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
How did the '61 Plymouth sell? I doubt it outsold its predecessor 3-5 to 1.
How did the 61 Plymouth sell compared to more normal looking cars? That might be more telling. And to be apples to apples, current GS sales need to be compared with 06 when it was a new model, not 11 when it was an ignored anachronism.
Speaking of the 61 Plymouth, I recently watched an episode of "Leave it to Beaver", where Beaver and his friend play in Ward's car, and accidentally roll it out of the driveway. The car was a 61 Plymouth 4 door HT, rectangular steering wheel and all - must be stupendously rare today:
300 was the last model, the new one sells in the thousands (monthly).
If you want to get a sales forecast wrong, ask an enthusiast. Some of the cars most likely to succeed and panned by us.
Recent examples? JX & Pathfinder.
Enthusiasts on Edmunds hating something is a pretty sure fire sign it will be a huge sales success.
They sold out, it's not BOF
CVT? OH NOES
It's really just a minivan
Those used to be real trucks
Reality:
PathFinder 7,014 +145.8%
The JX nearly matched the well established MDX in sales last month.
I'm telling you, the biggest success factor for a new model's sales is how much it's hated here.
I also post on a VW forum and this is a regular result. If it were up to some of the folks over there, if VW would only introduce a Polo sized diesel 2 door wagon with a 5 speed, 14" wheels, no airbags or electronic nannies weighing less than 2K lbs and with an MSRP of $12K, they'd buy one.
Yeah right.
And yeah, nobody would buy it.
Polos are sold in Brazil, it's your basic econobox, nothing special.
Saturn Astra
New Ranger Pickup
Mahindra diesel pickup
Any Citroen or Peugot
Opel Adam
Seats
VW Amarok
Holden Ute
I can see about 627 sales amongst them all.
Haven't they always?
If the average dope on the road had their say, there would be only a few styles of vehicle to choose from: dorky hybrid, various sizes of bland 4cyl (and maybe 6cyl for those who live on the edge) slushbox commuter can, pretentious faux-SUV minivan (aka crossover, covers everything from Pathfinder to RX), larger even more pretentious SUV aimed at the non-working set, and trucks, especially full size 4x4s for suburban cowboys to commute from their cardboard 'n plywood tract house to their cube at work. That's it. Oh, and maybe a non-performance coupe or convertible here and there. No manuals, no diesels, no wagons, no sports cars, no supersedans, no motorcycles. Thank heaven for enthusiasts :shades:
The new Pathfinder is a nice vehicle IMO. CVT sucks, but I think for the wife it would be fine.
Any crossover ute is basically a minivan. 80% of the ultility with none of the soccer mom stigma. No wonder they all sell pretty well.
2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic
I'd have to look up the specs to be exact, but can almost guarantee that it was the worst in its class. However, part of the problem was the way Chrysler restructured starting in 1960. That year, they merged Plymouth/Chrysler/DeSoto into one division, while Dodge soldiered on alone.
To give Dodge a broader lineup, they dropped what had been the base Coronet, and replaced it with the Dart, which wasn't just one model, but rather a whole series, that matched Plymouth model for model. While Plymouth had Savoy/Belevedere/Fury, Dodge had Seneca/Pioneer/Phoenix.
The remaining Dodges, which had been called Royal and Custom Royal in 1959, were replaced by the Matador and Polara. Dodge sales soared in 1960, from something like 156,000 in 1959 to around 373,000 in 1960. The majority of those were Darts, which accounted for something like 330,000 units, and actually outsold the equivalent Plymouths that year. Plymouth as a whole still outsold Dodge though, as it had the compact Valiant, and Dodge had nothing similar in its lineup. Dodge would get the Lancer version for '61-62, but it never sold in near the quantities that the Valiant did.
So, forward looking to 1961...#1 would have been the full-sized Chevy (Biscayne/Bel Air/Impala) followed by the full sized Ford in #2 (Custom/Galaxie/etc). A very distant #3 would be the Dart, followed by the Plymouth.
Incidentally, 1961 was Plymouth get ousted from third place in overall sales. It had regained #3 back in 1957, knocking Buick out, and managed to hold onto it in '58-60 despite Chrysler's problems in general. Rambler briefly claimed #3 in 1961, though.
Plymouth's problems only worsened for 1962, when they fielded shrunken full-sized cars that, while very space efficient for their time, were really more midsized than full-sized, and not too pretty to look at. I think Pontiac took third that year.
