What kind of station wagon would fit my needs?

That's silly, tanks have awful gas mileage!

In actuality I have considered a jeep, but I do the above mentioned damage so rarely that it wouldn't be worth it to have a jeep for such occasions. I'd rather have the better mileage and space of a good wagon. Something of equal power in a jeep I'm assuming will be less fuel efficient in a jeep.

I'm going to see what I can do to hunt down a GM wagon to test drive.

 

Okay, I did a fair amount of reading, and it looks like a 94-96 Buick Roadmaster wagon will suit my desires nicely. If I want that added durability, I probably want one with the gran touring suspension and towing capabilities. My old interceptor had "severe duty" shocks and brakes, I'll have to shop around to see what sorts of similar parts a Roadmaster can take.

I found a buick forum that mentioned the Roadmaster can fit Monroe Severe shocks ( http://www.buickforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9230 ), which happened to be the same shocks I put on my crown vic and was quite happy with.

I prefer stiff, firm rides with good control. For those of you with Roadmaster Wagons, any suggestions for some good heavy duty parts?

And thanks to everyone for helping me find a good fitting wagon! Even you old senile ones like jangleguy

 

I can't see why you would eliminate the Caprice wagon....especially since, like me, you are not enamored with the back seat roof window??

 

I read some about the Caprice, it just seemed like more people were telling me to look towards the Roadmaster. Reading back though, most people were just saying "GM Wagon" so that could be either.

In my reading, I don't see many differences between the Caprice wagon and the Roadmaster, aside from the roof window. You said you have a 96 Caprice, right? What are the differences between the two?

Edit: I wonder how many 9C1 wagons there are around..

 

Not many. The ones that are around are usually beat up. It sounds like the Roadmaster or the Caprice would be fine. There really isn't that much difference between the two.

The Monroe Severe Service shocks do well on the B-Body chassis. I'm not sure what sway bars are available any more, but I have heard of people retrofitting Crown Vic rear sway bars to the B-Body chassis.

 

Swiped from another thread on another (infamous) board, here's the #'s for the Monroe shocks for the Buick Roadmaster....
Monroe “Severe Service” - 550013 (Rear) & 550012 (Front).

 

I wonder how well they fit. Looking at the list of vehicles they can go on, the Roadmaster isn't listed there... But I see a number of people say they fit fine, so I assume there'd be no trouble.

Do anyone know what specifics are different with the tow package? I assumed it would be the best idea to get one with a tow package because of the added suspension, but if it's just the shocks, then that's something I can take care of myself. I've never owned a car that can tow

 

I put Bilsteins on my Caprice 9C1 and they are great, but are the police service option.
They are firm, like great for blasting down pothole infested back lanes, and jumping curbs.
Not really smooth on the little bumps.
If you shop around you can find a good deal.
Try eshocks.com I got one pair there.

 

Andy?.......I grew up in Winnipeg....please show me a pic of a 'little bump" on any road (that does not include grass clippings)...blasting pothole infested main streets, i'll believe though

All in fun man

 

You know what I'm talking about....

Oh and to Kozme, the "service" wagons have a 1A2 designation.

 

Geez, what happens in here if you miss a day on a good thread!

Here's my twopence worth.

There is nothing wrong at all with the big G.M. wagons. running right, they do roughly 35 MPG (Imperial). The big Fords (and Mercurys) with the 351 beat that by about 5 mpg when, and if, you can get the 2 bbl VV carb working right. I wouldn't give twopence halfpenny for the VV system. Take the damned thing off and install an Edelbrock Performer 4 bbl square bore 600 cfm carb. Fantastic drivability. Incredible fuel economy. Remember, torque rules when it comes to mileage. The Chev 350 is good for about 350 ft/lbs at roughly 4,000 rpms. The Ford 351 with the Edelbrock stuff is good for somewhere around 440 ft/lbs t 2,300 rpm. With the 2.73:1 rear end and the .6:1 overdrive, the thing never works. The Ford is also rated for 6,000 lbs of trailer.

Another thing to note is parts availability: The Ford is, surprisingly, easier and less expensive for parts. For example, the starter solenoid. Ford: $11.29, including tax, and about 3 minutes to install. G.M.: Replace the starter motor for about $150, and about an hour, if you get the blasted shims right.

About the Fords: here in Canada, the 351 was a rpo option at a price of $185.00. Trailer tow III was also an RPO, and cost $550.00. The former was restricted to sedans after 87. The latter was available well into the 90s. When ordered with the 351, the TT III was rated for 6,000 lbs. ith the 302, it was rated at 5,000.

I have seen one American 1989 Crown Victoria Country Sedan (or what ever they badged the no woody models). It had been ordered by a funeral home, so it was obviously available, but likely as rare as hen's teeth.

The one thing I dislike about the fuel injected Ford engines is that the compression ratio is lower. They use more fuel than the carbed versions.

Before anyone thinks I've been drifty, here's a list of cars either I or friends/family have owned, all of which returned almost identical highway mileage:

1969 Pontiac Acadian (230 I-6), 1978 Buick Electra (Buick 350), 1978 Thunderbird (351M) (times 2), 1979 Thunderbird (302W) (times 2), 1981, Volvo 245 DLA, 1984 Delta 88 (307), 1986 Pontiac Parisienne Safari (305),1988 Crown Vic (302, TT III), 1992 Crown Vic (4.6, Handling Package). All these return about 30 MPG (Imperial).

1979 Ford Thunderbird (351W/Edelbrock upgrades), 1985 Mercedes-Benz 300SD, 1986 Colony Park (351W, TT III, Edelbrock upgrades), 1987 Grand Marquis (351W), 1989 Grand Marquis (351, TT III, with factory VV), 1990 Volvo 245 DLAO, 1996 Camaro SS (6 speed manual). All these return somewhere between 35 and 42 MPG (Imperial). The 86 wagon went to scrap when the body mounts broke and the frame bent from an unexpected off-road expedition into a tree. It had 750,000 kms (480,000 miles) on the odometer, with the original engine, transmission and limited slip differential all in place and working correctly. My brother had figured out what was required to get another 10 mpg from the colony Park but it was written off before he got the work underway.

 

The tow package will tow 5000 lbs plus easily. It comes with a class III hitch, 2:93 gears and one mechanical fan and one electric fan. I'm not well versed on the suspension differences even though I have one. Point is....you can set these up any way you want....the parts combo's are available to customize your ride to your specifications. If you like the wagon...and you likely will...buy it and set it up if you don't like the way it is.

 

So much great information. Sounds like I would have more trouble finding an 1A2 than it would be worth, but I'm also not in a hurry, so I can afford to wait around for a bit and see what comes up. I wish I could find a good list of what the actual differences between the regular wagon (or one with tow package) and the 1a2 is. Namely, does the 1A2 really have that much more added durability? I want to take on those pothole infested back roads with no fear!

Most I've come across is something about steel wheels, and aluminum driveshaft, and a ~2.4 gear ratio.. and I'm not even sure how accurate that info is.

Oh, and the 1a2 has rubber flooring instead of carpet (now that's something I would love)

 

That one that I posted a photo of was for sale for a long time.
They come up on the impalass forum from time to time, and the 9C1 forum as well.
Not much activity on the latter but occasionally the guys post up some cool cars.

http://stlouis.craigslist.org/cto/2381968159.html

Not a wagon:
http://stlouis.craigslist.org/ctd/2392556750.html

 

Oh man, that's a beautiful color. I'm not a fan of the woodies, so I'm hoping what I do some across doesn't have that trim.