Should a Post '73 Suburban Be Classed as a Wagon?

I know - I know - Suburbans are built on a truck chassis - but really, aren't they just a heavy duty station wagon? Sort of the big sister of an Impala or Caprice??? We have owned a few Suburbans and we love them! They serve every application that a station wagon could serve and do the heavy grunt work without uttering a whimper. Our Suburbans have served as the family car for may years and while I like wagons - no question about that - the big Suburbans really have a special place in my heart. Our first one was a very attractive, pretty much fully loaded ( except for power windows ) 1980 Sierra Classic three seater that we bought from the original owners in 1990. We still have her although she's retired due to a bad case of the rusty's but I do hope one day to make her pretty again. We made many road trips in that vehicle - from B.C. to Manitoba and into Oregon - many times. I was just wondering what others think about that idea - I always considered ours to be a car as it drove and rode so nicely.. better than many cars out there on the road. They are heavy and solid and a fantastic winter rig for traction and convenience - to say nothing of relibility. Plus, once you got into the 70's, a loaded Suburban was every bit as luxurious as any car with the added leg room and cargo area. Admittedly, the older Suburbans were more like trucks but remember, I am referring in my question to post '73 'burbs. Opinions please... is it a truck? Is it a station wagon?

 

The good news? It's a truck with a wagon heritage. Diplomatic eh?

 

For me it depends very much on the height. I mean, I would doubt about an original one, but when it is a bit lowered, it certainly feels very close to a station:


But when they are lifted, for me they come much closer to a truck:


Both are really complying with the term "longroof". I would vote for wagon for the original classic model!

 

Not a wagon. The Suburbans are SUVs even if they weren't called such when new.

Wagons were replaced by minivans. Minivans were replaced by SUVs. So to many of us the SUVs are still keeping the wagon down and out of todays market.

Don't get me wrong, they are collectible in their own right. One of my neighbors has a late 1960s GMC Suburban, gold and white. It is showroom stock and perfect. It is beautiful. But it doesn't belong at a wagon show. No more than a box truck Ambulance belongs at a Professional Car show next to the Cadillac Ambulances.

 

I certainly don't want to add fuel to the station wagon definition argument.

But, when the suburban was first brought to market by GM in 1936 it's intended use was as a station wagon. It had windows and seats.

Someone would first have to define station wagon. All suburbans are clearly classified as trucks. They've always been trucks and they've always been registered as trucks.

The accepted definition of as station wagon would first have to be defined as passenger car to eliminate the suburban as a wagon. I don't think anyone has done that. Hemmings Classic Car Magazine clearly included the IH Travelall in the Station Wagon issue #48.

In 1936 the term SUV had not been invented or thought of. I think a 1/2 ton non-4 wheel drive people mover like the Suburban could certainly be classified as a Station Wagon. It's intended use would create the classification. The original wagons were more closely related to trucks with open wooden bodies to haul people from the rail heads to the hotels and resorts.

I say Booboo59er along with your large wagon. Way back a couple of years ago the thread:http://www.stationwagonforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=30 attempted to "Define Station Wagon". It's never been done. I think it's simply too confusing to define.

I tease my coworkers, which several have Expeditions that are 2WD, that they are simply driving station wagons.

 

Maybe it was just an attempt to close the gap, but Jeep had the Wagoneer, which in my opinion is not far from a Suburban.
And in Holland, the suburban is registered as a car ("peoplecarrier") and not a truck.

 

In British Columbia, any vehicle with a back seat can be registered and licensed as a car if it is just used for carrying people. Light cargo would be OK - some plywood or what ever you carry in a car. I think that the classification of a Suburban, Jeep Cherokee or IHC Travel ll as station wagons is applicable but I also think that the choice is up to the individual and the vehicle's application. We always licensed our Suburbans as station wagons although they did serve for pulling car trailer. Quite honestly, I have pulled trailer with half tons and three quarter ton pickups, one tons, station wagons and Suburbans and I found the Suburban to be by far and away the best rig for the job. Even with a little 350 they pulled well and handled the load just fine and they are quiet and comfortable. Personally, I hate the term SUV although I do realize that today, it is a common term.
We are looking to replace our last Suburban as they are so much more practical than anything else ( including station wagons ) that we have ever owned. Maybe we should do a poll to see what percentage of people feel the Suburban is a truck and how many feel that it is a car???

 

When we traded our Jeep Grand Cherokee for our Buick Rendezvous, I pulled the Kelly Blue Book on the Jeep to see what the value was and it was called a "wagon" in their circles...something to ponder.

I agree that if the Suburban is not jacked up 4 feet into the air, then it would be more or less a station wagon, but built on a heavier frame. I also consider the tailgate configuration to make it qualify more (if that makes sense ).

To me, a 2WD Suburban with the tailgate is more of a station wagon than a 4WD Suburban with the barn doors would be.

 

I would consider it a wagon in my mind a truck has a open bed and I can load large items on to it. The suburban is sort of like a big brother to my Willys wagon which was advertised as a station wagon.

 

Well if the tailgate is the criteria then I'm out.....I don't have one. It's a rear lift gate. Not to be confused with a hatch back.

 

OOOOOPPPPPSSSSS!!!!! My bad.

Only referring to the Suburbans. Personally, I think the barn doors detract from the "station wagon" look of the vehicle. The tailgate speaks to its "station wagon" beginnings.

No offense to the liftgates, clamshells, magic doorgates and split gates out there...

 

Must be my old age, but I now consider the Suburban to be a heavyduty, truck based wagon.
But I still consider my Grand Voyager a minivan, despite it being classed as a wagon.

 

In some States the DMV even makes it more confusing!

A van with windows all around is a wagon, but if it has cargo rear panels it is a truck.

To drive on the Parkways in Newyork, many cargo van owners still have those silly small round windows installed on the rear quarters to comply with the law. It's been a loophole for decades.

 

I wonder if our provinces do that distinction? Never heard of it. So a sedan delivery wagon might not be allowed in a suburb?