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 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
I spotted an (insert obscure car name here) classic car today! (Archived)
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
However, Plymouth had the compact Valiant, which boosted their sales considerably. Dodge would get the Lancer counterpart for 1961, but it sold far fewer units.
I'd have to add up the figures in my old car book, but I think the full-sized Dart lineup might have outsold the full-sized Plymouth lineup again in 1961, although the Valiant would have still given Plymouth enough total sales to outsell Dodge as a whole. And what had traditionally been the Dodge class of cars seemed to almost vanish for '61. The Matador nameplate went away, leaving just the Polara.
Yeah, they did, and that was the order. Dodge didn't have a direct equivalent to the Sport Fury, but they did have the D-500 with the cross ram dual carbs, which was an option package rather than a model. From '57-59 I believe you could get it in any Dodge from the Coronet to the Custom Royal. But for '60, I'm thinking that in the Dart lineup, you could only get it in the Phoenix, although I believe the bigger Matador and Polara both offered it. I think in the Dart it might have been a 361 Cross Ram with around 305, hp, but in the Matador/Polara, it might have been the 383, which had around 333 hp I think.
I thought your previous comment comparing 61 Mopar to 58 GM and Ford was right on the mark. The new 1960 full size big Chrysler was not bad looking, but 61 wasn't kind (except I still like those cool backlit domed instrument panels). Chrysler would be an interesting company to read about from the mid 50's to the mid 70's. They were rather small in comparison to Ford and GM, and continually in and out of financial crisis. Virgil Exner had a tough situation on his hands I think because to compete, and achieve the industry's consolidation mandating ever greater volume to be profitable, Chrysler needed high style. But high style also meant quick obsolesence. Big fins got tired pretty fast (not helped by quality issues) so he again needed something radically different and in 60 he started with the big stuff. 62 was the volume movers, but management got faked out by the upcoming Malibu and ordered a fast downsizing. Then Exner got the total rap and was replaced by Ellwood Engel from Ford which was known as mostly a conservative shop. Remember, GM's Mitchell had greatly toned down industry styling going with more simple and classic looks. By the late 60's muscle had helped Mopar's image and cars needed new styling to reflect that like the fuselage models.
When the downsized 62's came out I was a kid who actually kind of liked their lean size and unique styling. But I was hugely in the minority as Americans equated size with power. I often wonder how they would have turned out if not downsized. I suspect a bit better looking, but I still don't think that new look would have caught on fire like the forward look fins did. Funny thing is that the size thing affected other industries too back then. During the jet age as the 727 came on board it was considered by many passengers as an inferior, or at least less desirable booking than a bigger 707 even if the 727 was probably a better aircraft from an industry and pilot's perspective. By the late 60's everyone wanted to be booked on a jumbo jet.
-Mid-late 80s Celebrity Eurosport, gray and in decent shape, boy were those boxy.
-Gen II Accord four door, even boxier than the Celeb. Good shape, dark met. gray
-67/68-ish Chevy H/T coupe probably an Impala, red roof, white body(!?), not bad shape but hardly pristine.
-Similar vintage Cadillac 4-dr. H/T in nice shape except for oxidized teal paint, nothing a good compounding couldn't fix.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
I remember when the '77 Caprice came out, Automotive News had a drawing of the car, with dimensions, etc., overlaid over a 1964 Studebaker Cruiser. Proportions and interior dimensions versus exterior dimensions, seat width, door thickness, etc., were similar. The chief designer of the 1964 Studes, Brooks Stevens, said that...'the rest of the industry looked, sniffed, and went on downsizing'.
He was the guest of honor at a Studebaker Drivers' Club national meet in Minneapolis in the '90's. He was then in a wheelchair, and the meet hotel lobby was fixed up like an unveiling of the '64's...Studes on turntables under sheets. I heard the first thing he said when he came out was, "Where were all of you in 1964?!"
2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv. (RIP 2001 Jaguar XK8 cnv and 1985 MB 380SE [the best of the lot])
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1978-Toyota-Cressida-MX32.jpeg
Damn thing would probably run for the next 100 years though.
I think people confuse cars with sturdier bodies as more durable mechanically but the two don't always go together.
You don't see 500K Japanese cars because they would be hard to drive with just a frame and engine and no body---LOL!
Those Cressidas always made me think of a Japanese attempt at a Ford Granada, mainly because of all the fussy, pretentious styling cues.
I wonder how well the Cressida performed? That generation was offered with several different engines overseas, but in the US I think it only came with a 2.6 inline-6 that was carbureted (may have gone fuel-injected later), and an automatic transmission. According to Wikipedia, it had somewhere between 108-122 hp, and it was SOHC with 2 valves per cylinder.
