While gazing on that lovely baby Blue 56 Ford it occurred to me that back in the forties and fifties cars were designed with the human body in mind. It seems that around the late fifties and early sixties other factors became primary in the design equation. The quest for the long, and low, sleek look took precedence over anatomical factors. When I was in my teens and twenties this was not an issue and I had no problem with the Fiat x1/9. Now that I am in my fifties and having back problems it is an issue. Even though I see the Jaguar D and E types as fantastic works of automotive art, I am not sure that I could have one as a daily driver even if funding were no issue. As I recall the Volvo 122S was fine but that was really a fifties design that lasted more than a decade beyond its time. Even full size cars were getting pretty low of seat and it was left to the vans and mini-pickup based SUVs like the Bronco II to provide chair height seating (Checker excepted). So given that it is unlikely that I will be able to afford a 50s vintage car anytime soon, I propose that we create a Geezer Index to help identify likely candidates. Each of us can measure each vehicle in our stable and report back here with the results. The measure is Butt/Head. That is, the numerator is the height in inches of the rear of the seat cushion above the road, measured at the juncture of the seat cushion and seat back. The denominator is the height in inches of the top of the door opening above the seat cushion directly above the junction of the seat back and seat cushion. Of course we express it as the actual numbers rather than do the division or reduce to least common denominator. So an example measure would be 18/22. Understanding that a vehicle such as a full size van or step van that has a step from which one typically takes their seat, these vehicles should measure from the step rather than the road surface. Whatcha think? mike
We will have to see after some more folks report in. Thank you for getting the ball rolling so quickly. mike
Hello to everyone! I don't understand everything about the geezer index. Is someone could help me ? (rather in french..) Is the idea to measure the distance betwenn the top of the roof and the seat? or something else? Thank you for helping me! Bye Jérôme
Hi Jerome; There are two numbers. The one before the slash is the distance from the ground to the seat. This tells us how far down we have to fall getting into the seat and more importantly how far we must struggle to get up. The number after the slash is the distance between the seat and the part of the door frame on which we will hit our heads. This determines how much we will need to duck down in order to get our head in and out. Hope this helps. mike
Hi Mike! Thank you for your explanation, it's clearer now for me. I'm going to mesure that on my car in metric, after i'll have to convert it in inches....:banghead3: Bye Jérôme
It's too cold in the garage to be out there measuring. Barely 60 degrees. The lowest cars I've ever had were my 1960 Austin Healy Sprite and 1977 Corvette coupe. This was many years ago when I was in my prime. But I'd still have no problems getting into either today. Getting out may be take awhile! The tallest vehicles were probably my full sized vans. Climbing waaay up inside those could take some time today. But falling back out should be easy. Sorry no measurements at this time. I just got up! My 50's cars are still quite comfortable for the older people I know.
Excellent idea for all you geezer that is. So is this quest just for wagons? or are looking for other cars as well??? Maybe I'll go back and reread your post. Just a sec.. Got it your looking for wagon options that will meet your...butt to head ratio. I can't measure Fanny for you she's still on blocks right now.
Any info is welcome. I would love a country sedan but knowing me I will probably end up in and Aerostar or Explorer. mike
Oh NO ! There are many nice older station wagons out there just waiting for you. When I built my wagon minivans were just becoming popular. I built my wagon to be our minivan. I would have worn out a dozen minivans by now and hated them. Just take time to look around for an older station wagon. Adding late model running gear is not difficult and makes them more dependable.
Well maybe I will be able to swing a panther. Ever notice how much plagiarism there is on the net. It seems that every article on the panther has the exact same phrase about "only slightly less" cargo capacity but no one defines it further. Anyway, I will measure my tracker this weekend and report back. mike
You ought to see my sixty one year old father getting out of either of our '92 Chevy Camaro's, it's not a lack of room, it's the fact that you are basically sitting ON the road. He gets really funny looks getting out of those cars, sometimes it takes him a bit of extra momentum to get out. It's quite amusing when he starts sounding like kindling in a fire getting out of the car. *snap crackle pop!* I mock him now, but, eventually someone will be mocking me, what goes around comes around. Oh well, fun for now.
With the X1/9 there was a trick to it. You put your left foot (for driver) out on the ground and your left hand on the door sill. You would swing your right leg over and pivot on your left foot and left hand until you were bent over facing the car. Then stand up. Easy at 18. Not so much now. mike
I'll do these measurements later this morning. I want to figure out the numbers of why it's so easy for me to walk up to my wife's Durango and just get in and go, versus plopping in or out of the Torino, versus the climb up into the Suburban. I give zero care about the Cavalier and the Ciera isn't here for me to test. I also recall the other two vehicles it was so easy for me to get in and out of were that 2010 Grand Marquis I rented for a trip to PA and that 1998 Silhouette minivan I had last winter.