Popular Science’s predictions for 1967 cars weren’t always on target

The July 1966 issue of Popular Science breathlessly predicted what U.S. automakers had planned for the next model year. Even though introductions were only a few months away, a surprising number of the magazine’s predictions did not occur. Here are the greatest misses:

• The Mercury Cougar would initially be offered in only a notchback model, but “a sweet-looking fastback is in the works and will probably be out as a half-year model in January” (PS staff, 1966; p. 68).
• Pontiac would get a 448-cubic-inch “light-weight” V8 to replace its 421 engine. Meanwhile, for the first time the Bonneville would share a 123-inch wheelbase with the Grand Prix and use the same fascia, replete with ribbed turn signals at the top corners of the front fenders (PS staff, 1966; pp. 66, 69 and 70).
• A redesigned Plymouth Valiant would get a wheelbase increase to 110 inches and the Dodge Dart, “now 111, may add an inch or two” (PS staff, 1966; p. 70).
• “All Ramblers will be restyled — the first total changeover in AM’s history” (PS staff, 1966; p. 70).
• Chevrolet’s new pony car would be called either the Camaro or the Caramout. “A fastback may be added later” (PS staff, 1966; p. 67).
• The Oldsmobile Toronado “will get a facelift, front and rear. Those ‘eyelids’ just above the headlight panels will go; more brightwork will be added to the rear end. Since Buick shares its basic bodies with Oldsmobile, Olds changes apply to Buick also” (PS staff, 1966; p. 70).

From plausible to overhyped . . . and downright dumb

Some of these predictions could plausibly have represented the best available intelligence at press time. For example, further increasing the Chrysler compacts’ wheelbases was plausible given the U.S. automakers’ general penchant for making their cars bigger. That said, I assume that marketeers sometimes were leading on automotive journalists. The Chevrolet Caramout — really?

It’s also hard to give a huge amount of credence to the Camaro or Cougar getting a fastback given the contingencies of doing so. The Chevy already had a semi-fastback roofline. Meanwhile, the Cougar’s side styling would have looked awkward if it had adopted the Mustang’s fastback body style.

Automaker overhype may have been the driver behind some of the predictions. For example, American Motors only gave its mid-sized cars a reskinning for 1967 — the basic body still dated from 1963. In addition, the compact American had received major sheetmetal changes the previous year, so it was not an obvious candidate for another redo given the automaker’s precarious financial situation.

Also see ‘How American Motors abandoned its uniqueness in the second half of the 1960s’

Other predictions sound downright dumb. The Toronado may have shared the same body shell as the Riviera, but only the Olds had “eyelids.” By the same token, why would Pontiac essentially demote the Grand Prix to a variant of the Bonneville when it sold fairly well in 1965-66 and was the brand’s sole entry in the large personal coupe field? Even if Popular Science had confused the U.S. and Canadian versions of the full-sized Pontiacs, their predicted wheelbase was four inches off.

All and all, this is not automotive journalism that has withstood the test of time. Yet back in the day I devoured these stories like candy. One weird aspect of looking at old car buff magazines is discovering what went over my head the first time around.

Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.

---

RE:SOURCES

• PS staff; 1966. “What the 1967 Cars Will Really Be Like.” Popular Science. July issue: pp. 65-70.

ADVERTISING & BROCHURES

• oldcarbrochures.org: Buick Riviera (1967); Pontiac Grand Parisisienne (1967)