Comments by "Harry Mills" (@harrymills2770) on "The History Guy: History Deserves to Be Remembered" channel.

  1. 61
  2. 51
  3. 44
  4. 38
  5. 11
  6. 7
  7. 5
  8. 5
  9. 4
  10. 2
  11. 2
  12. 2
  13. I didn't know that wagons had to compete with passenger cars and mini-vans and SUVs came under different rules. They're still more efficient than vans and SUVs. I bet they'd still be selling big if they didn't artificially push people to buy SUVs and vans. In the mid-70s, our family owned a '69 Buick Estate Wagon. When we first got it, I was small enough to fit in that little gap between the rear passenger seat and the rear-facing seats in the VERY back. I was a real runt, and it was GREAT to sit that high up, because I could see everything. I've always preferred wagons or at least hatch-backs, because you could make a nice long bed in back by folding down the back seat. That's too bad. A station wagon still makes sense. A couple I know have two Toyota station wagons. I think they're the last year Toyota made them. They get almost the same gas mileage as a Camry, only there's just WAY more room. SUV's as a separate KIND of station wagon, stretch back a long time, too. Those old Chevy "Hi-Boys" with 4-wheel-drive, were basically the ultimate adventure wagon. Half way between a panel truck and a station wagon. Big, tall captain's seats (but fixed), and you could rig them up for camping. You had to bend at the waist, but you could stand and walk to the back. Went on a geology field trip, and one of the guys drove one of those old 50s or 60s-vintage high boys, and I've always wanted one, since. You could haul just about anything you could put in a pickup, plus you had an extra-big cabin for road trips. He had everything he needed to go off-grid for weeks at a time, back in the '80s.
    1
  14. 1
  15. 1
  16. 1
  17. 1
  18. 1
  19. 1
  20. 1
  21. 1
  22. 1
  23. 1
  24. 1
  25. 1
  26. 1
  27. 1