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

andre1969

Improved entry/exit was something else that GM pointed out with their downsized '77 big cars. While the cars were smaller overall, the door openings were larger, and taller, than the '76 models. Although in the back seat, I wonder if the increased height and more vertical C-pillar was offset by the rear wheel opening cutting more into the door area than before?

My Grandmom's '85 LeSabre Limited was a very quiet car, as I recall. I imagine it had generous amounts of sound insulation. Definitely quieter than my '79 5th Avenue, although the R-body has the disadvantage of being unit-body, and having frameless windows. The door window glass is also ultra-thin. It's been about 22 years since we got rid of Grandmom's LeSabre, so my memory's getting a bit fuzzy, but I'm pretty sure its door window glass was thicker.

benjaminh

roadburner

My first new car was a 1974 Monte Carlo. I couldn't afford a new Bavaria, so when Road and Track tested a Monte and said that it could keep up with a Bavaria on a (wide enough) road I was sold. The high-caster steering and increased steering effort made the car a fairly pleasant drive, although I had to fit stiffer shocks to kill the remaining floating feeling. I do remember that the owner of our local Chevy dealership mentioned that a lot of customers didn't like the new steering feel because they had to "pay attention to their driving". What a terrifying concept...

I also have an '80s BMW brochure that helpfully notes that, when first driving a BMW, "the unfamiliar sensation you are experiencing is called the road".

As I've mentioned before, my wife came from a "Buick family" and she has never had a complaint about the ride quality of our E83 X3 or E84 X1- vehicles that the crew at Car and Driver thought had a harsh ride. Even funnier, the suspension of my W205 C43 is described by the bed wetting wimps journalists at C/D as having "all the compliance of an I-beam." My bride's opinion? "The Mercedes is the most comfortable car we have ever owned."

ab348

uplanderguy said:

Both made me wish for the days of absolute whisper-quiet cars for road trips. i can remember the '77 full-size Chevy brochure saying about the Caprice Classic, "You'll find it hard to believe a moving car can be this quiet". My friend's parents' new Caprice Classic sedan was absolute silence inside--quieter than our same-year Impala which didn't have the optional 'Quiet Sound Group' which got you the Caprice's extra sound insulation.

I so-could enjoy a new '77 Caprice Classic with F41 and 350 engine. Not obnoxiously large but good-driving, and again....oh so quiet. Fill in your choice of other GM B-bodies of the period, same experience I'm sure.

Back to modern reality.

The thing about body on frame cars is how well they isolate road noise. They don’t even need much sound insulation. I learned that when I started have unibody cars as daily drivers when I still had my Cutlass. It would go over expansion joints and the like with nary a sound and tire noise was virtually nonexistent despite it only having a jute mat under the floor carpet. In my Intrigue, LaCrosse, even the Caddy to an extent, you hear all that. The newer GM cars even have sound deadening pads in the front of the door jambs, in the fender wells and on the underside of the car but they aren’t as whisper-quiet as my ‘78 Delta 88 was. That even had some sort of sticky padding stuck to the inside of the body in spots that provided extra noise control.

fintail

uplanderguy said:

Curmudgeon alert!

Spent much of the weekend driving the wife's Equinox. I hate tire noise and the Michelins (you know, God's gift to tires) are wearing well but are pretty noisy, with about 40K miles on them. I know, too, that the Equinox is a low-priced SUV of its size and to make MPG go up, soundproofing weight probably comes out.

I rode in a friend's 2016 M-B with about 45K miles and I thought the tires were noisy as well (not as noisy as in my Equinox). Also had trouble getting my fat head in the rear door cutout. I don't know which model it is, as I don't remember alpha-numeric names well, but he answered that it wasn't the smallest four-door sedan but the next size up. He likes the car.

Both made me wish for the days of absolute whisper-quiet cars for road trips. i can remember the '77 full-size Chevy brochure saying about the Caprice Classic, "You'll find it hard to believe a moving car can be this quiet". My friend's parents' new Caprice Classic sedan was absolute silence inside--quieter than our same-year Impala which didn't have the optional 'Quiet Sound Group' which got you the Caprice's extra sound insulation.

