Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

I spotted an (insert obscure car name here) classic car today!



  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,404
    Hmm...might not have PS--usually a lux car with a stick shift means a 'stripper' .

    That would be bad. :(


  • bhill2bhill2 Posts: 1,330
    Yup, and PS was indeed an option.

    2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv, 2001 Jaguar XK cnv, 1985 MB 380SE (the best of the lot)

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    I do agree on the '59 me it's almost cartoonish.

    I know you don't like Avantis, but I have a factory video of a '64 Avanti passing a base-level '59 Ford on a highway outside of Chicago and the Ford looks like it was much older than five model years older than the Avanti. Different types of cars, I realize.

    That said, there are quite a few '58-63 cars I think are handsome. I do put a big divide between '64 and '65 though as it seems like a lot of mainstream cars were redesigned for '65.
  • lemkolemko Posts: 15,120
    Geeze, two classics immediately come to mind for 1963:

    Buick Riviera
    Corvette Sting Ray
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 21,847
    To me, a '59 Ford looks a bit like it's stuck in transition, between the late 50's and early 60's. While features such as the wraparound windshield, headlights above the grille, fins, and heavy-handed chromework still give it off as a 50's design, it still looks like they were trying to square it off and tone it down a bit, a hint of things to come in the 60's.

    In contrast, I think of a '59 Chevy as a 60's car that hasn't totally shaken off its 50's excesses yet. And, the fact that the design lasted through 1964, just toned down a bit each year, seems to support that idea.

    Meanwhile, a '59 Plymouth just seems like it's still stuck in the 50's to me. It's like they took what had been modern and futuristic looking in 1957, and decided to out-do that, but unfortunately that wasn't really what the public wanted anymore.

    If I was forced to choose between a '59 Chevy, Ford, or Plymouth, I don't know which way I'd go. I'm not really a fan of any of them, although each one does have a few things I like. I kinda like the formal, upscale look of the Ford, although at the same time, I do find it a bit heavy-handed and fussy from some angles. I like the sleek, lowness of the '59 Chevy, but just not some of the excessive details. And the Plymouth, I like the overall shape, but just don't like the frenched headlights, the garish, two-piece eggcrate grill, or the "toilet seat" fake tire hump on the decklid.

    If I was a new car buyer in '59, I think I'd just try to save up a few more bucks and splurge on a Pontiac, Olds, Mercury, or DeSoto.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    If I was forced to choose between a '59 Chevy, Ford, or Plymouth, I don't know which way I'd go.

    I'd just buy one of these instead:

    If I HAD to buy a '59 Chevy, Ford, or Plymouth, I'd probably buy a non-white, non-red, non-black, factory two-tone '59 Impala Sport Coupe. But I wouldn't be totally happy doing so. ;)
  • tjc78tjc78 JerseyPosts: 5,025
    Saw one of these beasts last night in a light blue color. I'm pretty sure I've seen it before, there can't be two of them running around south Jersey. I'm not even sure what the proper name is. I think it said Apache on the side, which makes sense.


    1999 Chevy S10 / 2004 Merc Grand Marquis / 2012 Buick LaCrosse

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    That's a '61 Chevy Apache panel truck. The inserts in the 'cats eyes' are different between the '60 and '61.

    I think those are durable trucks but of no great styling integrity. I think everybody else's trucks of that period were better-looking. Just MHO of course.
  • berriberri Posts: 4,141
    Looking at Shifty's pix, I think he's a bit of a minimalist in his styling preferences. I doubt he has any Picasso hanging on his walls! I think one of the things that contributes to that 59 Ford view is that often squared off C pillars and long deck lids can look a bit out of balance, particularly in two doors. In the 58-63 time period, I think I liked the 60 Ford the least. It was like two cars. the front part was decent, but the back was odd. It had those goofy, truncated finlets and then the elongated half moon tail lights with inverted images embossed into the fender (which owners frequently filled in with red reflector tape that didn't really enhance it). Throw in that bulbous rear window on the lesser Fairlane models and Wuuf! I think the more squared off C pillar and smaller rear glass on the Galaxie worked better. IIRC Fintail liked the 60 Ford wagon. It was the last Big 3 wagon to still have a two piece tailgate, but it probably worked better on that particular design than a squared off roll down window one piece would have. I suspect back then though that Ford made the decision based on cost rather than aesthetics. I think the wagon looked better than the sedan too, but the Starliner coupe is probably a collector favorite. As for 59's, I'd go Chevy. My favorite Ford for of that era is the 63, although I know some don't like the tail light and rear fender interface. I think the FOMOCO's that had many less than attractive model years during that period is actually Mercury. If a Ford guy puts down a 59/60 Chevy, all the Chevy guy has to do is pull out a pix of a say 60 Merc and say "checkmate"!
  • jljacjljac Posts: 649
    I do agree on the '59 me it's almost cartoonish.