So, compared to a Granada, it was more technologically advanced. I'm sure it was also a lot more expensive. And while that HP:CID ratio is great for the era, I'd guess a 302 in the Granada would still be quicker.
It's amazing how tiny those things were inside, too. According to the EPA, Toyota's finest had 83 cubic feet of passenger volume, and an 11 cubic foot trunk. And as far as Japanese cars go, that was the mastodon of the bunch. Just for comparison, the smallest domestic compact sedan that year would've been the AMC Concord, with 90 cubic feet of passenger volume, and an 11 cubic foot trunk.
The Cressida was a pretty well-built car though. If you could keep the rust off of them, they'd probably go a good long time. Every once in a blue moon, I'll see one at a classic car show, and IMO, they do have a well-built look to them, and pretty sturdy looking for a small car. Not something you're going to want to enter into a demolition derby and take on Royal Monacos and Electra 225's. Interiors were pretty nice on them too, for a Japanese car.
Wikipedia is showing a picture of a Cressida hardtop coupe, which in my opinion, isn't a bad looking little car. I see a little Mercedes influence in it, as it makes me think just a bit of those 70's era SLC hardtop coupes. I also see some Mustang II in that C-pillar and quarter panel, though! :P
don't tell I kinda see it too
2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic
Toyota paying homage to MB styling is nothing new (it's how the Lexus LS gained ground), I don't mind, and I like old Cressidas.
I don't know if we ever got that coupe, seems unfamiliar to me and the pic was apparently taken in France.
2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic
I didn't like the final-gen Cressida when it came out, because I thought it looked a little stuffy. But I think it's aged well.
I knew a guy in the early 90s who had a 350SLC with about a gazillion miles on it. The seats were shot b ut apparently it still served as his DD. The SLC wasn't a big seller in North America but it was imported here.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
I remember when I was about 10, my dad knew a guy who had one, and the car had a leather interior that was button tufted and very American barge-like, even then it seemed out of place to me.
That's a fair description of what they looked like at the time. There was some weird-tech going on in the cramped interior though. Like some other cars the Cressida had motorized belts - but like nothing else it also had a wacky motorized climate control tray in the dash. It was pretty cool that the Cressida and Supra shared the same engine although that accounted for cooling/head gasket problems for both models.
I read an interview with Ted "mouth of the south" Turner who drove a first gen Cressida around '79 or so when he was still with his first gen wife. At the time Turner claimed he bought a Toyota as part of his energy conservation philosophy. Considering how small the interior was, could it have been that much better on gas than a compact from Detroit? I doubt that even a Celica with 4 cylinder/automatic was good for much more than 21 mpg or so. Besides that, Mr. Turner's energy conservation ideas included eliminating air conditioning from anything but hospitals and TV studios. He was a colorful character back then whether driving his little Toyota or flying in his private jet.
Unfortunately, for 1979 the EPA only lists city estimates on their website. They have the Cressida at 18 mpg that year. Interestingly, they also show the car as having a 4-speed automatic! They were definitely an early adopter in that regard. It looks like the only other Toyota to offer it was the Supra, which would make sense, since they both used the same engine. Outside of Toyota, the only other manufacturer in the EPA's list using a 4-speed automatic was Mercedes Benz!
FWIW, that 18 city cycle isn't too impressive, considering the small displacement of the Cressida 6, and what a small car it really was. The Ford Granada with the 250-6 and automatic was rated at 17 city. A Fairmont with the 200-6/auto was rated at 18. The Nova with a 250-6/auto was 16. And, surprisingly to me, at least, a Volare with the 225 slant six was rated at 18 city, regardless of transmission (3-speed/4-speed stick or Torqueflite) or carburetor (1-bbl or 2-bbl "Super Six").
The 79 Malibu was rated 18 city with the 200 V-6/automatic, but even returned decent numbers with the 267-2bbl and 305-4bbl V-8's, which were both rated 17.
So really, Ted Turner probably wasn't saving much fuel by buying a Cressida. Unless he was simply comparing it to whatever gas guzzler he may have owned before.
Saw a couple other old cars - red 65-66 T-Bird, ~70 Nova.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
I like Avantis, find them totally original, but I don't like the level stance and smaller front-wheel openings of the II. The Chevy V8 wouldn't fit under the Avanti's hood without making the original car lose its 'forward rake'. Of course, a lot of folks like the serviceability of the Chevy V8 underhood.
