Just two automobile companies were responsible for about half of Detroit’s new-car sales in the postwar period through 1980: Chevrolet and Ford. Over that 35-year stretch, a rich tapestry of American brands grew threadbare as independent marques struggled (and failed) to survive. Even Big Three brands failed. Yet the Blue Oval and the Bowtie remained, duking it out atop the rubble of brands both dead and extant.
It used to be easy: A company would design a car, it would produce a million of them, and the next year the car would be facelifted or redesigned. Brands featured one basic car, with multiple models and trim levels based on the same body and chassis throughout. But tastes evolved. In the 1950s, low-volume personal-luxury-sporty two-seaters crept into the mix. By 1960, compact cars became popular, and by the end of the ’70s, Ford and Chevrolet each offered an entire lineup for every need, with subcompact, compact, midsize, fullsize, personal luxury, and other derivations. Choose a body. Choose an engine. Choose a transmission. Choose from forty-thousand option combinations. Make it your own.
We’re going to spoil the ending for you: From 1946 to 1980, Chevrolet outsold Ford all but six years. If history annoys you, or if you’re an outraged Ford fan, then you might want to read Thomas DeMauro’s story on the Mustang versus Camaro sales race later in this issue. What’s more eye-opening: Ford actually slipped to third place, once. But only once.
Economic forces are as likely to influence sales as new styling or powertrains. The recession year of 1958 was a bad one for sales for most of Detroit, for example, but everyone rebounded for 1959. And so, rather than percentages of sales yo-yoing up and down year to year, we’re going to look at the difference in sales between the two marques in a given year. Some years, the gap is shocking; some years, the difference looks like an accounting department rounding error. We also take recession years and strikes into consideration, two other important yet frequently overlooked factors in car sales.
The world beneath Ford and Chevrolet may have changed, but the automakers’ ability to predict (if not drive) the changes that America wanted in its cars is what kept them on top. Here’s how it worked out.
1946
FORD …………………………… 467,413
CHEVROLET ………………….. 398,028
15-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
Ford won the first head-to-head sales race since early 1942, but there are a couple of things to note. First, Ford started production three months earlier than Chevrolet: Fords began rolling out on July 3, 1945, while Chevrolet cranked up production on October 3. Even this was curtailed: Strike action against all of GM lasted 113 days from late 1945 into early 1946.
1947
CHEVROLET ………………….. 671,543
FORD …………………………… 481,067
29-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
Overall sales jumped 50 percent across the board in 1947, so while it’s no surprise to see Chevrolet climb year to year, it’s a headscratcher to see Ford’s numbers rise by just 5 percent. GM was making something of an effort to continue its annual model change, with revised hoods, fenders, and grilles, while the Ford’s style remained more or less the same.
1948
CHEVROLET ………………….. 715,992
FORD …………………………… 247,725
66-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
A simple reading of the numbers suggests that Ford somehow tripped so badly that for one model year only, Chevrolet nearly tripled Ford’s output, and Mopar’s economy-brand Plymouth ascended to the second spot in the annual sales race. But this is an anomaly: Ford’s 1948 model year lasted but eight months, so that the company could get an early jump with the new-for-1949 model.
1949
FORD ………………………… 1,118,740
CHEVROLET ……………….. 1,037,600
8-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
The 1949 model year happened during a mild recession, but you’d never know it from car sales: Both Ford and Chevrolet topped the million mark for the first time in the postwar period. Ford’s new model featured advanced styling, and its extra months on the market (compared to Chevrolet’s own newly styled efforts) helped Ford squeak by.
1950
CHEVROLET ……………….. 1,498,590
FORD ………………………… 1,209,549
19-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
Ford’s car was largely a carryover model for 1950, while GM introduced some innovation on existing cars, including the Powerglide two-speed automatic transmission (the first in the low-priced field) and true hardtop styling with the Styleline Deluxe Bel Air.
1951
CHEVROLET………………… 1,229,986
FORD…………………………. 1,013,381
18-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
Having innovated the hardtop body and the low-priced automatic transmission the year before, GM took a breather and chose to refine its existing package; Ford introduced the Ford-O-Matic automatic transmission to its facelifted models. Overall, sales weren’t as robust as 1950, perhaps because of a brief burst of inflation following our initial involvement in Korea.
1952
CHEVROLET…………………… 818,142
FORD……………………………. 671,733
18-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
Could the expectation of higher inflation (which never did come) have scared people away from big purchases, like new cars, in 1952? Was it down to material shortages needed for the police action overseas? It was the second down year in a row for both car companies, although for the third consecutive season, Chevrolet outsold Ford by an 18- to 19-percent margin. Ford offered an all-new car for the year, while GM continued to serve new styles on old chassis, but it mattered not.
