Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
I never like the nose of the Stingray so much..as you know, I don't like unattractive snouts, shovel noses, shark noses, locomotive noses. On the Sting Ray...I dunno...that split bumper messes up the line for some reason. But I like the roofline and the muscular fenders. The car does suggest "power", so its styling fulfills its form.
The Riv suggests power and speed. The 60 Ford suggests a birthday cake make in prison.
That '60 Ford would look nicer with the extra reflectors in the bumpers to mirror the taillights! Come on, those were cool!
I could enjoy owning a robin's egg blue '60 Galaxie 500 Starliner. I love '61 Starliners, but I don't like Ford's tomato reds in and out of those early '60's years. Get me a subdued color one and I'd be a happy camper.
I also like '58 Fords. Figures the other Studey guy (jljac) and I would concur on that! I actually like the Fairlane 500 better than the Thunderbird. The wheelbase is too short on the 'bird IMHO and it was pained to resemble a bird outside I think--something I think Ford did up through '63. Still, I'd take a '62 or '63 Sports Roadster!
So you have a "three-body trunk" and barely enough room in the back seat for a cat and a cantaloupe.
The 1961 Chevrolet is drop-dead gorgeous!
The 1961 Ford is squarish and conservative
The 1961 Plymouth is .... Aaaagh! Change it, Butthead! Change it!
First year for narrow whites on a Chevy.
As you know, I'd have to get one with 'straight line tuning' radio and no pushbuttons, 'cause I think the buttons that spell "Chevy" is cheesy!
At Hershey a few years back, there actually was a '61 Impala Sport Coupe (not SS I don't think) that had the non-pushbutton radio! Too bad it also had skirts. ):
And cleaner than 50s style on the sides:
And you still got gun sights on the fenders.
Speaking of wagons, I remember many years ago, there was a 2 door 1960 Ford Ranch Wagon for sale in BC. Big rarity.
Is it a 61 Plymouth or a Lexus GS? :shades:
1 tiny detail doesn't make (or break) a design. That's ugly for many reasons.
Sales seem to be pretty soft, too - probably were for Plymouth as well.
One of my old auto encyclopedias ragged on the '61 Plymouth, saying that it spawned a whole generation of bad Japanese sci-fi monsters. I guess that's not the only thing it spawned. :P
It's funny though, how the Japanese will pick up on some long lost styling motif from days gone by. A few years back, the Honda CR-V had what I called a "1961 DeSoto complex". It had sort of a double-grille effect, where the lower grille slanted up into the headlights, and then an upper grille that jutted out, in a bit of a swollen fashion.
And, that odd beltline drop-down in the current Honda Odyssey makes me think of the old Dodges from 1957-60, where the fin ended short of the fender. Or the '61 Dodge, with the odd, reverse-slant fins.
I don't find the Odyssey hideous though, just odd, with that little detail. And, that previous-gen CRV, while it hasn't exactly grown on me, I guess Iv'e gotten used to it.
As for the '61 Plymouth, I once saw one with '59 Chevy taillights grafted onto it and, believe it or not, it made a world of improvement. I think the biggest issue with the '61 Plymouth isn't the overall shape, but merely the details. The scalloped-out corners are actually kinda neat, but the stuck-on taillights and that hideous front-end are just a mess.
I think that roofline dates it a bit, too. Even though it was all-new for 1960, unit-bodied, and shared very little with the '57-59 Mopars, It looks to me like they just used the roofline from a '57 Plymouth 4-door hardtop, and put frames around the window glass. Kinda neat though, how they recessed the B-pillar so the window frames overlapped it.
That roof persisted through 1964 with the Dodge 880. By that time, it was really looking out of date. Chrysler, at least, modified it a bit for their '63-64 Newport/300/New Yorker, so it looked more up to date, although it still used the same wraparound windshield.
That's like saying an attractive model is an troll just because she has one small mole on her face.
Gimme a break.
Sales were up 450+ % the first year, they've settled down now that the new ES arrived, but they're still more than double the sales rate 2 years ago. Not exactly soft.
Feb 2013 1108 units
317% as many sales as the no-spindle predecessor.
