Rare Rides: A Pristine Ford Escort From 1985 is Your Squire, M'Lady

Corey Lewis
by Corey Lewis

The Rare Rides series has touched on the Ford Escort a couple of times before, via the sporty EXP and extra sporty Mercury Tracer LTS. And we’re back with more Escort today! This one carries no sporting pretense whatsoever, and unlike the prior two actually wears an Escort badge.

It’s an early wagon with the seldom-selected Squire package.

Escort debuted for the 1981 model year and was a new direction for Ford’s compact offering. Eighties box styling and front-drive happily took over for the departed and maligned Pinto. Though the Escort was a new name for North America, Europeans were on their third generation Escort at the time. Seeing cost savings, Ford’s intention was to share parts between the North American and European Escort versions. However, that message got lost in translation between the design teams, and the resulting cars shared no body parts. Though they were similar in profile, the North American version stood on its own: It was larger than the Euro Escort in every dimension and had more trim.

Escort was initially available as a three-door hatch and four-door wagon, with a 65-horsepower 1.6-liter inline-four at launch. The engine was a new design from Ford, called CVH. Said engine was shared with the European Escort, as well as the later Sierra and Fiesta. The 1.6 was available through the 1985 model year and had optional fuel injection by 1983 (88 HP). There was also a turbocharged version for ’84 and ’85, good for 120 horses.

The final body style to arrive was the five-door hatch, available for 1982. In its initial year only, Escort offered an SS trim package that featured tape stripes, black trim, and wider tires. General Motors quickly pointed out that it owned the SS name, thus in 1982, the Escort GT was born in its stead.

Toward the beginning of its run, Ford offered a Squire package on the Escort, keen to offer a trio of wood-clad wagons for traditional wagon-buying consumers. Simultaneously offered were the LTD Country Squire, Fairmont Squire (also called Mercury Zephyr Villager), and the Escort Squire. Atop the GL trim the Squire package added wood trim and a plush interior. The original owner here ticked all the option boxes and wanted the automatic, tilt wheel, cruise control, air conditioning, rear defrost, rally wheels, and a luggage rack.

Halfway through the 1985 model year, the Escort received a facelift which coincided with the debut of the EXP as a separate model. The 1.6 was swapped with a 1.9-liter engine from the CVH family, available with a carb or multi-port fuel injection. Carried over from the original Escort was the 2.0-liter diesel engine which made 52 horsepower. Throughout its first generation, transmissions on offer included a three-speed automatic, and four- and five-speed manuals.

Escort was refreshed again for 1988, at which point its Mercury Lynx sibling was killed off in favor of the Tracer which was a Mazda 323. The first generation Escort carried on through the 1990 model year before its replacement by the Mazda-derived second generation. But by then the Squire option was long gone, its low take rate meant the ’85 model year was its last.

Today’s Rare Ride just sold on eBay with 44,000 miles. In stunning condition, it fetched $8,777.

[Images: Ford]

Corey Lewis
Corey Lewis

Interested in lots of cars and their various historical contexts. Started writing articles for TTAC in late 2016, when my first posts were QOTDs. From there I started a few new series like Rare Rides, Buy/Drive/Burn, Abandoned History, and most recently Rare Rides Icons. Operating from a home base in Cincinnati, Ohio, a relative auto journalist dead zone. Many of my articles are prompted by something I'll see on social media that sparks my interest and causes me to research. Finding articles and information from the early days of the internet and beyond that covers the little details lost to time: trim packages, color and wheel choices, interior fabrics. Beyond those, I'm fascinated by automotive industry experiments, both failures and successes. Lately I've taken an interest in AI, and generating "what if" type images for car models long dead. Reincarnating a modern Toyota Paseo, Lincoln Mark IX, or Isuzu Trooper through a text prompt is fun. Fun to post them on Twitter too, and watch people overreact. To that end, the social media I use most is Twitter, @CoreyLewis86. I also contribute pieces for Forbes Wheels and Forbes Home.

More by Corey Lewis

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 18 comments
  • Eng_alvarado90 Eng_alvarado90 on Jun 02, 2021

    Back in the late 90s one of my aunts purchased an 85 Lynx wagon to replace her tired but trusty 81 Tercel. I believe she paid $500 for it back then. I thought the Tercel was slow, then the Lynx arrived and would've said hold my beer. That 3 spd auto/1.6 carbureted was the epitome of molasses slow. Surprisingly the Lynx survived for about 3 or 4 more years with few minor repairs but still my aunt had enough. She replaced that Lynx with a 97 Integra (bummer, 4 spd auto).

  • THX1136 THX1136 on Jun 03, 2021

    I owned an '86 wagon and thoroughly enjoyed the car. Understanding it was NOT a sports car it delivered what I expected, carried all the sound gear to jobs I had and was reliable to the end. The end was the timing belt going a few hundred miles from home. Wouldn't mind another, but not for the price of the one in the listing.