I so-could enjoy a new '77 Caprice Classic with F41 and 350 engine. Not obnoxiously large but good-driving, and again....oh so quiet. Fill in your choice of other GM B-bodies of the period, same experience I'm sure.

Back to modern reality.

Probably a C-class, as CLA would be the smallest that year. A fun aside, if it is a C, all USDM C-class then were built in Alabama.

I think all non-AMG models had runflats, which if the case there, definitely can have a flinty ride/NVH quality,

uplanderguy

That even had some sort of sticky padding stuck to the inside of the body in spots that provided extra noise control.

I remember that too. The back of it looked like silly putty.

uplanderguy

RE. Roadburner's '74 Monte Carlo:

We bought a new '74 Impala Sport Coupe. My friend's parents' bought a new '74 Monte Carlo Landau.

While I never drove that car, I remember it feeling very solid and quiet, more so than our Impala. Some of that was probably radial tires vs. bias-ply, but I remember thinking a mid-size shouldn't be more solid than their full-size.

sda

Very nice condition, after market wheels. When was the last time you saw one of these? Dodge 600.

tjc78

@sda said:
Very nice condition, after market wheels. When was the last time you saw one of these? Dodge 600.

That had to have been a Grandma car. I’ve haven’t seen one in any condition since the 90s

There were worse cars in the 80s IMO. I wonder if that had the Chrysler 2.2 or Mitsubishi 2.6

fintail

The MB style badge on the 600 always amused me.

ab348

I watched this today and found it strangely captivating. Nothing like old-school M-B over-engineering:

https://youtu.be/rwOEqa121Aw?si=0sEucpcj6PKAKbDm

benjaminh

uplanderguy said:

...Both made me wish for the days of absolute whisper-quiet cars for road trips...

My wife's new Outback actually has a very quiet and smooth ride, which is even more luxurious-feeling than the Oldsmobile 98 we used own. Consumer Reports had a recent feature on cars with the most comfortable rides, and the Outback was one of their top picks. This is probably a big reason why these station wagons are popular. Was surprised when I took a test drive that it rode like an old-fashioned Detroit luxury car, but just not nearly as squishy around corners.

Speaking of old-fashioned luxe cars, here's a fancy 1956 Mercury Montclair from Bill's museum in Amarillo.

benjaminh

uplanderguy

I absolutely love Continental Mark II's.

RE.: That 600--my much-younger brother-in-law had a LeBaron sedan of that vintage with the Mitsu 2.6. It was old and tired and I offered to put STP in it for him which I used in my Studebaker at the time (in fact, STP was a division of Studebaker). So help me God, I'd never seen anything like this before--with the car running, that thick-as-molasses STP hung in the air over the oil fill hole, defying gravity.

andre1969

Lots of nice pics there, BenjaminH. Looks like that was a nice place to visit!

imidazol97

@benjaminh
Thanks for posting the pictures. I love seeing classics with their original
parts. Lighting and photography are superb.

benjaminh

As you can see Bill's museum was rather crowded with cars, which sometimes made it challenging to get pix because you could barely get in-between them. Thanks @imidazol97 for your too-kind words about the photos with my lowly google 7 phone. Bill really likes Lincoln Continentals too, since he had at least three of them. Here are some more of the Lincolns, plus a 1958 Cadillac Limousine.

imidazol97

I like the 57 Oldsmobile side profile of the greenhouse in the picture of the dash of the brown leather Lincoln. Reminds me of getting a girl in my class in high school to give me a ride home in her family's 57 Olds like that. Car was great.

explorerx4

Lincoln is still somewhat using that center dash theme for the climate controls today.
I'll post a pic after my wife gets home.

benjaminh

Michaell

Is that a Tempest with the rope drive?

uplanderguy

Catalina. It has buckets and console from a Bonneville I’d say as I don’t believe the floor shift automatic was available in anything but then.

explorerx4

Here's the Corsair center stack.

ab348

explorerx4 said:

Here's the Corsair center stack.

“Too much piano black!!!”

I think you posted in the wrong discussion.

imidazol97

How do those P R N D buttons work? Are they pushed in to activate that selection or pushed down?

