Are you a current or recent car shopper who bought an EV and then installed solar – or who had solar already, making the decision to go electric easier?
OR
Are you a recent EV buyer (past 3 months) as a result of manufacturer incentives and dealer discounts on these vehicles, including year-end deals? Were you convinced to buy an EV after finding a good end-of-year deal, or due to uncertainty around which EVs will no longer qualify for full/partial EV tax credits in 2024? A national business reporter is interested in speaking with you. Please reach out to [email protected] by 12/15 if interested in sharing your story.
OR
Are you a recent EV buyer (past 3 months) as a result of manufacturer incentives and dealer discounts on these vehicles, including year-end deals? Were you convinced to buy an EV after finding a good end-of-year deal, or due to uncertainty around which EVs will no longer qualify for full/partial EV tax credits in 2024? A national business reporter is interested in speaking with you. Please reach out to [email protected] by 12/15 if interested in sharing your story.
Comments
I hope they have a course in design school called "bad design and how it got that way".
Styling is an art, and as such has certain basic "principles" that one violates at one's own peril. Perhaps in modern art one can get away with it, but in product design there's the question of functionality harmonizing with form. It is, after all, supposed to be a car underneath that chrome pagan temple to Baal, or Kalesh, whatever form of devil worship the designer of the 59 Mercury was into.
I think the '59 Merc looks really good from the front, though...
The front-end is downright clean and graceful, compared to what they did in back!
Not hardly, for 1960 they came up with this...>
...and I still say the Lincolns were worse>
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
I think it's amazing what a job they did with the 1960 Mercury. I used to think it was a one-year only design, and that the 1959 was just a continuation of the 1957-58, with a wheelbase stretch. IMO, the '59 looks more like a '57-58 than it does a '60. Still, that doesn't mean the '60 is attractive! I think it's cleaner in style than the '59, and less cluttered, but somehow, more ugly.
They plowed through corners like a crusie ship and they had a lot of quality problems and electrical glitches.
Cadillac had little competion from Lincoln.
No doubt about it. Cadillac ruled that market in those days!
Why do people put those on Buciks and Cadillacs when they never came with them?
Besides the classic good looks those were great cars too.
In 1961 though, Imperial really went off the wall, with those free-standing headlights. I guess if nothing else, it was kinda bold, and different. But not exactly gorgeous.
A Cadillac handled like a sports car compared to an Imp. The Imperials had the ugliest, wierd dashboard and controls and oodles of electrical problems.
The ate ball joints and other front end parts too.
The Starliner roof line was nice and the front end wasn't bad, but overall I don't think the 60 Ford was really a big styling success as evidenced by its short, one year lifespan. The lower lines like the base Fairlane had a bulbous rear window and the rear end looked like an aborted 59 Chevy. While Chevy did some heavy updating in '60, Ford pretty much just replaced their '60 in '61.
ugly house, ugly car, methinks. It has no grace, no flow to it. It's a botch.
The Cadillac is "okay" except for the silly fins and the wire wheels--but the body line at least flows and doesn't confuse the eye. The grill was supposed to convey the 1960s idea of "rich" with lots of jewels---which is probably why many of us regard designs like this somewhat vital and outrageously bold, but at the end of it---garish.
Why do people put those on Buciks and Cadillacs when they never came with them?
Actually they did, Kelsey-Hayes Wires were a rare and expensive option offered on many upper-end 50s cars including T-Birds, Caddies, Chrysler 300s etc. IIRC they were standard on the '53 and '54 Skylarks optional on some other Buicks. They are actual wire wheels, not the wheel covers often seen in the '60s.
For the most part I think they look good but they must be hell to maintain.
It's one of those things that are seen far more often on restored examples than they ever were originally like side pipes in a Sting Ray or exhaust splitters on a GTO.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
One gets the impression that rather than having the light wires "lift" the car, as they do in graceful sports cars, in a heavy 50s American car the body seems to want to crush the wheels. You expect to hear spokes popping as it drives past.
Elvis would have loved them.
So would vinyl roofs then be like the fat guys chest hair sticking out behind the all that gold jewelry around his neck?
So would vinyl roofs then be like the fat guys chest hair sticking out behind the all that gold jewelry around his neck?