(Edit: my numbers were low, sales last year were up more than 500%)
2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve
The new one has done better because it's not. The risks with the styling have undoubtedly worked.
Let's not forget competitors are spending about $5 grand per vehicle in incentives, prompting even the biggest die-hards to trade in their AMG models. LOL
One thing I can't stand about any of the GSes though, is the C-pillar. It's too big, and goes too far back beyond the rear axle, to the point the car starts looking like a swollen hatchback.
What, really, is the point of the GS, anyway? Is it for someone who wants a Lexus interpretation of a 5-series or E-Class? It's RWD at least, so it's probably more fun to drive than the more mass-market ES, which seems to carry the bulk of Lexus volume.
That '61 Plymouth look doesn't bug me as much on the ES...maybe because it's smoother, toned down a bit, much less bold?
Exactily. And from Edmunds long term tester, many of the drivers like the GS more than the latest 5. Which says more about the 5, really...
Same designer penned the Daewoo Leganza, so not a coincidence.
We should all keep in mind they dropped the V8 Lexus GS and still sell 3 times as many in a BAD month.
Anyone here really think Lexus regrets the spindle? Sales are way up, and they're pretty much using the same old 2GR-FSE V6 from ages ago.
Weren't month to month sales off by like 30%+ in the last report posted on the other forum?
Give me a break. Some seem to get a little red when bad styling is called out for what it is. Just like the new IS, which is a shame, because the cars are pretty nice inside. Nobody will be looking at these cars in 20+ years and reminiscing about their lovely lines.
Sales 2 years ago were very low because the model was aged and design-wise was outclassed by the entire competition people simply stopped buying it. It indeed had nowhere to go but up. Not many people bought the V8 after 06-07 anyway.
And what a fine engine it is. I still think the Toyota 2GR (both DI and Non-DI) is the best V6 on the market right now.
Its also not "that" old, it was introduced with the 05 Avalon in non-DI form.
The GS certainly isn't a bad car by any means, it just competes in a very competitive segment that BMW/Merc basically owns. I haven't checked, but I bet they sell more of the GS than Infiniti does the M.
2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve
The new ES took some attention away (cheaper, same new grille) and the GS didn't have $5-6 grand worth of cash on the hood like the Germans did.
It's not like the ES competes with the 3 series. The new 5er has gone so soft the comparison is no longer ridiculous, either. And the ES uses the Avalon as a starting point and grew much bigger, so there's more overlap with the GS.
The spindle hasn't hurt Lexus at all, in fact total sales were up another 4% in Feb 2013 and that's compared to a fantastic month in 2012.
They're not discounting at all.
Spec for spec it is still cheaper than the Germans even with incentives (though the difference aint what it used to be). I am sure the 11 GS had some cash on the hood too, outgoing styles always do - which is why the E is sale priced now, leftovers before the facelift.
Some of those early 60s cars look like someone threw a few thousand nuts and bolts and parts and shook them together and spilled them out on a table!
Believe me, I know and appreciate how all of us occasionally like to stick our gearhead snouts into the automotive hog trough of over-the-top indulgences, but I don't think such indulgences should be masqueraded as "good styling".
So, maybe you could argue that the way those taillights stuck out was one last vestige of the 50's jet/space age motif that the Impala still hadn't quite thrown off. As I said, I don't mind it. However, I think the '66 Chevy taillight treatment is more attractive. But, I don't like the front-end of the '66 as much. A bit too blunt, and not as forward thrusting as the '65.
I think '65 was a good year for just about everybody, style-wise.
I'm impressed that, even with the tiny 14" wheels of the era, that '65 Impala still looks well-balanced. I'm wondering though...is that Impala sitting a little high overall, but especially in the rear? Like maybe it has heavy duty shocks or something?
Also, if you want to get nitpicky, the '65 Chevy is a good example of function following form. Or, as Consumer Reports used to say "Handsome is as handsome does". A '65 Plymouth Fury isn't nearly as attractive in the eyes of most people, but it's about the same size, it has a sturdier front bumper, is bigger inside, and has a larger trunk. IIRC, the '65 full-sized Fords were a bit bigger inside as well, although I can't remember how their trunks were.
