Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

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

15415425445465471276

Comments

  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 57,072
    Imperials make me think of this:

    We're the ones in the Imperial, and we're running last?! :shades:

    A 1960 must be pretty rare today.
  • ab348ab348 Member Posts: 18,979
    From what I understand, Imperials are often prohibited from being entered in demo derbies for precisely that reason. They were built like tanks.

    2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6

  • ab348ab348 Member Posts: 18,979
    Here's '63 coupe. Reupholstered front seat at least...and is this what an Imperial front seat looked like in '63? Where's the center armrest?

    That front seat upholstery looks all wrong to me, both in terms of pattern (the stitching pattern is too wide) and the fabric (looks like a velour material). Too bad.

    2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6

  • ab348ab348 Member Posts: 18,979
    edited December 2012
    The IPs are similar but not identical. Here is a '67 Chrysler New Yorker IP:

    image

    Here's the Imperial:

    image

    The Chrysler IP bowed out in the center while the Imp's did not, and the Imp also had a number of neat features like a pop-up vanity mirror in the glove compartment and a cover for the radio.

    2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6

  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    I think 1966 was the last year of stand alone Imperials?
  • bhill2bhill2 Member Posts: 2,464
    It may just be my inner car freak showing, but I am somewhat bothered by the fact that the seller of that '66 doesn't know that year has a 440 in it, not a 413.

    2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv. (RIP 2001 Jaguar XK8 cnv and 1985 MB 380SE [the best of the lot])

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,026
    I thought that '67 Imperial had a 'bowed out' look to the top pad, but maybe that's just sagging of an old vinyl part. Thank you for pointing out the differences, and there are quite a few.

    A "pop-up vanity mirror in the glove compartment"? Wonder where they got that idea? Same place they were able to pick up the "Challenger" and "Daytona" names! ;)
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,026
    In my memory, it's unusual to see a convertible with a rear-seat center armrest like that Imperial has. My experience with large convertibles is mostly GM, but I always figured in a convertible, GM made the rear-seat back cushion thinner, making a center armrest not nearly as useful. Matter of fact, in the early '70's, GM even started cutting out rear-seat center armrests in coupes, when the hardtop sedan version of the same model and interior trim had them (Pontiac Grand Ville with optional Custom interior; Buick Centurion).

    Neat touch on that Imperial.

    Is that vinyl or leather inside? If leather, it's avoided the wrinkly/lined leather look that seems so typical.
  • ab348ab348 Member Posts: 18,979
    edited January 2013
    I'm pretty sure it's leather.

    Here's a pic of the silver leather interior. Imagine how great it would look with the original Charcoal Gray Metallic paint on that '67.

    image

    Regarding rear-seat center armrests, I suspect GM did that because the top mechanism ate up significant width in the rear because the frames went into each side until '71, making the rear seat narrower than the coupes. Of course starting with the '71s the frame was different to alleviate that problem but I bet the GM bean counters wouldn't allow the armrest to return, as part of GM's continued cheapening up of their cars back then.

    2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6

  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,638
    I remember reading that when the Mopars were redesigned for 1969, the convertibles picked up about 10" in back seat shoulder room, because of a redesigned top mechanism. At first, I thought that might have been a bit of hyperbole, but after seeing how much room the surrounds for the top intrude into the back seat area, I can believe it. Looks like it eats about 5" on either side, easily.

    I wonder what kind of gains GM saw when they went to the "scissors" type mechanism for 1971?

    Awhile back, I took a tape measure to my '67 Catalina, and the way I measured its shoulder room, got 62.5" in the front seat, and about 56" in the back seat, measured between the narrower area in between where the top cuts in. Looking at the sales brochures, Pontiac didn't publish shoulder room, although they did show legroom and headroom stats. I just checked the 1970 Buick brochure though, and they're showing the LeSabre convertible as only having 52.3" of shoulder room in the back! So, I wonder if GM changed the top mechanism from '67-68 to '69-70? Or, maybe I just measured wrong?

    I just dug up a '71 Buick brochure, and they're showing the LeSabre convertible at 61.7" of shoulder room! So, it looks like the big '71 GM cars got about a 10" gain in shoulder room, too!

    I think the '71 full-sizers had something
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    If something happened to my Brougham, I'd go for it! I imagine it would also survive a nuclear war, but with my luck, some d*** dirty apes would burn it!
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,026
    Thanks for posting. I can tell that interior is leather; wasn't sure about the eBay car.

