I always marvel at the sheer size of the US wagons, but since having so much exposure on this forum to so many of the different US wagons I have noticed an interesting difference in how they are built. When looking at the different pics of the US wagons my eye is always drawn to the cargo area overhang behind the rear wheels. It finally dawned on me, that the US wagons must use the same wheel base chasis as the sedan and just add length to the rear rails (please correct me if I'm wrong) to create the required cargo area. Down here, and I can only speak in regards to GMH, the sedan of any model comes in basic, mid range & top of the line luxury. Generally, the top of the line is the 'Statesman' & 'Caprice'. For these top end models the sedan wheelbase is increased by 6inches, thus distinguishing it from the lesser models. This extended wheelbase chasis is then used to create the stationwagon variations. In a nutshell, when viewing the Australian wagon you will notice the extra 6 inches has been added between the rear door & the rear wheels-opposite to what the US wagons use. (They have stopped this with the latest wagon & consequently we've lost alot of cargo area) I have tried to show this in the following pic using the US GM wagon and the same year model GMH wagon. (Click on image for enlarged) (Sorry, didn't realise the images were going to be so small) I think you can see what I mean, but the US idea seems to be a more economical solution?
Maybe your cars are built for the outback terrain? Or do they just use 4X4's there? Most of the difference I've noted is under the bonnet and some nicer styling. You new project car is bigger/plumper than ours. HandyAndy gave you that link to FordSix. The company that owns/spnsors it, also has a nice site, promoting Aussie cylinder heads for the sixes: http://www.classicinlines.com/ That's the under-the-bonnet stuff I know about.
I can't speak for the cars down under but in the case of the Ford Fox chassis all the Fairmont/Zephyr/Cougar/LTD/Granada all the chassis from 1978-198X are 105.5" including the station wagons. The differences are the Cougrar XR-7 and Thunderbird were shorter by an inch or so and of course the Mustangs were shorter. Then in 83 the Cougar and Thunderbirds were both on a 104" chassis.
Your assumptions are correct GMWAG. For the most part (at least in the recent past), a particular car line is only produced with one wheelbase length. Those B-body GM vehicles all used the same wheelbase, whether sedan or wagon. They are body-on-frame construction (not unitized), so a separate frame was engineered for the wagons (not frame extensions tacked on to a sedan frame). I'll show you one example where the U.S. did it YOUR way..... This is a 1968 Oldsmobile Cutlass wagon (produced in this body through 1972). It has a 116" wheelbase - the same as the sedan version of the vehicle (the 2-doors had only a 112' wheelbase). This was only a 6-passenger, '2 seater' wagon. To get a 3rd seat in, they stretched the wheelbase to 121" and raised the roof, producing this, the Vista Cruiser..... The rear overhang with both wagons is about the same. The increased length is in the rear doors. This allows space between the 2hd seat seatback and the wheelhouses for access to the forward-facing 3rd seat. These cars were big sellers back then, and are still popular today among wagon lovers. Buick also had versions of the same wagons.
Krash is a plethora of information. I think he has a library of car info that would water our eyes. Not to mention the great photos he comes up with. This is a test. I want to see a picture of a 1982 Mercury Cougar GS station wagon, black with 10 hole aluminum wheels with a roof rack. You watch. Within just a few hours one will appear.
I'll bring the rattle-cans of black and a camera, you furnish the wheels, and bada bing, bada boom - there we go.......... Info is in my head, pics on the dubba dubba dubba........
Ah Gee! I thought for sure you'd come up with something. Norm's the link king and your the photo king.
Interesting? Have the roles been reversed? In the early days it was the US cars that had all the styling, size and big engines! And now we are doing the bigger car??? Generally the wagons could handle some of the rough stuff, although now people go out & buy 4wd for true off roading. GM Holden, in 2004, introduced the all wheel drive "ADVENTRA" it was the standard station wagon with AWD running gear, a set of flared guards a little extra ground clearance and some cosmetics to set them off...............of course I went and bought one straight away this is what they looked like..: This is the standard of the same year model: Surprisingly they were not as popular as GM Holden had wished and they consumed fuel like it was going out of fashion. People simply wanted the look of the 4WD(SUV). I think if these had been introduced in much earlier models (before the 4WD become the vogue) they would have gained a foothold from the devoted wagon driver. The early 70's GMHolden, the HQ series sedan, was popular for anyone wanting a cheap 'Corvette'...You could buy a Corvette body shell and fit it straight onto the HQ chassis!! Didn't see too many imitation Corvettes. naughty:No that good of an idea after all) So perhaps there was method in their madness after all. If they had to make the longer chasis for the station wagon, perhaps this worked as an ideal platform for the luxury sedans such as the Statesman & Caprice.?
I'm glad I accidentally came across this forum. And you are 100% right, you do learn something new everyday.