IMO, that's why it's hard to design a really beautiful looking car nowadays. Function can't follow form anymore. A car has to be aerodynamic, safe, roomy enough, have enough luggage capacity, incorporate all sorts of safety features and creature comforts, conform to various bumper and crash standards, etc, but can't be too big externally, or nobody will buy it.
I know another guy who doesn't like the 'bullet' taillights. I like them, for one reason since they were the sixth consecutive model year for three round lights on each side of an Impala. The '66 square lights looked OK to me, but not as nice to my eyes. I also don't like on the '66 how it has a molding right smack down the middle of the side, like a Bel Air. Still, the '66 is a pretty car.
Those '65 and '66 Impalas were comparatively luxurious inside, too--I'd say more so than a Catalina or base LeSabre or Dynamic 88 even. Those cars gave you three-speed automatics, longer wheelbases, and bigger standard engines, but the Impala seemed like it gave you quality where you could easily see it (not disparaging the others; IMHO all the '65 GM full-sizes were nice cars and the Pontiac/Buick/Olds advantages were indeed advantages). Over one million '65 Impalas (not counting Biscaynes or Bel Airs) sold that year, a record never duplicated I believe.
I know a guy who says if you looked underneath a '65 and then looked underneath a '64, it would be apparent how the '65 was cheapened, but I think the styling was definitely improved. I can hardly think of two consecutive model years of the same model that looked more different (I think we've had that conversation here before).
You ought to ask to be reassigned to the Funny Furrin Car Forums and let someone host this one that actually likes old cars.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
Besides, if someone were to call me an "elitist", that would be a supreme compliment! :P
Without discrimination, everything turns to mush, doesn't it?
Not really apples to apples, the cars (should) appeal to different buyers. Maybe they just have it a couple dollops of styling too many, the ES isn't this flamboyant.
Even the people at "Club Lexus" have a laugh
Apparently these things are starting to be collectible (after a fashion).
Back in the 90s, a friend of the family had an immaculate 60s Dodge van - also had a very nice Studebaker Champ pickup, so one could say he had unique tastes.
a few years ago, someone local here had an early (1st or 2nd generation) Plymouth Voyager converted into a PU. They created a bulkhead out of what appeared to be plywood, but the did put in a window!
I imagine the structural rigidity left something to be desired. And no, I have no clue what they were thinking.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
I must have seen the same thing in November. I wrote about it here.
I certainly hope there aren't two of them in SJ.
2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve
Oh, don't get me wrong, I like 'em too. It just happens that I like them both, in their own way.
One other nitpick I just thought of, with Chevies in particular from that era. I never noticed it before, until we started looking over these cars with a fine tooth comb at car shows...but the 3-piece bumpers on the Chevies bugs me. It seems like a cost-cutting move to me, but I wonder how much they really save?
On the plus side, I guess if your bumper only gets slightly damaged, it works out better, because you might only have to seek out one part of the bumper, rather than the whole thing. I just looked on eBay out of curiosity, and there are a couple of bumper endpieces for sale. So, that's cheaper, most likely, than having to buy a whole bumper!
Along those lines, andre--I have noticed multiple times over the years that some '68 Bonnevilles and Grand Prixs have the handle below the glovebox inside, and also the "Bonneville" or "Grand Prix" nameplates on the lower half of the glovebox, but it seems like most do not (same dash on Bonnevilles and Grand Prix as on Catalinas). Have you ever noticed that? My college roommate drove his parents' '68 Bonneville Brougham and it did not have either of those things.
Every pic I've seen of a '67 Bonneville or Grand Prix has it, though.
At some point in time, Pontiac brought that grab handle back, because my '76 Grand LeMans has one. My guess is that it first showed up in the '73 Grand Prix and Grand Am, and then the '75 Grand LeMans? I'm sure it was a lot flimsier and impact-friendly than the older, 60's handles. Whenever I have a passenger in my LeMans, I warn them NOT to grab it, for fear it might rip off!
http://www.under1981.com/1968BONNEVILLECONVERTIBLE.html
Those 'pie pans' around the headlights are the same ones used on Dodge 'big' pickups and trucks at the same time.