Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
I spotted an (insert obscure car name here) classic car today! (Archived)
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Remember the old AMC TV commercials which demonstrated how the passenger cabin was shaped to fit people? At least the jelly bean Pacer didn't follow the airline industry in shaping people to fit fuselage.
I think I just paid homage to the 70s. Yuck that didn't feel good. :sick:
Despite the opera windows, massive C-pillars, etc, I think for the most part, visibility out of those 70's cars was actually pretty good. A week or so ago, I had to drive our government Impala, which is either a 2010 or 2011, and honestly, my '76 LeMans has better visibility. The A-pillars in the Impala are huge, and cut at an angle where if you're trying to make a left turn onto a road, they can easily hide traffic coming from the right. And the rear deck, rear roof pillars, tall seatbacks, etc, make the view to the back almost non-existent.
I still remember the night I brought my '76 LeMans home. I had a friend follow me back, in my Intrepid. He said he really liked following my car, because it didn't hide the view ahead like most modern cars do. For one thing, it's only 53-54" tall, but he also said that it was easy to see THROUGH the car as well as around and over it.
Spotted today: gold 1965 Mustang with rusty quarter panels and a faded Firethorn 1977 Pontiac Grand Prix.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
My '68 and '69 Darts were like that. Although I dunno if you'd call 196" short, but at least you could see, within a couple of inches, where the car ended. I especially liked being able to see the rear deck of the car. On my '80 Malibu, which was my first car, it sloped away so you really couldn't see it from inside. And while you could see most of the hood, it still sloped away.
My '57 DeSoto, bulky as it is, is actually pretty easy to maneuver around. The peaked fenders and tailfins are great for judging the corners of the car. The only problem I've had with it is that I can see the left fin in the rearview mirror, and at a quick glance, I think there's a car cruising cruising off my left flank.
When I got my '79 Newport, sometimes I'd think that the trunk was open, because I could see it in the rearview mirror. While I was used to that with the Dart and DeSoto, the Newport registered in my mind as "modern", or at least modern enough that it was from an era that you didn't see the trunklid unless it wasn't closed all the way!
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
Mercedes, along with a number of other Euro makers glommed onto fins and wraparound windshields about the time they faded from the scene in the USA, circa 1960. There were plenty of examples but this T-Bird clone is one of the best>
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
I always laugh when MB wouldn't admit they were being trendy...German stubbornness in the face of obvious reality.
also has good visibility. The new model, while stylish in the lighting bolt school of design, feels like sitting in a bathtub by comparison.
Sonata is in that CLS school of design, where you'll eventually be begging for parking sensors or a backup camera.
That style actually reminds me of some old 1830's concept for trains that was called "Never the Train Shall Meet". When I was a kid I got a book called "Train Wrecks", by a guy named Robert Reed (I used to think it was the same guy who played Mr. Brady on the Brady Bunch!
I guess there was some truth to that concept when it was applied to cars. Once they started making cars with low-slung front-ends and sloped off rears, it seemed like collisions were more likely to result in one car riding up over, or under, the other! And once trucks and SUVs with higher bumpers proliferated, it just added to the problem.
The Vauxhall Cresta is one of my favorite American-influenced cars, just wacky
It's also a very sought after Matchbox
http://daytona.craigslist.org/cto/2224514102.html
If I had some extra cash I'd seriously buy that Renault Medallion and immediately put it into service as a daily driver. I'd love to see how it would hold up on my 40-mile round-trip commute every day.
http://cnj.craigslist.org/cto/2233540636.html
The SM, you'd have to be nuts, but the same would be true even if it was perfect.
And the following one even moreso
For better or worse, American themes dominated then
I think the last time I had to have a car towed, other than when I had my DeSoto towed off, was my '89 Gran Fury, when the starter broke. I called AAA, and when the tow truck came out, I think I accidentally insulted the driver's manhood or something, when I asked him if that little truck of his was gonna be big enough to tow it! It was some little cabover thing, like a Mitsubishi-something-or-other, or maybe an Isuzu. He seemed a little miffed when I asked if it was enough truck! And sure enough, when he hooked up to my Gran Fury, the front of that little truck raised up like the butt-end of the Titanic as it went down!
That old Ford looks like it would be more than up to the task.
As for those Medallions, I thought they were kinda neat cars. Very space efficient, and quirky enough in their French sort of way I guess. But I think I'd be afraid of one nowadays. Probably a pain to get parts for.
Simca bought in the mid-50s. The green car behind the Vedette is a '51 Ford Vedette which apes an earlier generation of Ford/Mercury styling.
Vauxhalls have often looked like little Chevies which isn't surprising since GM bought the British car maker in 1925.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
Some 60s Opels are also very influenced by their American cousins
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
was heavily influenced by the Chevy Corvair>
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
I can see Germans liking the Corvair.
I don't know that the common GM complaint of 'took too long to improve' can apply to the Corvair. Took too long to put a stabilizer bar in the back, but that Corvair in the photo is a '62 Monza Spyder with Turbo, and there was nothing else remotely like it from an American manufacturer. "Poor man's Porsche" is what one always hears about the Spyder.
The '65 Corvair was a styling improvement IMHO, as well as having an independent suspension a la Corvette.
The lack of "improvement" happened only after the Mustang's success and Nader's book--which the government ended up saying was hooey.
I have no idea about production figures, but I think that little hardtop coupe was the precursor to the famous 6-series of the 70's and 80's, the 8-series of the 90's, and, most recently, the revived 6-series of the '00's (which I think has been dropped). So it was probably pretty expensive. The car that really put BMW on the map in the United States was the 2002. And even that didn't really happen until 1974 and the fuel crisis. That year, BMW sold an unprecedented 40,000 cars in the US, about 25% of Cadillac's volume in that down year. It was considered a big deal at the time, as that was the biggest chunk an import luxury brand had ever taken out of the US market, up to that point.