They need a facebook style "like" button for some of these comments.
I think one reason a '53 DeSoto comes to my mind quickly with these types of wheels is that there's a pic that pops up in several of my old car books, of a pale yellow '53 Firedome convertible with Kelsey-Hayes wheels.
Now, I don't think they'd look very good on my '57. Here's a '57 Adventurer with them.
GM had a knack for that, as well. The 1959-64 Chevy were all the same basic thing underneath, and so were the '65-70.
And I like the example you used...1980 Monte Carlo versus 1981. That sounds like the type of example I would use. ;-)
Personally, I prefer the Cadillac Sabre-spoke wheels from the 1950s over the wire wheels:
That Desoto screams to me: "Grandma won the lottery!"
I will admit, though, that wire wheels on this big barges occasionally is de rigeur on some cars, like the 50s Buick Skylark. But that's a collector/market preference, not necessarily a good aesthetic decision for the car.
There are so many handsome wheels and wheel covers out there, that I see no reason to go through the expense and hassle of wire wheels on these big cars---they are hard to clean, expensive to buy and/or restore, and to my eye, are pretentious and non-functional.
After all the whole idea of wire wheels was to make the car lighter (unsprung weight). Putting them on a 2-ton cruiser seems pointless and does not follow function.
It's "automotive jewelry" in other words, like conti kits, mudflaps, chrome exhaust tips, furry dice, steer horns and silver-dollar door panels.
"Amazingly, the Firedome engine, working through a Tip-Toe Shift with Fluid Torque Drive, hurled the DeSoto down the quarter mile in 19.7 seconds at 69 miles per hour - according to the testers at Motor Trend."
"hurled...19.7 seconds at 69 miles per hour"...That's 0-60 in about 15 seconds or so... things sure have changed!
To be fair to the car, that Fluid Drive was very inefficient and ate up lots of HP just to get the car moving.
"Pigs CAN fly given sufficient velocity"
I thought a wire wheel was almost always heavier than the equivalent stamped steel disc wheel.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
Wires also served the function of aesthetics, in that you were able to see through the wire wheel (they were quite large way back when) which made the car very graceful.
Those 50s wires are too small, is the point---the cars look too big on top of them.
I think I've seen that test, and I want to say that 0-60 came up in something like 17.3 seconds?
Also, keep in mind, this was a two ton monster, and that tiny 276.1 Hemi was just a 2-bbl putting out 160 hp gross. That's about 120 net. Lotta cars back then struggled to break 20 seconds in the 0-60 run. The DeSoto 6-cyl, a 250.6 CID unit that put out around 116 hp, was good for around 21.6 seconds, IIRC.
I think the early 50's Saratoga, which was basically a smaller Windsor with the big 331 New Yorker Hemi, was good for 0-60 in about 10-11 seconds, which was probably about as good as it got in those days unless you went for something truly exotic.
The times really changed fast back then though. By 1955, Consumer Reports tested a Fireflite with the 291 Hemi, 4-bbl, 200 hp, and 2-speed Powerglide, and got 0-60 in something like 13.3 seconds. I think the '56, with a 330.4 Hemi and 255 hp, was good for around 11.4. And I've seen a test for a '57 Firedome convertible, 341 2-bbl Hemi, 270 hp, and the 3-speed torqueflite, 0-60 in 9.7 seconds. The Fireflite, with a 4-bbl and 295 hp, was quicker, and the 1-hp/inch 345 hp Adventurer, quicker still.
It's amazing, to think that in just four short years, they were cutting the 0-60 times in half on many cars, and really bringing the power to the people.
Edit: wanna hear something really sad? Motortrend tested a 1980 New Yorker 5th Ave with a 318-2bbl. quarter mile in 19.8 seconds.
The 80 NYer managed to get to 60 mph in 14.1 seconds though, so I guess it was a bit better off the line than the DeSoto, but then just ran out of steam after that? The NYer would've been stuck with a sluggish 2.45:1 axle. I have no idea what a '53 DeSoto would've used. My '57 has a 3.36:1 axle, and the 2-speed automatics used a 3.54:1, so I guess a '53 might have something even shorter?
