1965 was a peak station wagon year because Baby Boomers weren’t babies anymore—they were pre and post teenagers.
That meant families needed more kiddie-hauling room, so station wagons were the default choice for transportation.
Here’s what real world testing told you about mid-range wagons in ’65.
Jerry Sutherland
Popular Science tested three lower-end wagons in their May 1965 edition. The timing was good because summer vacation was on the horizon and a wagon was the perfect solution for hauling five to seven passengers. They called it a baby boom for a reason.
They tested the ’65 Ford Country Sedan, the Plymouth Fury and the Chevy Impala station wagons. AMC guys may wonder where the Ambassador wagon was in this mix, but this was the Big Three era—AMC and Studebaker (on its last swirl around the drain) simply weren’t big enough. Those two builders were too much of a niche market for Popular Science.
These were full-sized cars with minimal options, so the Ford came with a 289 and the Chevy came with a 283 small block, while the Plymouth came with a 318. Popular Science was big on numbers, so they tested 0-60 miles per hour—the Ford did it in 14.2 seconds, the Chevy in 14.8 seconds, and the Plymouth pulled it off in a blistering 13.3 seconds.
Quarter-mile numbers weren’t much better. The Ford took 19.84 seconds, the Chevy took 20.14 and the Fury took 19.22 seconds. No wonder Tad–the eldest boy in the family–never won a stoplight run in dad’s long roof back in ‘65.
Mileage was unimpressive too. The Chevy Impala averaged 13.8 mpg (US gallon), the Ford Country Sedan did 13.6 mpg, and the muscle car Fury only did 12.7 mpg. Any SUV today would thump those three in speed and fuel economy.
Popular Science put these wagons through some serious handling and braking tests because you never knew when dad would try to pass one semi too many on an ill-advised pass on a two-lane road. The Ford and Chevy wagons had coil springs at all four corners so Popular Science said they rode better than the Plymouth. The Plymouth rode better with weight in the back.
The Chevy had the most noticeable lean on turns and the most nosedive under heavy braking. The Ford and Plymouth had similar nosedive tendencies, and the Plymouth handled curves better but became “unpredictable” at higher speed. Brake fade under heavy use was another test and the Ford came in last, while the Chevy came second, and the Plymouth recovered best.
Finally, they tested the payload capacity of the wagons. The Ford and Chevy handled 17 bags of cement (1360 pounds) while the Plymouth took 20 bags of cement (1600 pounds) before the rear springs hit the bump stops.
What does this really tell you about mid-60s wagons? Popular Science compared them to the original station wagons like the Model T and Model A—they concluded that comparing the old wagons to the new wagons was like comparing the Titanic to the Starship Enterprise.
You could say the same thing about a new SUV versus a station wagon from 1965, but there’s one thing the ‘65 wagons had that a new SUV doesn’t have.
Class.
Jerry Sutherland
By: Jerry Sutherland
Jerry Sutherland is a veteran automotive writer with a primary focus on the collector car hobby. His work has been published in many outlets and publications, including the National Post, Calgary Herald, Edmonton Journal, Ottawa Citizen, Montreal Gazette, Saskatoon StarPhoenix, Regina Leader-Post, Vancouver Sun and The Truth About Cars. He is also a regular contributor to Auto Roundup Publications.
- CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR THE NEWSLETTER
- CLICK HERE to Like us on Facebook
- CLICK HERE to Follow us on Twitter
- CLICK HERE to Follow us on Pinterest