Honestly though, I don't think anybody was cross-shopping a Cadillac with a BMW at the time. I can see it now..."I want total silence and isolation from the world outside, the ability to tow a 7,000 lb trailer, and hold 6 people and 20 cubic feet of luggage, in shag, leather, and velour splendor...I know, I'll get a BMW!!" Or, "I want a fun little car to toss about on the back roads that's easy to park and good on gas...Fleetwood Seventy-Five it is!!"
Rather, I think BMW found a whole new market of luxury with the 2002 and their other cars. Or maybe it couldn't be called "luxury" even though they were luxury car prices. Perhaps "premium" would be a better word?
Were you joking, or did you inadvertently mismatch the attributes and their respective brands?
The sedan came first... Take a look at a BMW 1500 or 1600... and, you'll see that the coupe is a derivative of that... and, not much like the Corvair.
I love the look of the Corvair.. but, I don't think the BMW can trace it's styling roots to it... (not to mention, front engine vs. rear engine).
As, andre1969 mentions, the CS was the forerunner to the 6-series..
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
I'll agree that the 1500's links to Corvair styling are less obvious but if you look at that car (introduced in 1962) you can see certain features that were clearly influenced by the little Chevy, the most obvious being the pronounced beltline>
I guess you could argue that in turn the pointy front end of the Neue Klasse Bimmers had a big influence on the 2nd Gen Corvairs>
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
I agree though, '65 Corvair was a beautiful car, with excellent brakes I might add---surely the best brakes of any American car of the time. And John Fitch proved that you could make a '65 Corvair every bit as good as a Porsche.
Unfortunately, GM didn't do it. Fitch's improvements, while quite basic, would have pushed the car to a higher price level, and GM regarded Corvair as a cheap car.
This fits into the BMW discussion because the BMW Isetta had the narrowest rear track of any production car. The Isetta is considered a "car" because it had a reverse gear. The Messerschmitt tandem seat Kabinenroller (cabin scooter) was more narrow, but it was not considered to be a "car" because it had no reverse gear. (The motor runs backwards for reverse.)
Interesting to see that Oldsmobile gets credit for the first mass production car, the 1908 Ford Model T was the first SUV, and Studebaker gets credit for the first window defroster, window washer, air conditioning and limited slip differential (1956). (Where would we be today without advanced thinking of Studebaker?)
In an answer to this question "I have also wondered what fans of contemporary BMW's think about the Isetta?" . . .it seems that contemporary BMW owners fall into two categories; (1) those who do not know about the Isetta, and (2) those who pretend not to know about it.
The Isetta was actually built under license based on the ISO of Italy (hence the name Isetta).
As for limited slip, that would be Ferdinand Porsche, in 1932.
My Uncle had one of the early ones (1960) and he liked everything about it except the gasoline heater. It went through deep snow that would stop most other cars. A turbo Monza used to run at the drag raceway and it was amazingly quiet without mufflers.
Ralph Nader probably killed it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Corvair
""Subsequently, Corvair sales fell from 220,000 in 1965 to 109,880 in 1966. By 1968 production fell to 14,800." Things could have only gotten worse if they raised the price.
Even if Nader cannot be completely blamed for its demise, the Corvair had too many unique parts not shared with any other GM line and impending auto emissions standards made life difficult for air cooled engines.
Well, Wiki says that the Studebaker Commander sold it in 1938 which is before 1939, so if WIKI is wrong, it should be corrected. It is also the consensus of auto historians that the 1953 Lowey coupes and hardtops were one of the most beautiful designs of the 1950s.
As for limited slip, that would be Ferdinand Porsche, in 1932.
Reply: How many cars did Porsche sell in 1932? Whatever he did in 1932, nobody followed his lead until Studebaker mass produced Twin Traction in the 1956 Golden Hawk. There seems to be a consistent effort to deny giving Studebaker credit for doing anything first or doing it well.
I'm surprised at how low-priced the Corvair was, considering how unique a lot of the parts and technology were.
for example, in 1967, the Corvair started at $2128 for the hardtop coupe, $2194 for the hardtop sedan. The convertible, available only in the more expenisve Monza series, based at $2540.
In contrast, the Chevy II started at $2090 for a 2-door sedan, $2120 for a 4-door sedan, and that was with the 4-cyl. If you wanted a hardtop coupe, you had to spring for the Nova, which would cost $2330, although that also got you a 6-cyl. Hardtop sedan, forget about it. No compact other than the Corvair offered it. And, Chevy II didn't offer a convertible by this time, either.
The Camaro, which no doubt stole a lot of Corvair sales that year, started at $2466 for a 6-cyl hardtop coupe, $2,704 for a convertible.
The '67 Falcon started at $2118 for a 2-door sedan, $2167 for a 4-door sedan. You got a standard 6-cyl at least, unlike the Chevy II. hardtops and convertibles were history, jetissoned to make way for the Mustang.
A '67 Valiant started at $2117 for a 2-door sedan, $2163 for a 4-door. Again, no hardtops, to make way for the Barracuda.
So, considering that the Corvair was actually a bit exotic for a domestic offering, plus coming standard as a hardtop from 1965 on, I'm surprised they were able to sell it so cheap! I wonder if GM lost much money on each sale, or if they found a way to cut corners?
Also, could you get a/c in a Corvair? Seems to me that if you did, it would be an awful strain on those small engines, which topped out at 164 CID. I'd imagine that in the Falcons, Chevy II's, and Dart/Valiants, if you wanted a/c, they made you get the bigger 6-cyl, or in the case of the Chevy II, get the 6 instead of the 4?