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

Mr_Shiftright · March 2013

yes I think '64 Riv is nicer and cleaner. But since everyone mentioned '63, that's what I picked.

I never like the nose of the Stingray so much..as you know, I don't like unattractive snouts, shovel noses, shark noses, locomotive noses. On the Sting Ray...I dunno...that split bumper messes up the line for some reason. But I like the roofline and the muscular fenders. The car does suggest "power", so its styling fulfills its form.

The Riv suggests power and speed. The 60 Ford suggests a birthday cake make in prison.

uplanderguy · March 2013

I do think the '63 Riv is probably the first GM car with a back seat, that had the long hood/short deck theme, which is a great thing IMHO. I like '60's Pontiacs, but not real long ago I saw a photo of a '62 Pontiac Bonneville, which I've always liked. The rear overhang is almost insane IMHO! I don't know how folks backed out of driveways without hitting bottom!

That '60 Ford would look nicer with the extra reflectors in the bumpers to mirror the taillights! Come on, those were cool!

I could enjoy owning a robin's egg blue '60 Galaxie 500 Starliner. I love '61 Starliners, but I don't like Ford's tomato reds in and out of those early '60's years. Get me a subdued color one and I'd be a happy camper.

I also like '58 Fords. Figures the other Studey guy (jljac) and I would concur on that! I actually like the Fairlane 500 better than the Thunderbird. The wheelbase is too short on the 'bird IMHO and it was pained to resemble a bird outside I think--something I think Ford did up through '63. Still, I'd take a '62 or '63 Sports Roadster!

Mr_Shiftright · March 2013

Well that's a case in point---that degree of overhand is really dumb styling. This is after all a CAR...it should behave like one.

So you have a "three-body trunk" and barely enough room in the back seat for a cat and a cantaloupe.

lemko · March 2013

...it's no contest!

The 1961 Chevrolet is drop-dead gorgeous!

The 1961 Ford is squarish and conservative

The 1961 Plymouth is .... Aaaagh! Change it, Butthead! Change it!

uplanderguy · March 2013

That '61 SS is indeed drop-dead gorgeous and I love the color too!

First year for narrow whites on a Chevy.

As you know, I'd have to get one with 'straight line tuning' radio and no pushbuttons, 'cause I think the buttons that spell "Chevy" is cheesy!

At Hershey a few years back, there actually was a '61 Impala Sport Coupe (not SS I don't think) that had the non-pushbutton radio! Too bad it also had skirts. ):

fintail · March 2013

The wagon was more logical - not so much overbite at the back:

And cleaner than 50s style on the sides:

And you still got gun sights on the fenders.

Speaking of wagons, I remember many years ago, there was a 2 door 1960 Ford Ranch Wagon for sale in BC. Big rarity.

fintail · March 2013

Is it a 61 Plymouth or a Lexus GS? :shades:

ateixeira · March 2013

No comparison...the sheetmetal above the headlights on that sags in, the grille's too small, the fender placement is all wrong.

1 tiny detail doesn't make (or break) a design. That's ugly for many reasons.

fintail · March 2013

Spindle grille, homely eyes, disjointed style - good enough for me. Much more than a tiny detail, even if from an underdog maker who can never be taken to task for what they have wrought.

Sales seem to be pretty soft, too - probably were for Plymouth as well.

berri · March 2013

Shifty, I think what you say about "design" has validity as toward what will likely be considered by most to be "classic" over many years. However, car fans are like music lovers. Music has basic principles and concepts as well, but people have a wide variety of tastes and favorites regardless of whether those principles are followed. Emotion, memories and the like, as well as just personal preferences play into all of it for most I think. Some car people have favorite brands as well, just like some music people are aligned with certain bands or genres. Personally, in both areas I consider myself a bit of a whore possessing sometimes insatiable desires over very broad spectrum!

andre1969 · March 2013

And, Lexus seems to be going for that pinched, "hourglass" grille look across the board.