    I agree. I think that the '59 Ford was the worst looking Ford produced during the 20 years following WWII. A guy on our block had a pink and white hardtop retractable convertible. It was horrible. The trunk looked massive - like a big, white food freezer we had in our basement. From the side it looked like a pick up truck (or El Camino).

    I thought that the 1960 was the best looking Ford of that era and 1958 was second best. Many don't like the 1958 Fords, but I did and still do, especially the hardtop. They seemed to be related to the Thunderbird of the same year. All the other Fords were OK with me, some quite nice, but the '59 s were "da woist."
  • texasestexases Posts: 5,511
    "I think I liked the 60 Ford the least. It was like two cars. the front part was decent, but the back was odd."

    I was just about to post how the '60 Ford was one of my favorites of that style-challenged era, with the '61 looking older than the '60 to the eye of the beholder, and all that...
  • berriberri Posts: 4,141
    Totally true - car design and preferences is a very emotional matter I think. I don't have sales numbers, but Ford didn't stick with that 60 body design beyond one year (although I believe the chassis went through 64).
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America: I70 & I75Posts: 18,045
    >I was just about to post how the '60 Ford was one of my favorites of that style-challenged era

    Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I was going to post that I liked the 59 style. The era was about rockets and jets and fins; the '59 had that style. The '58 was a little messed up with strange variations on the headlights and taillights after the '57.
  • omarmanomarman Posts: 693
    That said, there are quite a few '58-63 cars I think are handsome. I do put a big divide between '64 and '65 though as it seems like a lot of mainstream cars were redesigned for '65.

    I can see where you could divide a lot of Detroit iron between the '64 and '65 model years. It's just that the '58-'63 era was a bigger slice of time with a fuller catalog of dreck. Last week I watched part of "It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World" from 1963. The characters are still fun to watch and the traffic mix can be hard to look at. :shades:

    But I still like the '58 Corvette and the '63 Galaxie so there's no accounting for taste.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,505
    I like the 60 too, it is odd, but cool in a way. There's something kind of forward look mopar in it to me, especially the Starliner. It is a link to the 60s from the 50s - a little gingerbread, but some clean parts too, and not as sometimes awkward as a 59. I might be biased, as my dad had a cool red and white 60 Country Sedan back in the 90s. It would attract attention even then before the wagon fad took off - when was the last time anyone saw one?
  • berriberri Posts: 4,141
    The 59 Ford was actually a pretty good seller and I believe outsold Chevy. Two things probably played. Obviously the 59 Chevy style was controversial and the Plymouth, while not badly done, was getting a bit old. But customers also flocked to the Thunderbird roof lines and interior cues on the new Galaxie. For it's day, it was a bit modern inside. I always felt that the 60 Ford either wasn't completely done, or screwed up by management committee interference or excessive compromise?
  • berriberri Posts: 4,141
    Actually, I think the 60 Ford was the best looking of the Big 3 wagons that year, even if a bit unusual. The Chevy had far too many window pieces that didn't seem to quite work right and the Plymouth was getting a bit too extended in the rear to my eyes at least.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,404
    edited March 2013
    Well you can't use sales figures to assign high marks to styling; people have been known to buy, wear, eat or watch the most horrible things.

    I really don't think beauty is in the eyes of the beholder---that suggests that training, the artistic eye, and styling talent are irrelevant. I don't believe they are.

    Most of the 58-63 cars may have some appeal for the big lovable goofs they are, but stylistically they are an utter mess of add-ons, lines smashing into one another, completely unrelated themes, garish adornments---and we (I) haven't even started on how dumb some of the interior design is.

    Many foreign cars were no better, so I'm not beating on one dead horse here.

    I would suggest that some fans of these cars look at them in "real life" and give us a reassessment---photos tend to forgive so many crimes.

    Look at this car---every line in agreement, every shape makes sense, everything stating one bold "idea":



  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    edited March 2013
    To me, that Riv was much-improved when the fake scoops were removed, and the inboard headlights made hideaway and the taillights moved lower into the rear bumper--all done for '65.

    That said, a '63 or '64 Riviera is not ridiculously priced, and there seem to be a lot of 'em out there still.

    I'm one of those very few that doesn't like a split-window '63 'Vette--too 'Buck Rogers' for me. The '64 you can actually see out of, and it costs less than a '63!
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,404
    "tortured lines" par excellence.

    What are we doing here? Let's have some icing on that cake with layered wait, I want wait...let's put a dip in the rear windshield and a fat lip on the trunk.

    this car looks like it fell off the modeling table and someone pushed the clay back together so they wouldn't get in trouble: :P



Sign In or Register to comment.