1953
CHEVROLET………………… 1,341,475
FORD…………………………. 1,247,540
7-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
President Eisenhower’s first year in office, 1953, was a recession year, yet the sale of cars rebounded with the end of our involvement in Korea: Ford bounced back hard, nearly doubling its sales year to year, while Chevrolet (and its all-new offering) also experienced growth beyond its 1951 sales numbers.
1954
FORD…………………………. 1,165,942
CHEVROLET………………… 1,143,561
2-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
Ford pipped Chevrolet in the sales game for the third time since the war ended, though the margin was a slim 2 percent— just 22,381 more Fords were built for the model year. Base prices of low-line coupes were within $10 of each other, but Ford’s all-new 130-horsepower Y-block OHV V-8 cost as little as $72 extra. Ford’s identity as a bargain-performance brand, cemented as early as 1932, was back. Briefly.
1955
CHEVROLET………………… 1,704,693
FORD…………………………. 1,451,157
15-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
Both Ford and Chevrolet entered the year with an entirely new line of cars, with standard Six and optional V-8 power. Just $22 separated a six-passenger $1,707 Ford Mainline two-door from a six-passenger $1,685 Chevrolet One-Fifty two-door, so pricing remained competitive. Mainlines outsold One-Fiftys, but Two-Tens outsold mid-level Customlines, and Bel Airs outsold Fairlanes by 128,000 units.
1956
CHEVROLET………………… 1,567,196
FORD…………………………. 1,408,478
10-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
A facelift year for both brands, yet Ford managed to close the sales gap to just 10 percent between them.
1957
FORD…………………………. 1,676,448
CHEVROLET………………… 1,507,904
10-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
Well, here’s a shocker. Ford outsold Chevrolet by 10 percent, which came to about 170,000 cars. Granted, Ford had a new car for the year, whereas Chevrolet offered its final facelift on a model that had been around since the fall of 1954. Sales for Chevrolet’s overall 1957 line actually fell slightly compared to 1956. Nostalgia tells us who won hearts in the long run, but in the heat of the moment, Ford came out on top.
1958
CHEVROLET ……………….. 1,226,217
FORD …………………………… 987,945
19.5-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
The 1958 model year, coming as it did in a recession, was not kind to the bulk of Detroit’s automakers; Chevrolet production fell 450,000 units (18.7 percent) year to year, but Ford’s numbers fell by a frightening 40 percent from the year before. Was it Chevrolet’s all-new body, chassis, and engine that motivated what buyers there were that year?
1959
CHEVROLET ……………….. 1,480,036
FORD ………………………… 1,437,804
3-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
A steel strike didn’t help matters as Detroit climbed out of a poor sales year in 1958. Even so, just about all of the car companies rebounded with stronger sales. Ford rebounded harder, increasing sales nearly 50 percent year on year and coming within 3 percent of Chevrolet’s sales tally. Chevrolet’s car was practically all new, and Ford’s was facelifted for the final time this generation. With 2.9 million units sold between Ford and Chevrolet for the year, the difference in sales was barely 42,000 units.
1960
CHEVROLET ……………….. 1,651,753
FORD ………………………… 1,439,506
13-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
The end of the year saw a minor recession that straddled the calendar and lasted into early 1961. It was a situation custom-made for the onslaught of American compacts. Ford’s Falcon sold 435,000 cars immediately, while Chevrolet’s Corvair sold a quarter-million cars total. But compact sales, while significant, were small potatoes compared to 1.148 million fullsize Chevrolet models and just 911,000 fullsize Fords. This, despite the UAW striking GM that year.
1961
CHEVROLET ……………….. 1,484,922
FORD ………………………… 1,339,043
10-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
Ford and Chevrolet rode out the end of the brief recession with new fullsize models for 1961. Fairlane and Galaxie combined sold 810,000 units, while Chevrolet sold 1.192-million Biscaynes, Bel Airs, and Impalas. Ford’s conventional approach to compact cars continued to boost Blue Oval fortunes, with Falcon outselling Corvair 474,000 to 282,000.
1962
CHEVROLET ……………….. 2,057,677
FORD ………………………… 1,455,966
29-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
Ford’s lines were shut down for three weeks during an October 1961 UAW strike, affecting its 1962 model-year numbers. Those three weeks, however, cannot possibly excuse the huge 29-percent gap between Ford and Chevrolet. Chevrolet sold a whopping 40 percent more fullsize cars than Ford did, 1.4 million to 1 million. Chevrolet also launched a second, more conventional compact car, the Chevrolet II. Its debut year sales of 326,000 came within 50,000 units of the more established Ford Falcon’s 376,000. But mix in another 292,000 Corvair sales, and Chevrolet had the compact market covered, albeit with two models.