One of my old auto encyclopedias ragged on the '61 Plymouth, saying that it spawned a whole generation of bad Japanese sci-fi monsters. I guess that's not the only thing it spawned. :P

It's funny though, how the Japanese will pick up on some long lost styling motif from days gone by. A few years back, the Honda CR-V had what I called a "1961 DeSoto complex". It had sort of a double-grille effect, where the lower grille slanted up into the headlights, and then an upper grille that jutted out, in a bit of a swollen fashion.

And, that odd beltline drop-down in the current Honda Odyssey makes me think of the old Dodges from 1957-60, where the fin ended short of the fender. Or the '61 Dodge, with the odd, reverse-slant fins.

I don't find the Odyssey hideous though, just odd, with that little detail. And, that previous-gen CRV, while it hasn't exactly grown on me, I guess Iv'e gotten used to it.

As for the '61 Plymouth, I once saw one with '59 Chevy taillights grafted onto it and, believe it or not, it made a world of improvement. I think the biggest issue with the '61 Plymouth isn't the overall shape, but merely the details. The scalloped-out corners are actually kinda neat, but the stuck-on taillights and that hideous front-end are just a mess.

I think that roofline dates it a bit, too. Even though it was all-new for 1960, unit-bodied, and shared very little with the '57-59 Mopars, It looks to me like they just used the roofline from a '57 Plymouth 4-door hardtop, and put frames around the window glass. Kinda neat though, how they recessed the B-pillar so the window frames overlapped it.

That roof persisted through 1964 with the Dodge 880. By that time, it was really looking out of date. Chrysler, at least, modified it a bit for their '63-64 Newport/300/New Yorker, so it looked more up to date, although it still used the same wraparound windshield.

ateixeira · March 2013

The GS doesn't look homely or disjointed. It merely shares one styling element, a pinched grille.

That's like saying an attractive model is an troll just because she has one small mole on her face.

Gimme a break.

Sales were up 450+ % the first year, they've settled down now that the new ES arrived, but they're still more than double the sales rate 2 years ago. Not exactly soft.

ateixeira · March 2013

Feb 2011 349 units
Feb 2013 1108 units

317% as many sales as the no-spindle predecessor.

(Edit: my numbers were low, sales last year were up more than 500%)

tjc78 · March 2013

In all fairness they had no where to go but up. The GS has never been a huge seller for Lexus. I question it's place in the lineup period.

ateixeira · March 2013

Yeah, the old one was conservative and had dull styling, and was basically invisible.

The new one has done better because it's not. The risks with the styling have undoubtedly worked.

Let's not forget competitors are spending about $5 grand per vehicle in incentives, prompting even the biggest die-hards to trade in their AMG models. LOL

andre1969 · March 2013

There's a lady at work who has a previous-gen GS hybrid, and I don't think it's too bad looking, in black. The one I really didn't like was the model before that, which had sort of an insectoid look up front, and Daewoo-like proportions, in general.

One thing I can't stand about any of the GSes though, is the C-pillar. It's too big, and goes too far back beyond the rear axle, to the point the car starts looking like a swollen hatchback.

What, really, is the point of the GS, anyway? Is it for someone who wants a Lexus interpretation of a 5-series or E-Class? It's RWD at least, so it's probably more fun to drive than the more mass-market ES, which seems to carry the bulk of Lexus volume.

That '61 Plymouth look doesn't bug me as much on the ES...maybe because it's smoother, toned down a bit, much less bold?

berri · March 2013

Heck, do you really think people buy Toyota and Lexus for style? I think it has more to do with reputation, reliability and trade in values than looks.

texases · March 2013

"What, really, is the point of the GS, anyway? Is it for someone who wants a Lexus interpretation of a 5-series or E-Class?"

Exactily. And from Edmunds long term tester, many of the drivers like the GS more than the latest 5. Which says more about the 5, really...

ateixeira · March 2013

Daewoo-like proportions, in general

Same designer penned the Daewoo Leganza, so not a coincidence.

We should all keep in mind they dropped the V8 Lexus GS and still sell 3 times as many in a BAD month.

Anyone here really think Lexus regrets the spindle? Sales are way up, and they're pretty much using the same old 2GR-FSE V6 from ages ago.

ateixeira · March 2013

Then how do we explain sales 3-5 times greater than the previous model?

fintail · March 2013

Aggressive face, bland sides and rear, not an exercise in homogeneity.