    What are the black fold/crease areas in the car seats? Are they black leather or vinyl, or a suede-like material, do you know? Interesting contrast.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,638
    I have a gut feeling that those black creases are just vinyl. Also, the side bolster on the center armrest is vinyl. But interestingly, it looks like the side bolsters of the seat itself is leather.
  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 50,382
    In case you want the same basic (well, roughly) car, for a whole lot less money. Obviously not the same condition, but it does have a goofy roofline!

    http://southjersey.craigslist.org/cto/3454361934.html

    image

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.

  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Interesting car for next to nothing.

    Needs water pump=it over heats so could be more serious.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,026
    I have a friend whose parents had new '56, '60, '65, '67, '70, and '73 Caddy sedans and '76 and '78 Sevilles. My friend's Mom (who recently passed) was a tiny little lady...probably not even five feet tall. He said she used to always say, even later, how she liked their '60 Cadillac, which was a flat-top sedan, as she "...could really see out of it". I can't imagine her even driving a car that large!
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 57,072
    That car does have amazing visibility. Just look at it in that pic! Even thinner pillars than my old car, too. So unlike the blind spot monsters of today.

    My grandma had a downsized FWD big Olds in the 80s, and she liked that car a lot, because the trunk was low, which made reversing easy. Her next cars (2x Taurus) always had her complaining about visibility.
  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    but it does have a goofy roofline!

    Have some mercy - it was the fifties :D

    I think that flat top roof line worked best on the Impala.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,026
    edited January 2013
    Out my home office window just now, a pale green '62 or '63 Chevy truck cab-with-stake bed. Saw evidence of an unpainted repair at the bottom of the LR front fender, but other than that, moved smartly up our street. Never seen it around before. It had the wraparound windshield, but I didn't notice the location of the front fender series nameplate, which would have told me for sure the year.

    One of those vehicles some might say, "Who would want one?", but there it was, zipping up the salt-covered streets of Kent, OH, 50 years old or darn close.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,638
    At one time, I thought about trying to find an older 60's truck to replace my '85 Silverado with Only problem is, it seemed like they were either overly-restored/resto-modded, or in much worse shape than my '85, but nothing in between.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,026
    LR= "lower right", but I didn't make that very obvious!
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,363
    I found myself behind a very nice black over black Buick Electra convertible of mid 70s vintage (w antique plates). I got a good look as the old duffer driving it (original owner?) was doing 20 in a 25 zone. I'd say it was in good number two condition spoiled only by small wheels with snap on fake wires.

    Needless to say I passed him like he was standing still. ;)

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,026
    That'd be a LeSabre most likely, andys. The '70 Electra was the last Electra convertible.
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,363
    Well I didn't see a model name or count the portholes but it looked pretty spiffy for a LeSabre.

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 57,072
    Spotted a dark blue late 2002 (big bumpers) with sliding metal sunroof.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,026
    edited January 2013
    I almost asked you, "2002 what?" !

    I'm old-skool, but I always hated numbers as a model name of a car.

    To me, the worst was the Cadillac "Series 62". They used that up to the '64 model year. You go into the dealer and say, "I want a '61 62" or "How 'bout a '64 62?" LOL
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Safety regs ruined the style of many a car.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,638
    Well I didn't see a model name or count the portholes but it looked pretty spiffy for a LeSabre.

    LeSabres started getting pretty big, pretentious, and luxurious by the mid 70's, so it would be easy to mistake one for an Electra. Once the 5 mph bumpers went into effect, I think they topped out around 226". An Electra wasn't that much bigger...maybe 231"? I do remember there were a few years where the Electra was actually an inch or two longer than Caddy DeVille.

    I always thought the '75 LeSabre convertible was a sharp looking car. Make mine baby blue with the Buick magnum wheels. And a 455. :shades:
    image
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,026
    To me, nobody's factory wheels were better than Buick's.

    I can just picture that LeSabre, andre--white top and white vinyl seats with blue dash, seat belts and carpet, right?!

    I remember our local eye doctor buying a firethorn-colored '76 Eldo convertible when new...white interior with red dash, etc. When I was back in town visiting a few years ago, I saw a slightly beat-up looking Eldo pull up to the intersection, top down, and it was the good Dr.! Still owned it. He was a white belt and shoe kind of guy, and somehow that Eldo seemed just right for him! Before that he had a light blue '71 Eldo convert.
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    Saw one of these today:

    image

    Flat gray primer, Crager wheels w white stripe tires, young guy driving it. Looked like a project car.

    From behind, I could see the left rear tire was about 3"-5" to the right of the left front tire. Bent frame I presume.
  • texasestexases Member Posts: 10,669
    "Bent frame I presume. "

    Bent unibody, in this case. We had a '68 Valiant for 10+ years, that thing ran forever.