Even though I wouldn't buy a II, I think the story of the Avanti II is pretty remarkable. Who would go in and think they could make a go of it, when Studebaker's U.S. operation had collapsed?
Avantis were well-built in the Altman years...that's what building by hand will do. Of course, right out of the box, the price was thousands higher than Studebaker's.
I read someplace that Nate Altman just loved the car. And he had sold Packards for twenty years, then Edsels, then Studebakers.
It is said he wasn't above building one in chartreuse with salmon interior, if that's what you wanted. Some of the AMC bits in '70's and later models (seat backs, mirrors, etc.) looked cheap to me but you have to buy where you can when you're a manufacturer like that I guess.
Yes, Altman would give you an almost inexhaustible list of options interior/exterior choices.
I suppose the biggest success of a "continuation" of a model has been the AC Cobra. Then there was Glenn Pray who did a fabulous job on replica Cords and Auburns. And of course the VW bug was built almost forever in Mexico.
I think the Avanti II lived on longer than it should have.
I would like to hear of a similar situation too. The closest any American car came to doing that was the 1937 Coffin Nose Cord 810, which was built by others after the parent company quit the business. but it did not continue in production for 20 years. Avantis were also built at a time of increasing government regulation. Since when do mass production numbers prove that a car was something special be remembered?
Newman & Altman had the right idea. . .build 200-300 cars a year just as the customer wants them. Those who later bought the company and tried to mass produce Avantis with other body styles had the wrong idea and they did not last long.
Stephen H. Blake, a Washington D.C. businessmen and Avanti enthusiast, bought the company in 1980 and assumed its chairmanship. So 22 years after the first Avanti rolled off the assembly line, you can still buy one in 1984. Not a kit or a replica, but a real car manufactured by many of the same people who first produced it.
The Avanti as always been a high-performance luxury-car, and the current 5.0-liter V-8 upholds the tradition, accelerating from 0-60 mph in 8.4 seconds and running through the quarter mile in 16.3 sec at 85.5 mph put the car in the same league as the Jaguar XJ-S HE or the Audi Quattro-and its slightly quicker than a Porsche 944, for example. While not among the very fastest cars on earth, the Avanti has enough performers to keep all but the most power-hungry drivers happy. What the numbers do not tell is the wonderfully lazy way in which the Avanti's drivetrain moves it down the road. With the 4-speed automatic transmission in 4th, the tachometer shows a loafing 1300 rpm AT 55 mph.
While the Avanti ride is on the stiff side, the car handles large highway dips and bombs with much more composure than many cars (a Z28 Camaro, for instance) with similar firmness. . . .. What Avanti imparts more than anything, it all types of driving, is a great feeling of solidness and rugged construction.
Hand-built cars seem to come in two categories: they are either full of irregularities and subsequent groans and rattles, or they are tighter and better assembled than the average mass-produced item. The Avanti falls nicely into the latter group. Though it has a few small cosmetic glitches, the body, frame and suspension had a tough, 1-piece feel that typifies the best of the 60's performance cars and still feels good today.
replica: ---faithful copy of something: an accurate reproduction of an object
A Ford Cobra was not an ACE Bristol replicar. A Shelby is not a Mustang replicar. The Willy's Jeep did not become a replicar when AMC bought it and replaced the Willys motor with an AMC engine. The Chevy II and Mustang II were not replicars. Neither was the Avanti II. :shades:
Replica is not a derogatory term--you don't have to defend the Avanti II on that basis. The Glenn Pray Auburn (early models) even used Auburn chassis and engines. Yet it is not an Auburn built by the original company. So it's a replica, and keeps the Auburn name.
My opinion is that keeping the same name on a 2nd generation of a car is an intent to replicate it.
p.s. - why's this discussion going on here, rather than the Stude thread?
Speaking of somewhat obscure, I'm still looking at a version of this car I found in a garage in San Fran:
None of what was just said above applies to the Avanti II.
I agree with Road and Track that the Avanti II was no kit or replicar. I am still waiting to hear about any car that contunued in production more than 20 years after the parent company went out of the auto business.
Regarding the later Avanti family, not a replicar, just a bit of a freakshow. I remember those things being expensive in the 80s too, sellers would advertise them in the DuPont Registry, which especially then wasn't a sign of affordability.
Sorry, you can return to the discussion about spotting rare Toyota Cressidas and other immediately forgettable foreign cars that get used up thrown away like disposable BiC lighters after a few years.
Cressida was one of the better mass market products of its era, and probably has a higher survival rate than its peers...so not all bad.
This morning I saw a VW Quantum wagon, now that's something that has to be fun to keep on the road.
Insert groan here.
ba-dum-bump