1963
CHEVROLET ……………….. 2,240,000
FORD ………………………… 1,579,073
30-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
Both car companies increased sales numbers for the year, but there hadn’t been a gap this large since the weird, anomalous year of 1948.
1964
CHEVROLET………………… 2,319,619
FORD…………………………. 1,641,417
30-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
Introduction of Chevrolet’s new intermediate- size Chevelle immediately eclipsed the established Fairlane, 338,000 to 269,000. Mustang added more than 126,000 sales to Ford’s tally. But it wasn’t enough to make up for Ford’s fullsize deficit: 1.574-million fullsize Chevrolet models sold, while fullsize Fords remained around 923,000.
1965
CHEVROLET………………… 2,383,504
FORD…………………………. 2,050,397
14-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
Would it be fair to credit Mustang with closing what had been a 30-percent sales gap, halving it from the year before? With more than 559,000 Mustangs sold for the year, it certainly helped shrink the gaping chasm between the fullsize Ford (978,000) and fullsize Chevrolet (1.6 million). Falcon doubled the Chevy II’s sales, but Chevelle outsold Fairlane by 130,000 units.
1966
FORD…………………………. 2,426,617
CHEVROLET………………… 2,142,035
12-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
Ford’s dominance over Chevrolet in the 1966 sales race, the only time during the decade, was a team effort. With more than 607,000 Mustangs sold for the model year and no competition from GM, it seemed inevitable. But Ford also beat Chevrolet in the intermediate class (new Fairlane versus new Chevelle) by 145,000 units, and Falcon outsold Chevrolet II to boot.
1967
CHEVROLET………………… 1,948,416
FORD…………………………. 1,731,227
18-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
Ford’s Mustang more than doubled sales over Chevrolet’s new pony car called Camaro. But it wasn’t enough to overcome Ford’s deficit in the high-volume fullsize sales race: Chevrolet sold 1.2-million fullsize cars, Ford just 877,000. In a reverse of last year’s fortunes, Chevelle also topped Fairlane in the midsize race by 120,000 units, while the Chevrolet II outsold the Falcon by a third.
1968
CHEVROLET………………… 2,141,686
FORD…………………………. 1,752,502
18-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
Most of the sales difference for 1968 can be laid at the feet of the fullsize cars: 1.236-million Chevrolets were built, versus 867,000 big Fords. Both brands restyled their midsize cars, though Chevelle outsold Torino/Fairlane by 50,000 units. Chevrolet’s new Nova outsold the warmed-over Falcon 200,000 to 131,000, and Mustang outsold Camaro 317,000 to 235,000.
1969
CHEVROLET………………… 2,210,064
FORD…………………………. 1,937,103
12-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
In the fullsize category, Chevrolet defeated Ford by just 12,000 units out of 2-million cars total. Chevelle outsold Torino/Fairlane 455,000 to 367,000; Chevrolet’s restyled Nova outsold Ford’s outgoing Falcon 252,000 to 95,000 in the compact race; even adding in the half-year Maverick’s 128,000 sales didn’t top Nova’s numbers. Mustang remained a bright spot for Ford as it topped Camaro 299,000 to 230,000.
1970
CHEVROLET………………… 2,014,917
FORD…………………………. 1,971,992
2-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
A recession year has an effect on all carmakers, but Ford was able to close the gap to just 43,000 cars for the year. Helping Ford hugely: the launch of the compact Maverick two-door sedan, which sold 451,000 units on the back of its highly touted $1,995 starting price. Not helping matters was Thunderbird’s sales, which were roughly a third of Chevrolet’s new personal-luxury hit, the Monte Carlo.
1971
FORD…………………………. 2,054,301
CHEVROLET………………… 1,701,774
17-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
Brand new big cars for both Ford and Chevrolet meant that the heat was on… and Ford won. Ford sold a quarter-million more fullsize Fords (Custom, Galaxie, Galaxie 500 and LTD) than Chevrolets (Biscayne, Bel Air, Impala, Caprice), almost exactly the overall sales difference between brands. A 67-day strike against GM in late 1970, just as the 1971 models were meant to be rolling out, badly hobbled GM and handed Ford the sales title for 1971. It was the only time Dearborn would be on top of the charts overall in the ’70s.
1972
CHEVROLET………………… 2,304,648
FORD…………………………. 2,283,904
1-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
Another strong year for Ford, coming within 21,000 units of sales victory, though Dearborn was helped by a long strike at GM’s Lordstown, Ohio F-body plant. Mustang’s 125,000 units sounds paltry, but it doubled Camaro’s 68,000 production. Chevrolet’s big-car sales rebounded, topping the million-car mark, compared to 832,000 fullsize Fords.