Plymouth started doing better, sales-wise, for 1963, but so did everybody else, so it usually stayed pretty low in the rankings. When the "true" full-size Fury came out for 1965, it sold pretty well, and by then was probably selling a lot better than Dodge's full-size 880/Polara/Monaco lineup. But Chevy's and Ford's full-sized lineups were still #1 and #2, respectively. I think the Pontiac Catalina might have also been outselling the Fury.
BTW, Plymouth would only see #3 again three times during its existence, 1971 and 1973.
It may not be exciting but that's what pays the bills.
GS is nowhere near worst in class, FWIW. Infiniti, Acura, and Lincoln are way behind.
When you ante up and buy a basic mainstream car like a Rio or a Yaris, or something that appears to just be misunderstood like a GS, maybe then I'll believe it :shades:
Nowadays though, even if you're worst in your class, that doesn't mean you have a bad car. The competition is fierce these days.
As for the '61 Plymouth, it wasn't all bad. It was just ugly to look at. In its defense, it was a good handler, fairly safe and rugged for the time (at least, it wouldn't fold up like an X-frame Chevy would) It also had a good engine lineup, starting with the 225 slant six, a 318 wit 2- or 4-bbl carb setups, a 361-4bbl, or a 383 with dual quads. And it had some of the most durable automatic transmissions around.
But, you still had to look at it, because they don't make paper bags that big.
Charles Morgan does a better job explaining:
http://youtu.be/KkgmXBDDNjQ
It is sad that the best selling Porsche isn't even a real Porsche, but one of the minivans you mention, thinly veiled. VW chassis and engines.
Precious few cars are worthy of the label fantasy.
There's a guy who lives about a mile from me, who has a 1959 Dodge Coronet Lancer hardtop coupe with the 383 dual quads. You'd sort of expect it in a car like that, though, being a sportier 2-door, even if it's just a low-line Coronet.
You've gotta have a light car
And compared to classic Morgans, that new one is a bloated up sled.
VAG as a whole still has some issues with component sharing. What the lowest common denominator demands isn't always a good thing, popularity doesn't equal excellence. Nobody really loves the Cayenne for anything more than providing money to build (ever more complex and expensive) actual cars.
"Fantasy" was a bit of hyperbole, you know.
Yeah right.
Hahahaha, so true.
After working in the car biz for so long I heard it all the time from tire kickers and window shoppers: if your company would make this I'l be the first in line to buy it etc, etc......
Going into car sales (started selling Hondas 10 years ago) as an enthusiast I was shocked that 99% of car buyers didn't care for double wishbone suspension, Vtec, horsepower, or even styling for the most part. Most people wanted to know what the fuel economy was, if it was safe, if it was reliable, and how much it will cost them per month.
If all of the above criteria met their expectations, and it came in a color they liked, and was on sale then that was a good chance there'd be a sale happening.
People always want what they can't get. When the Accord coupe came out people wanted a manual with the V6. They swore they'd buy one if ti ever came out. When it did come out and we got some and I called the same people and all of a sudden they didn't want that anymore, they wanted something else. :confuse:
2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX
Hahahahaha, well said.
2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX
Oddly enough one of the things I like best about the GS is that it was so much lighter than the car it replaced. We have to reverse this trend of bloating up.
Fortunately other brands are getting the message.
Yeah, I imagine more stick takers for a smaller and/or sportier car.
IIRC I recently read that most BRZ/FRS are stick, for instance.
How much less does the new GS weigh? I went to Edmunds and looked at 2010 vs 2013 - almost identical per their specs.
New models have so much tech built-in that probably adds most of it back.
I know my W212 is a few hundred pounds heavier than the W210, but it has a lot more junk in it, and 14 years difference.
In the early '70's, the teenaged kid who lived behind us had his folks' old salmon-colored with white painted top, '61 Fury 4-door post sedan. It was clean and solid, a sign of being well-taken-care-of, even in NW PA. His parents were nice people; he ended up being not-so-nice I think. Anyway, I digress.
What '61 or '62 Mopar is my favorite? I think that's a good question! Leaving out the 300 series (of course!), I'd probably say any other '62, or '61, Chrysler two-door. Excluding that, I don't think the '61 big Dodges are THAT bad--I like 'em better than the Plymouth! Oh, and a '61 DeSoto is interesting and not that bad.
I know I said "'61 or '62", but I detest the '60 Plymouth more than the '61. I can't get past that front fender treatment.
Andre summed it up nicely earlier, but I think if you weren't a Mopar buff then (and I wasn't as a kid), it was hard to know all of the various Mopar models offered in the early '60's, as it seemed they were frequently changing model names, as opposed to old, solid Ford and Chevy at the time.
61 Chrysler can be cool - crazy face, big fins. But cool in a retro way rather than in a clean and solid design. It was an optimistic car.
