With the rare exception of some full-size, regular cab, short-bed pickups, I have no appreciation for the aesthetics of trucks and SUV's. Sure, I think their utility is great but I have little use for them otherwise. Somewhat ironically, while I loathe four-door sedans, I'm almost as much a fool for station wagons as I am for pony, sports, muscle and personal luxury cars. Almost. Let's not get carried away here. I even find much to love in post-1976 GM B-body wagons like this 1987 Chevrolet Caprice.
Adding to my state of confusion, when I was a kid, I thought the bone-stripper, rental-grade 1968 Ford Ranch Wagon my father drove the cringiest thing in town. Well, compared to the family across the street who had a '68 Country Squire it was, but today I appreciate it for its simple grace and a working-man's simplicity. Another "what-the-hell" was that my father was a struggling white-collar executive - I've never figured out why he bought that thing but I digress.
Station wagons hit two ice bergs in the early to mid 1980's that slowly but surely doomed them to oblivion. First was the "Griswold's Wagon Queen Family Truckster" from National Lampoon's 1982 "Vacation" that not only lampooned but harpooned "dad's" old steed. Then, the head shot - Chrysler rolled out their car based mini-van in 1984. While, frankly, dorkier looking than any woodie wagon, the mini-van was literally and figuratively a better mouse trap and family's beat their way to Chrysler's door.
Therefore, by the time our '87 here was new and shinier, it was already a marked (family) man. Fun facts, GM had worked on a X-body (Chevrolet Citation) based mini-van in the late '70's\early '80's but scuttled the project because they believed it would impact their station wagon sales. Ford had one in the pipeline too and yanked it for the same reasons. Whoops!
This car is part of GM's 1977 downsized full-sized line that went through few wholesale changes until it was redesigned for model year 1991; it sank for good after 1996. Seeing the 1980's weren't that far removed from the 1950's and 1960s and "planned obsolescence", that GM pushed out the same car for fourteen straight model years was either an indication that they had gotten the design right or that something was very wrong. Seeing the problems GM had en masse back then, something tells me it was the later and not the former.
So, by 1987, this Chevrolet Caprice, that's mercifully not an "Estate" version with the simulated wood paneling, seemed like the Titanic's cruise director planning a shuffleboard tournament after midnight on that fateful night. It doesn't seem nearly as dated now as it did back then but, trust me, it wreaked of "old". What's more, if you had to have a "wagon" back then, Ford had their Taurus and Mercury Sable wagons that were infinitely hipper looking and better familial transportation conveyances.
Thiss silver bullet here is a fairly special family truckster because in addition to not having simulated wood grain on its flanks, it's got power windows, locks, a dual power, 55/45 split front bench (rare!) and cool (but deadly) rear-facing rear jump seats.
Oh, but wait. There's more. The 4.3-liter V-6, (Chevrolet or Oldsmobile) 5.0-liter V-8 it was born with was tossed into Lake Erie for this "454 by Tonawanda Engine", 7.4-liter V-8. Hope they drowned the 2004R transmission the V-8's came with (the V-6 would have had the TH200) as well because this thing will twist out north of 370-foot pounds torque at a John Wayne low, 2,800-rpm. Otherwise, say buh-bye to the your turbine hub or worse.
All Chevrolet "big-block" V-8 engines were built at the Tonawanda factory outside Buffalo, New York, the last one coming off the assembly line in December of 2009. Seeing this one appears to have a carburetor, if it hasn't been modified, I'd guess it makes in the neighborhood of 230-horsepower. Nothing to write home to mom about but old school "big-blocks" were all about torque anyway. Seeing it has exhaust headers, some work may have been done bumping up hp somewhat. Torque might be a little lower but there's so much of it to start with a few pound feet missing wouldn't be a big deal.
Asking price on this one is a "you've got to be kidding me" $10,000 - that's nearly $6,500 above average retail. No doubt the inflated asking price is because of the engine transplant. Now, I don't mind paying a little extra if the value proposition makes sense but, in my opinion, on this thing, it doesn't. Sorry, pal. I'm not paying a super-premium just because someone did some heavy lifting for me. Please. I will take it for a test drive and stab the gas hard as I can. I feel that my god given right as not only an automobile enthusiast but as an American.
Much like my 2009 Toyota RAV4 Limited V-6, that's stupid fast, I love a sleeper. And an old station wagon sleeper so much more. I'm just not gonna pay for it but somebody no doubt will. Are we there yet?
No comments:
Post a Comment