I recently drove a Pilot and liked the way the selector in it worked. The reverse was a flap that pushed down or up, different than the other drive choices.

explorerx4

@imidazol97,
You push the buttons down. It's pretty easy.

texases

More intuitive than our RX350h's gearshift, but I've gotten used to it:

stickguy

I am fully used to the button and level setup in the Acura and rotary dial in the Ford at this point, but at least they both have individual spots for each gear. I never liked the ones that worked more like a light switch.

roadburner

The C43 has a column shift, the X1 has a beer tap, and the Jeep has a conventional console mounted gear selector, which I prefer. That said, the column shift in the C43 clears out a lot of room in/on the console for storage and some additional switches- as well as the selector wheel and touchpad.

fintail

I've been driving column shift MBs for so long now that it is muscle memory, and feels a little weird to drive a floor/console shift car - I will occasionally reach for a lever that doesn't exist. I like how the column shift opens up the console area, makes it feel more open and maybe makes the car feel more spacious.

stickguy

fintail said:

I've been driving column shift MBs for so long now that it is muscle memory, and feels a little weird to drive a floor/console shift car - I will occasionally reach for a lever that doesn't exist. I like how the column shift opens up the console area, makes it feel more open and maybe makes the car feel more spacious.

I still have stick shift muscle memory from 35 years of driving manuals. A column shift just seems weird to me.

uplanderguy

As I got older, I appreciated bench seat with center armrests and column shift more. For one, in a rare need you could use the center seat section; you could slide out the right side if you wanted/needed, you got a sense of roominess as your knee wasn't up against a console, and an upholstered center armrest felt better than a hard vinyl console compartment lid.

Of course, after about 2012 or so, this was all gone.

Shifting the automatic in the C8 is all pulling little buttons your direction.

xwesx

@benjaminh I'm not sure how you ever made it out of that museum!

andre1969

With regards to entry/exit with modern cars, Uplander, I thought you'd appreciate this...

It's from an old test of a '57 Plymouth. MotorTrend January 1957 I believe. So making cars a pain to get in and out of is nothing new

roadburner

The only car with a bench seat that I ever wanted was a 1968 Road Runner that a friend of mine found. It had to have been special ordered as it had a four speed manual, A/C and power disc brakes. It had been delivered with painted steel wheels and dog dish hubcaps, but my friend had installed a set of the optional Magnum 500 styled steel wheels (the painted wheels were in the trunk). I came very close to buying it.
Aside from that I never considered a car with bench seats- to me they screamed "Old Man's Car!" at 110 db.

roadburner

fintail said:

I've been driving column shift MBs for so long now that it is muscle memory, and feels a little weird to drive a floor/console shift car - I will occasionally reach for a lever that doesn't exist. I like how the column shift opens up the console area, makes it feel more open and maybe makes the car feel more spacious.

When I drive the Jeep I sometimes turn on the wipers instead of selecting a gear. The Club Sport is thankfully a manual, so there is little room for confusion.

uplanderguy

andre, I recall my late friend's '56 Packard Patrician as having conked my head more than once getting out of the back seat.

Are you going to Hershey this year? I think I might go only to the show.

andre1969

As bad as that Plymouth's back seat was, the '57 Ford's actually looks worse, in some respects!
It looks like you have to duck a lot lower to get out. Heck, it looks like you'd have to crouch down, just to look out the window! But on the plus side, it looks to me like the seat is taller and thicker than the Plymouth's. Ford also started using a perimeter frame that year, that they called the "Cowbelly." It tapered out towards the rear, so they were able to recess the footwells a bit for the back seat passengers, opening up a bit more room. Chrysler products, as low-slung as the bodies were, still sat on ladder frames, like a truck.

As for Hershey, yup, I'm planning to go, and so are Grbeck and Lemko, as far as I know! So, hope to see you there! We just go up for the show, only. I used to prefer it when it was on Saturdays, but being on Friday, gives me an excuse to get out of work!

uplanderguy

Hope to see you there. It's all weather-dependent for me. My friend from Baltimore is planning on having his '63 Riviera there. I wish he'd bring his black '64 Impala SS, only because I haven't seen it in person yet.

ab348

andre1969 said:

As bad as that Plymouth's back seat was, the '57 Ford's actually looks worse, in some respects!