1973
CHEVROLET………………… 2,579,503
FORD…………………………. 2,349,367
9-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
Fullsize cars were closer than usual: 978,000 Chevrolets versus 854,000 Fords. The personal-luxury segment was booming: Chevrolet sold 290,000 Monte Carlos, compared to 87,000 Thunderbirds. Torino sold 110,000 units better than Chevelle. Pinto sold 57,000 units more than Vega in a season that ended with a fuel crisis and a recession.
1974
CHEVROLET ……………….. 2,305,728
FORD ………………………… 2,179,791
5.5-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
The continuing recession of 1973-’75 saw the overall market shrink, but Chevrolet’s lead dropped to just 5.5 percent—around 130,000 cars for 1974. The newly downsized Mustang II helped, selling 386,000 copies against 151,000 Camaros; Ford also sold 100,000 more Torinos than Chevrolet sold Chevelles, and 85,000 more Pintos than Vegas.
1975
CHEVROLET ……………….. 1,763,561
FORD ………………………… 1,586,764
10-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
The recession finally wrapped up midway through 1975, but you’d never know it looking at the dismal overall sales numbers; Chevrolet sales down 24 percent overall, and Ford sales down 27-percent year to year. The Torino-based personal-luxury Elite managed half of Monte Carlo’s numbers; with Elite separate from Torino’s sales, Chevelle topped Torino sales by 88,000 units. Mustang sales dropped but still remained ahead of Camaro’s steady sales numbers. Nova outgunned Maverick, and Vega closed the sales gap to the Pinto to just 17,000 units.
1976
CHEVROLET ……………….. 2,103,862
FORD ………………………… 1,926,420
8.5-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
Chevrolet was filling in the bottom end of its model lineup nicely: the new Chevette, the previous season’s Vega-based Monza, and the continuing Vega, while Ford relied upon its stalwart Pinto and Pinto-based Mustang II. Fullsize Chevrolet outsold fullsize Ford 423,000 to 367,000, a sure sign that the days of the fullsize American car were over. Granada, based on the Maverick (and therefore Falcon) chassis, sold 549,000 units for the year. Without a 28-day general strike on Ford, the Blue Oval would surely have come closer to defeating Chevrolet in the sales race.
1977
CHEVROLET ……………….. 2,319,464
FORD ………………………… 1,829,300
21-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
Chevrolet’s sales improved year-to-year, while Ford’s did not. Chevrolet’s new downsized fullsize cars (which shared a footprint with GM’s intermediates, for one year only) sold 661,000 copies—a 50-percent bump over the 1976 models, though Ford’s fullsize cars regained sales strength, with 434,000 LTDs sold. Thunderbird became a midsize model and eliminated the need for the Elite; instantly the Thunderbird’s 318,000 sales became competition for the Monte Carlo’s 411,000 sales.
1978
CHEVROLET ……………….. 2,374,545
FORD ………………………… 1,923,655
19-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
The new fullsize Chevrolet line doubled old-fullsize Ford sales, something that the strong-selling new Fairmont, which beat the new downsized Malibu by 96,000 units, couldn’t quite compensate for. The downsized Monte Carlo beat Thunderbird by just 6,000 units. Nova beat Granada’s sales, 288,000 to 350,000. A resurgent Camaro in a market by itself sold 272,000 units, and the Mustang outsold Monza 192,000 to 139,000.
1979
CHEVROLET ……………….. 2,284,749
FORD ………………………… 1,825,454
21-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
It was Ford’s turn to downsize its fullsize models, but the new LTD sold just 15 percent better than the 1978 model, and trailed Chevrolet’s fullsize models by 230,000 units. Malibu’s sales resurgence topped Fairmont, while Camaro’s 282,000 sales looked good, except the new-for-1979 Mustang’s 369,000 sales looked better.
1980
CHEVROLET ……………….. 2,286,745
FORD ………………………… 1,167,028
49-PERCENT DIFFERENCE
A gas crisis and a recession year, together for the second time during the decade. Despite what looks to be a drubbing, Ford sold more cars than Chevrolet in several head-to-head market segments. Compact Pinto scraped by Monza’s sales by 15,500 units. The so-called sales-disaster-downsized Thunderbird actually out-sold the Monte Carlo by 8,000 units, the Mustang out-sold Camaro by 120,000 cars, and Fairmont out-sold Malibu by 117,000 units. (Granada added another 90,000 cars to the tally.) But GM’s all-new front-drive X-cars made a big splash; a mind-blowing 811,000 Citations were built. Granted, the Citation was a mid-1979 release marketed as a 1980 model, but that model alone accounts for nearly three-quarters of the sales gap. Ford’s imported Fiesta could only manage 15 percent of subcompact Chevette’s 449,000 sales. Impala/Caprice outsold LTD by 95,000 units.