At an old car meet I attended last summer tehre were two 55 Buicks that had the wire wheels. These came on the 53-54 Skylarks but not anyu other Buicks. They MAY have been available as an option but I never saw any.
Another thing that bothers me are wide whitewalls on cars that didn't come with them. The one inch whitewalls came out in 1962 at least on GM cars.
I saw a '64 Impala with 3 inch wide whites and they ruined the looks of the car at least for me.
And what is with those "blue dot" tailight lenses that seem to be on so many old cars. I don't remember EVER seeing a car with those.
I had a yellow 1965 Buick Riviera with a factory black vinyl roof and it really looked sharp. One day I saw one just like mine without the roof and it just didn't look right.
Now a pimped out padded vinyl top on a Cadillac, that is another story!
MB used wide whites through 64, when my fintail gets new tires I am going to seek a correct looking set.
Regarding vinyl tops, they are either hot or cold. I actually like 79-85 Eldos and bustleback Sevilles - but only with a metal top. Not often seen.
But once you take these same very formal and very conservative styling elements and attempt to translate them to a modern mass-produced car, especially ones with no formal lines---- before you know it the leather becomes vinyl and the landau bars are glue-ons made of plastic.
And thus the whole thing becomes a travesty.
If the top doesn't drop and the landau bars don't landau, then don't put it on the car. It's no different than fake air vents, and those fake continental tire humps in trunk lids.
How can one be proud of a totally phony car? Doesn't make sense to me.
They would install thick padded vinyl tops on new Cadillacs. they put on ugly Vogue tires with chrome and gold wire wheels. Thy stuck on landau bars and trunk straps. Gaudy and ugly gold grilles and hood ornaments.
I watched them pimp out a Sedan De Ville one day and the installer told me the guy had spent over 5000.00 just for that junk!
He probably devalued it more than that in the process.
Just the thing to cruise down San Pablo Avenue in, huh?
What's that about?
My Pop bought a DeVille with the half roof and Conti kit and I told him all he needed was the Landau Irons for the "Full Florida". I don't think he appreciated it but his current DV has none of that stuff.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
What's that about?
I think that look actually works on some cars. My '76 LeMans has a landau roof. I'd prefer that it didn't, but I still think it wears it well.
One reason I think those vinyl roofs became so popular in the 1970's is that they could charge extra for the option, but the cars were actually cheaper to build because they didn't have to finish off the area under the vinyl. Some of those 70's cars, if you pull the vinyl off, you'll find exposed, unfinished seams, exposed rivets and bolts and such, and unpainted areas.
Sometimes they would trap water and cause rust. This happened a lot on the '65 Impalas for some reason. Back below the rear window.
I knew a guy who was selling a car that had rust bubbles under the vinyl. He "solved" the problem with a rubber mallet.
Nice, huh?
Or to put it another way---if any car aspired to greatness, and was teetering on the brink of becoming great, the fake roof and bars would knock them back into the also-rans.
If one looks at the most admired postwar American classics today, you don't see any of them with this stuff on them, except the "second-tier" car under $10K or so. And even if you do see them, they still aren't our "great" cars.
I wish I could do Photoshop better, I think it would be interesting to put landau bars on a '67 Corvette 427 :shades:
But you also have to remember, that vinyl roofs really didn't start making a comeback until the 1960's, and pretty much had their peak in the 1970's and early 80's. Now many "classics" were built in the 60's, 70's, and 80's? Well, okay, my grandparents 1982 Malibu was a Classic, and I gotta admit, my '76 LeMans is Grand. And even my old '89 Fury was pretty Gran, itself! :P
I miss that Buick. I think it had every option that was available that year.
It had Reverb (remember?) cruise control, A/C power vent windows and even an Autronic eye.
It would burn rubber for a half block and if you drove it VERY carefully, it would get 10 MPG on premimum.
Anyone know what a Autronic eye was?
I think cars like a '65 Riviera could pull off a vinyl roof pretty well because there was a definite division between the C-pillar and the quarter panel. I think that's key. On cars where the C-pillar blends into the quarter panel a vinyl roof doesn't work as well.
I don't think a vinyl roof works as well on the 1966 and later Rivs, even though you're more likely to find one of them with a vinyl roof.