It probably was. I always thought that the full-size (or in the mid-'50s, only size) Big Three cars always had a 119" wheelbase. But the '57 Ford was 116", the Plymouth 118", and the Chevy only 115"!

andre1969

In '57-58, Fords actually came on two wheelbases. There was the Custom/Custom 300, which was comprised of only 2- and 4-door sedans, on a 116" wheelbase, and the Fairlane/Fairlane 500, which added hardtops, and convertible/Skyliner, were on a 118" wb. Wagons, their own separate series, were on a 116".

The Customs were more upright, and less "sexy." The 4-door's roofline was a bit more like the Plymouth (and Chevy), with the door window fairly squared off, and then a triangular quarter window in the C--pillar. While it was shorter and more upright, it had more room in the back seat than the Fairlanes on their longer wheelbase. I remember Consumer Reports mentioning that.

With the Fairlane, the 2-door was more like a hardtop coupe, with a B-pillar welded in and a frame around the door glass, than a more typical, upright 2-door sedan. The 4-door pillared model was also sleeker. I don't know if the Fairlanes were actually more low-slung than the Customs, but they definitely looked it, to me.

Oh, and just to complete the set, here's MotorTrend's commentary on the '57 Chevy's back seat:
It actually looks the worst of the three to me, because they tested a 4-door hardtop instead of a pillared sedan, and that hardtop roofline really looks like it cuts into the door/window opening. But from their description, other than some leg contortions it doesn't sound all that bad. I imagine the biggest problem with entry/exit was that the base of the B-pillar was bulked up considerably, to allow for the hardtop design.

As for the 119" wb, Chevy went to that for 1959, Ford for 1960. Plymouth wouldn't get there until 1965.

texases

Hard to imagine those cars being so cramped in the rear seat while so big on the outside.

uplanderguy

In '57's of those three, I'll take the Ford Fairlane 500 for looks. I still like the styling, and the instrument panel.

My late friend Bob Palma, who was a columnist for Hemmings Classic Car and whose Dad had been a Ford/Mercury dealer for a couple years in the sixties, used to tell me that in his opinion, the '57 Chevy held up better over the long run than the '57 Ford in both body and mechanicals which along with cheap and plentiful hop-up parts including in the aftermarket, is why he felt the Chevy earned the good reputation they got. (Our '56 Chevy rusted out over the headlights but that appears to have been solved on the '57.)

The '57 is my least-favorite of the three years of 'shoebox' Chevys. Only a Nomad, or maybe a One-Fifty (without that fanned-out quarter trim), or any one in Dusk Pearl, will turn my head.

andre1969

I'd always heard that the '57 Fords were horribly built, and unreliable, whereas with the Plymouths, they were fine cars in every respect, except for the tendency to rust prematurely. But, usually whenever I see a '57 Ford at a show, it has a solid look about it, and seems well put together, with tight gaps and such. A lot of that is probably thanks to the cars being restored to the point they're better than when they left the factory, but I'm not so sure. I see plenty of '57-58 Plymouths at car shows too, that have been restored, and they just have a sloppier look to me. Usually the panel gaps are bigger and more uneven.

Although I know, there's more to a car's quality than panel gaps and such. I like the Ford's dashboard, too, especially the way it curves at the sides, into the "dogleg". Ford also did some tricks for '58 to make the cars more rigid, such as that hood scoop, and the creases in the roof, so I guess that was an implication that there were rigidity issues that seriously needed to be addressed. I've also heard stories of the back doors, especially in the hardtops, popping loose over rough roads. But, I've heard stories about Mopars doing that, too. And I'm sure a GM car even did it, from time to time!

My grandparents had a '57 Ford Fairlane 500 Victoria 4-door hardtop, and I remember them talking fondly about it. My Dad hated it, but he just had a disdain for Fords in general! I remember one of my uncles, Dad's older brother, saying that he drove the car a few times, and that it was a really nice car. He was born in 1940, so he was driving age, but Dad was born in 1946, so he was only around 15 when they traded it, for a '61 Galaxie 500 4-door hardtop. My paternal grandparents were the type that tended to trade every 3-4 years, so they didn't keep them until they fell apart. But, if that '57 had been a turd, they would have dumped it earlier, I'm sure.