Honestly, I can stomach any of them, with the exception of the Plymouths. I think the most tasteful ones were the Chryslers and the '62 Dodge 880, followed by the '61 DeSoto. The only thing I really hate about the '61 DeSoto is that swollen upper grille. If they would've gotten rid of that, and sloped the hood down a bit, it wouldn't have looked that bad, although it would've been reminiscent of a '58-60 Lincoln. That bulge was there to save money, though. It allowed them to use the same hood as the Chrysler Newport and Windsor.
I kinda like the '61 Dodge Polara...the Dart a bit less so. Oh, and those shrunken, odd '62 Dodges I like, simply because of the weirdness. But the '62 Plymouths just came off as ugly, IMO.
And a '61-62 Imperial is anything BUT the epitome of taste, but I like 'em, simply for the weirdness. I think that design originally had hidden headlights in mind, which would have been really cool. But those neoclassic, free-standing headlights just seemed odd.
Going back another year, to 1960, I think the whole Mopar lineup was surprisingly tasteful. Except for Plymouth. The DeSoto and Chrysler that year looked really modern for a finned design. In fact, I think they actually look "newer" than the '61 models! The Darts and Matador/Polara were good looking too IMO, but really didn't look all that "new". They still looked like a 1950's design, with the headlights above the grille. I think the 1960 Imperial looked really good, as well. I love the front-end. It has a proud, accomplished look to it.
That's the Jane Hathaway syndrome from Beverly Hillbillies. Actually, I like the back part of both of those cars, but the front ends are weird. Kind of the reverse of the 60 Ford. I thought the side profile and dash were interesting on both of them too.
I think that's a good point about the 60 DeSoto and Chrysler looking newer than the 61.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Also saw a similar color W123 that wasn't smoking, and a white C43.
Chevrolet: 1,129,000
Ford: 791,498
Dart: 323,168
Plymouth: 206,757
Pontiac Catalina: 113,354
Mercury Meteor: 53,122
Here's how they stacked up, price wise, using a V-8 Impala 4-door as a reference point:
Impala: $2,697
Galaxie:$2,592 (book doesn't break out 6 versus V-8 price; I'd guess another $100-125 for the base V-8)
Dart Phoenix: $2,715
Plymouth Fury: $2,694
Pontiac Catalina: $2,702
Mercury Meteor: $2,767
I felt compelled to include the Catalina and Meteor in this group, because price wise, they were in range with the likes of a V-8 Impala and such. Chevy, Ford, Plymouth, and Dodge were still selling base-level full-sizers in the $2100-2200 range, but those were becoming less and less common. The Catalina came with a standard V-8. However, the Meteor offered a 6-cyl, priced around $2,600 for the 4-door sedan
As for other mid-priced brands, they were still starting a bit higher, enough to probably be regarded as the next price class. For instance:
Oldsmobile Dynamic 88: $2900
Chrysler Newport: 2964
Dodge Polara: $2966
Buick LeSabre: $3107
Desoto was phased out of production on November 18, 1960, and only offered a hardtop coupe and sedan that year, no pillared sedan. The HT coupe was $3102 and the HT sedan was $3167, about $60-80 more than corresponding Newport models. So if it had stuck around, and offered a 4-door sedan, my guess it would've been around $3025.
These pricier mid-priced cars tended to offer much bigger V-8's though. 361 for the Mopars, 364 for the Buick, a 394 CID monster for the Olds. In contrast, the cheaper cars were peddling 283's, 292's, and 318's as their standard V-8s. The one exception was the Catalina, which came with a 389.
2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic
Speaking of commercials, I'll have to admit to circlew over on the other board, that I laugh every time I see that Sonata Turbo commercial, where they're driving behind a big-bottom guy on a cycle, then behind a garbage truck, then behind a fireworks truck, to show how easy the Turbo can pass traffic!
We have a DVR but my kids make me watch that commercial. LOL
I think the D'Elegance has a really cool looking front-end, but then moving backwards, it looks a bit disjointed. The passenger cabin makes me think of the '60-62 Valiant sedan, just as a hardtop. The side windows even make me think a bit of GM's '73-77 A-body intermediates! And then the rear-end just seems way too stubby! The fender skirts don't help.
I really like the '61 Pontiac style that year, so even if I found the Catalina too cheap for my tastes, I could probably have been perfectly happy with a Star Chief or Bonneville.
Oh, I also need to go back and check my figures. I just looked at the numbers I posted, and I think that 323K for the Dart was 1960 figures, and not '61. Oops!
Are They Building The Car You Really Want?