    My oddball was a Mk. 1 Rabbit 4-door on the way home from work yesterday (unfortunately nothing special, not a GTI). Didn't stink, so I guess it wasn't a diesel, even more unusual...
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,638
    That Valiant actually looks kind of upscale in that dark color, and the nicer Signet trim level.

    I remember when Darts and Valiants were common sights on the streets, seeing that occurrence where it was going down the street at a bit of an angle (and it always seemed like the the rear was shifted toward the right, never the left) wasn't all that rare.

    Darts and Valiants had a very narrow rear track, something like 55.9" compared to around 59" up front, so I think that helped make the most minor offset more noticeable.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    That Valiant looks much better in the picture than it did on the street. Also, the interior was very cheap looking, but the engines (Slant 6 and V8) and Torqueflyte were really rugged.

    I always thought the size was just right for a sport sedan Chrysler version, with upscale exterior styling and a luxurious interior. It could have been Chrysler's answer to the BMW 2002.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,638
    white top and white vinyl seats with blue dash, seat belts and carpet, right?!

    Yep, that would be it! For some reason, I always associated that light powder/baby blue as a Buick color. Even though Pontiac, Olds, and Buick also offered it, it just seemed like it was made for Buick. I guess for Olds I always think of burgundy, and for Pontiac, sort of a brown/earthtone color.

    I wonder if, for whatever reason, that color was more common on Buicks than the other cars?
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    Bent unibody, in this case.

    I didn't know it was unibody - I thought every before the mid 70's was BOF.

    We had a '68 Valiant for 10+ years, that thing ran forever.

    With a Slant Six it should run forever.
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,638
    Chrysler switched everything to Unibody for 1960, with the exception of Imperial. In fact, Chrysler coined the word "Unibody". However, the cars still have sub-frames up front and in the back, so at a quick glance, looking underneath one, it might appear to be body-on-frame.

    The 1960-66 Imperial used the 1957-59 frame, and while the body looked very similar, it was beefed up, so the car was sort of a hybrid of unit-body on top of a frame. Similar to a current-day Honda Ridgeline or Pilot, I guess.
    image
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 57,072
    edited January 2013
    I don't mind numbers when they mean something. 2002 came close to engine displacement in cc, but not exactly.

    I wonder if some thought a 62 was an old model in 1964, just because of the name.

    About bumpers - the 70s railroad ties are ugly, but you could bump to your heart's content without receiving a $1000 repair bill.
  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    I remember when I was in the military in the 70's that light colored cars like yellow or powder blue seemed more common in the southern states (went with those sansabelt pants, white bucks and belts - just kidding!). A buddy of mine actually bought a big old used, maybe 69 Mercury Marquis convertible in a very light blue shade with white leather. I learned that in cut-offs you could get burned by white leather seats just like darker colors. A nice thing about those light colors is that they didn't seem to show the dirt too badly.
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,363
    A nice thing about those light colors is that they didn't seem to show the dirt too badly.

    That wasn't the case with the (optional) white leather sport seats in my '86 Mustang GT convertible. They never looked clean.

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    I was talking about exterior colors. I imagine white leather is tough to keep clean. I don't know why more vehicles don't offer saddle colored leather, that used to be popular and I think works well.
  • ab348ab348 Member Posts: 18,979
    Pastel paints were quite common even into the '70s. I remember visiting the Chevy dealer in the fall of '74 to see the new '75 models, and they had several cars in a very dull and rather odd-looking pale blue. The Chevy color chart calls it "Medium Blue" but it was almost closer to a blue-gray drab color that the military might have used. It seemed to have been only used that one year.

    I remember in '72 visiting the Plymouth dealer here and he had a new 2-door Scamp hardtop in the showroom in a pale blue shade called "Blue Sky" with a white vinyl roof and a white vinyl interior. Sounds sort of feminine, but it really looked sharp. Back then it seemed Mopar had a lot of non-metallic pastel paints in their assortment - maybe their large taxi and fleet business required such shades.

    Ford in the late '60s/early '70s sold a lot of cars in a very pale pastel blue they called Diamond Blue. I remember seeing that color everywhere, on Mustangs, Custom 500s, Fairlanes, you name it.

    2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,026
    edited January 2013
    I'd say that color you remember on '75 Chevys is the same color andre wants on a '75 LeSabre convertible. GM shared colors across divisions then, for the most part, but it was not unusual for the divisions to call them different names. That powder blue was pretty popular in my memory on '75 GM's. The only other blue I remember off the top of my head on '75 Chevys was a metallic, turquoise-blue.