My only beef with them, I know I've mentioned before, is the way those headlights bug out. But, in some colors, especially certain 2-tones, it seems to mute that effect somewhat.

uplanderguy

Your grandparents were early-in-the-curve on four-door hardtops. I remember Iacocca's book talking about a Ford regional manager he knew with a '57 four-door hardtop, where he had the rear doors tied together on the inside to keep them from opening on the road!

I always thought the '61 Ford, a favorite of mine, harkened back to some '57 styling cues, primarily the single round taillight and smallish canted fins.

At Hershey probably 30 years ago, I saw a black-red-black '57 Fairlane 500 two-door sedan, which was pretty stylish. It stopped me in its tracks. I like those '57 full wheel covers too.

I like the '58 Ford, even though it's busied-up some. I had good childhood memories of my aunt and her '58 Fairlane, so I think stuff like that can sometimes trump just actual styling. I don't care for the '59 Ford one bit. I do like the '60 Starliner.

fintail

Unusual one today on my Wednesday jogging route - parked next to the golf course was a pristine obviously restored stock 58 Bonneville.

andre1969

I remember Granddad saying that their '61 Galaxie 500 was a really nice car. However, he traded it after two years, for a '63 Monterey Custom 4-door hardtop. I asked him why he traded so soon, if it was such a good car, and he said he liked the Breezeway rear window of the Merc. It was good for hauling lumber, ladders, and other long objects! Their next car after that though, was a Pontiac Tempest. I think it was a '67 hardtop coupe, but not 100% positive. By that time, the kids were all grown and out of the house, drafted, etc, so I guess they figured there was no need for a full-sized car anymore.

And yeah, I think fond memories and associations of the past can definitely influence what we do and don't like, regardless of the actual merits of the vehicles. For instance, the '72 Impala is one car I like a lot. But I wonder how much of that was influenced by the 4-door hardtop my maternal grandparents had? I have a lot of nice memories from back then, and that car was often in them.

But, if my grandparents had bought a Galaxie or Fury, or something else instead, I wonder if I'd be nostalgic for that, instead? But, who knows? In the same timeframe as that Impala, my paternal grandparents had a '71 Tempest, '75 Dart Swinger, '77 Granada, and an '81 Granada. I have a lot of fond memories with my paternal grandparents as well, but don't feel any real sentiment towards any of those cars. I'll admit sort of a guilty-pleasure soft spot for the '81 Granada, though.

Oddly, some of my vehicular habits have mimicked my Mom. Her first car was a 1957 Plymouth. She also had a '66 Catalina and a '75 LeMans. I'm close to that, with my '57 DeSoto, '67 Catalina, and '76 Grand LeMans.

uplanderguy

My Dad and paternal grandfather in our town always had Chevys, with good results, and I picked up on that. New-car introduction night at the Chevy dealer was a huge thing for me, as was sneaking a peak at the new models when they'd be sitting way out back before introduction night. I have had good luck with my Chevys with regular maintenance, almost always at the dealer. I like the large dealer network as well.

I'm really not at all interested in '60's or '70's Camaros, or Chevelle SS396's, or Nova SS's, etc. I like bone-stock and a clean, authentic or original Impala Sport Coupe will make me take a look. But I've never owned a collectible Chevy, too commonplace.

uplanderguy

Don't know what made me think of this, but I see it on FB constantly--when people abbreviate a year by writing 65', for example, it bugs me.

"Wow! You've got a 65-foot Impala?!"

That, and using 'breaks' for brakes.

Michaell

I didn't have much of a car history growing up. I didn't know my paternal grandparents all that well (we were in CA, they lived in upstate NY), and neither of them drove, so far as I knew.

My maternal grandmother only had two cars that I remember - and early '60's Comet, then replaced with a '67 Monterey coupe. I was lucky to be old enough to drive the Monterey on a number of occasions.

I really wanted that car when she passed, but my mom and uncle decided to sell it, instead.