  • Bouzouki Cadillac (aka GM!!) made so many mistakes over the past 40 years, right up to today, one could make a MBA course of it. Others have alluded to them, there is not enough room for me to recite them in a flowing, cohesive manner.Cadillac today is literally a tarted-up Chevrolet. They are nice cars, and the "aura" of the Cadillac name still works on several (mostly female) consumers who are not car enthusiasts.The CT4 and CT5 offer superlative ride and handling, and even performance--but, it is wrapped in sheet metal that (at least I think) looks awful, with (still) sub-par interiors. They are niche cars. They are the last gasp of the Alpha platform--which I have been told by people close to it, was meant to be a Pontiac "BMW 3-series". The bankruptcy killed Pontiac, but the Alpha had been mostly engineered, so it was "Cadillac-ized" with the new "edgy" CTS styling.Most Cadillacs sold are crossovers. The most profitable "Cadillac" is the Escalade (note that GM never jack up the name on THAT!).The question posed here is rather irrelevant. NO ONE has "a blank check", because GM (any company or corporation) does not have bottomless resources.Better styling, and superlative "performance" (by that, I mean being among the best in noise, harshness, handling, performance, reliablity, quality) would cost a lot of money.Post-bankruptcy GM actually tried. No one here mentioned GM's effort to do just that: the "Omega" platform, aka CT6.The (horribly misnamed) CT6 was actually a credible Mercedes/Lexus competitor. I'm sure it cost GM a fortune to develop (the platform was unique, not shared with any other car. The top-of-the-line ORIGINAL Blackwing V8 was also unique, expensive, and ultimately...very few were sold. All of this is a LOT of money).I used to know the sales numbers, and my sense was the CT6 sold about HALF the units GM projected. More importantly, it sold about half to two thirds the volume of the S-Class (which cost a lot more in 201x)Many of your fixed cost are predicated on volume. One way to improve your business case (if the right people want to get the Green Light) is to inflate your projected volumes. This lowers the unit cost for seats, mufflers, control arms, etc, and makes the vehicle more profitable--on paper.Suppliers tool up to make the number of parts the carmaker projects. However, if the volume is less than expected, the automaker has to make up the difference.So, unfortunately, not only was the CT6 an expensive car to build, but Cadillac's weak "brand equity" limited how much GM could charge (and these were still pricey cars in 2016-18, a "base" car was ).Other than the name, the "Omega" could have marked the starting point for Cadillac to once again be the standard of the world. Other than the awful name (Fleetwood, Elegante, Paramount, even ParAMOUR would be better), and offering the basest car with a FOUR cylinder turbo on the base car (incredibly moronic!), it was very good car and a CREDIBLE Mercedes S-Class/Lexus LS400 alternative. While I cannot know if the novel aluminum body was worth the cost (very expensive and complex to build), the bragging rights were legit--a LARGE car that was lighter, but had good body rigidity. No surprise, the interior was not the best, but the gap with the big boys was as close as GM has done in the luxury sphere.Mary Barra decided that profits today and tomorrow were more important than gambling on profits in 2025 and later. Having sunk a TON of money, and even done a mid-cycle enhancement, complete with the new Blackwing engine (which copied BMW with the twin turbos nestled in the "V"!), in fall 2018 GM announced it was discontinuing the car, and closing the assembly plant it was built in. (And so you know, building different platforms on the same line is very challenging and considerably less efficient in terms of capital and labor costs than the same platform, or better yet, the same model).So now, GM is anticipating that, as the car market "goes electric" (if you can call it that--more like the Federal Government and EU and even China PUSHING electric cars), they can make electric Cadillacs that are "prestige". The Cadillac Celestique is the opening salvo--$340,000. We will see how it works out.
  • Lynn Joiner Lynn JoinerJust put 2,000 miles on a Chevy Malibu rental from Budget, touring around AZ, UT, CO for a month. Ran fine, no problems at all, little 1.7L 4-cylinder just sipped fuel, and the trunk held our large suitcases easily. Yeah, I hated looking up at all the huge FWD trucks blowing by, but the Malibu easily kept up on the 80 mph Interstate in Utah. I expect a new one would be about a third the cost of the big guys. It won't tow your horse trailer, but it'll get you to the store. Why kill it?
  • Lynn Joiner Just put 2,000 miles on a Chevy Malibu rental from Budget, touring around AZ, UT, CO for a month. Ran fine, no problems at all, little 1.7L 4-cylinder just sipped fuel, and the trunk held our large suitcases easily. Yeah, I hated looking up at all the huge FWD trucks blowing by, but the Malibu easily kept up on the 80 mph Interstate in Utah. I expect a new one would be about a third the cost of the big guys. It won't tow your horse trailer, but it'll get you to the store. Why kill it?
  • Ollicat I am only speaking from my own perspective so no need to bash me if you disagree. I already know half or more of you will disagree with me. But I think the traditional upscale Cadillac buyer has traditionally been more conservative in their political position. My suggestion is to make Cadillac separate from GM and make them into a COMPANY, not just cars. And made the company different from all other car companies by promoting conservative causes and messaging. They need to build up a whole aura about the company and appeal to a large group of people that are really kind of sick of the left and sending their money that direction. But yes, I also agree about many of your suggestions above about the cars too. No EVs. But at this point, what has Cadillac got to lose by separating from GM completely and appealing to people with money who want to show everyone that they aren't buying the leftist Kook-Aid.
  • Jkross22 Cadillac's brand is damaged for the mass market. Why would someone pay top dollar for what they know is a tarted up Chevy? That's how non-car people see this.
Next