    My parents bought a new '74 Impala Sport Coupe (all four windows rolled down) in the last week of Aug. '74, when the dealer had received a few '75's by then. Dad wanted to avoid having to use unleaded gas. There were two '74 Impala Sport Coupes that were identically sticker priced ($4,408.00), but one was maroon with a white painted top and had the black and white herringbone cloth interior (like a nice sport coat!), and the other was a pastel light green (with white painted top) that resembled baby diarrhea to me. It had a nice pattern cloth light green interior. I wanted the maroon one so bad it hurt, but Dad picked the pastel green one.

    Come to think of it, when he bought our '77 Impala coupe, I wanted the firethorn coupe in the showroom that was $200 more and had a 350 4-barrel instead of a 305. Dad didn't want four barrels or to spend $200 more (sigh). I guess I've become my old man.
  • ab348ab348 Member Posts: 18,979
    My parents bought a '74 Impala too, in that same maroon metallic with the black houndstooth cloth interior. It was a 4-door sedan and was an ex-Budget rental - my dad was friends with the local franchisee - and he bought it in the summer of '74. I liked the look of the car but it was not much fun to drive as I found it just too big and the engine had driveability problems due to emissions - when the choke pulled off, the thing ran really lean and would almost die when moving from a stop, then leap forward.

    That sports coat fabric on the inside didn't impress me much. We had previously owned '63 and '69 Impalas and their interiors were much nicer than the '74. By then GM was moving the Impala downmarket some and the Caprice was becoming their equivalent car to the older Impala. I remember thinking the fact that the bench seats didn't have a section of vinyl in the center of the seat seemed really cheap, like the older BelAirs and Biscaynes of the '60s.

    We didn't keep it long and dad replaced it with a Hornet Sportabout. Later on he bought a '79 Impala 4-door, also from his friend at Budget, in Dark Carmine Metallic with red cloth inside, which was a much nicer car than the '74.

    2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6

  • kyfdxkyfdx Moderator Posts: 234,725
    '74 Impala was my driver's ed car. Maroon, as well.

    Edmunds Price Checker
    Edmunds Lease Calculator
    Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!

    Edmunds Moderator

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,026
    Here are the '74 Impala standard cloth and 'Sport Cloth' seats. (Ours was like the blue shown here, but light green). Hard to see, but there were buttons along the seat backs.

    http://www.oldcarbrochures.com/static/NA/Chevrolet/1974_Chevrolet/1974_Chevrolet- _Full_Size/1974%20Chevrolet%20Full%20Size-08.html

    I liked the seats, especially the way the rear seat looked like a 'couch' in the coupes...large, full-length-and-depth armrests on the side panels and 'filler' panels on each end of the back seat back...but didn't like all the black plastic on the instrument panel that year. At least the steering wheel was color-keyed that year, unlike the older Impalas of that generation.
  • ab348ab348 Member Posts: 18,979
    It's odd that the car we had was fitted with what the brochure calls "sport cloth" seats. I can't understand why a Budget rental would be ordered with that. Actually I don't think I've ever seen what the brochure calls the standard cloth in any '74. All I've seen are the herringbone pattern.

    2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,026
    I think a full-size Chevy of that 'porker' era I could've enjoyed, would have been a '75 Impala Sport Coupe, fully loaded, wire wheelcovers (I hated the '75 full wheelcovers), the saddle-colored 'Sport Cloth' seats with 50/50 front seat, the couple of extra gauges....the end of an era at Chevy (full-size true hardtop coupe).

    I never liked on the '73 and '74, how the side molding went over top of the front wheel opening and right up to the front of the car.

    BTW, the '74 full wheelcovers were the '70 wheelcover. I never knew Chevy to do that before. Similarly, the '75 Monza Towne Coupe wheelcovers were early-Corvair.
  • ab348ab348 Member Posts: 18,979
    One of the things Chevy did with that generation after a while was introduce a styling feature on the Caprice one year, then move it to the Impala the next year. This seemed most prevalent with the '75 and '76 Impalas, which looked much like the previous-year Caprices.

    One thing I never realized is that when they killed off the BelAir in the US in '76 they introduced an Impala S stripper model that was much the same. Here in Canada the BelAir lived on for a few years more.

    GM afflicted the Impala with that sport cloth material for years, starting I believe in '73. By '76 they had changed the pattern a bit and it looked like a Herb Tarlek sports coat.

    2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,026
    Yeah, I know what you mean. It became a plaid. I will say I saw a '76 Impala wagon once, older but clean, for sale and it had a bright red interior with whitish/reddish plaid 'sport cloth'. I kind of liked it for the red interior that wasn't seen that often anymore. A friend was looking at it for his wife and she was horrified!
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,026
    That Impala "S" model was a stripper outside...like a Bel Air, but it still had the regular Impala's interior trim and materials.
Sign In or Register to comment.