Weren't month to month sales off by like 30%+ in the last report posted on the other forum?

Give me a break. Some seem to get a little red when bad styling is called out for what it is. Just like the new IS, which is a shame, because the cars are pretty nice inside. Nobody will be looking at these cars in 20+ years and reminiscing about their lovely lines.

Sales 2 years ago were very low because the model was aged and design-wise was outclassed by the entire competition people simply stopped buying it. It indeed had nowhere to go but up. Not many people bought the V8 after 06-07 anyway.

tjc78 · March 2013

using the same old 2GR-FSE V6 from ages ago

And what a fine engine it is. I still think the Toyota 2GR (both DI and Non-DI) is the best V6 on the market right now.

Its also not "that" old, it was introduced with the 05 Avalon in non-DI form.

The GS certainly isn't a bad car by any means, it just competes in a very competitive segment that BMW/Merc basically owns. I haven't checked, but I bet they sell more of the GS than Infiniti does the M.

ateixeira · March 2013

Comparing spindle to spindle, Feb 2013 sales were down from 2012, but spindle vs. boring previous design, they're still at 3x the old sales rate.

The new ES took some attention away (cheaper, same new grille) and the GS didn't have $5-6 grand worth of cash on the hood like the Germans did.

ateixeira · March 2013

Lexus splits this segment, with the ES and the GS.

It's not like the ES competes with the 3 series. The new 5er has gone so soft the comparison is no longer ridiculous, either. And the ES uses the Avalon as a starting point and grew much bigger, so there's more overlap with the GS.

The spindle hasn't hurt Lexus at all, in fact total sales were up another 4% in Feb 2013 and that's compared to a fantastic month in 2012.

ateixeira · March 2013

Per Edmunds the average incentive for the industry ($2269) is 51% higher than it is for Toyota right now ($1504).

They're not discounting at all.

texases · March 2013

The ES has always been bigger inside than the GS.

fintail · March 2013

I wonder why sales fell. The newness of the styling wearing off, so people realize how odd it is? Again, this will not be a design we look at in a quarter century and want it back. I am seeing a lot of ES, which is a nicer design, but of course a much duller car.

Spec for spec it is still cheaper than the Germans even with incentives (though the difference aint what it used to be). I am sure the 11 GS had some cash on the hood too, outgoing styles always do - which is why the E is sale priced now, leftovers before the facelift.

omarman · March 2013

That '61 Plymouth shows off another odd look for the '58-'63 styling era...a narrow track. After GM stopped using the X-frame even a big car like this '65 Impala SS didn't look like a parade float.
Photobucket

Mr_Shiftright · March 2013

See? There's not a bad line on that '65 Chevy. Yeah, it is rather large, but like a well-tailored suit on a 300 lb. person, it still works. No lines or angles going up, down and sideways.

Some of those early 60s cars look like someone threw a few thousand nuts and bolts and parts and shook them together and spilled them out on a table!

Believe me, I know and appreciate how all of us occasionally like to stick our gearhead snouts into the automotive hog trough of over-the-top indulgences, but I don't think such indulgences should be masqueraded as "good styling".

andre1969 · March 2013

I agree, I think the '65 Chevy is just about perfect, style-wise. About the only bad thing I can remember someone ever saying about a '65 Chevy was one of my cousins, who thought the way the taillights stuck out was kind of tacky. But, he may have been biased, as he was driving a '65 Ford Galaxie at the time!

So, maybe you could argue that the way those taillights stuck out was one last vestige of the 50's jet/space age motif that the Impala still hadn't quite thrown off. As I said, I don't mind it. However, I think the '66 Chevy taillight treatment is more attractive. But, I don't like the front-end of the '66 as much. A bit too blunt, and not as forward thrusting as the '65.

I think '65 was a good year for just about everybody, style-wise.

I'm impressed that, even with the tiny 14" wheels of the era, that '65 Impala still looks well-balanced. I'm wondering though...is that Impala sitting a little high overall, but especially in the rear? Like maybe it has heavy duty shocks or something?

Also, if you want to get nitpicky, the '65 Chevy is a good example of function following form. Or, as Consumer Reports used to say "Handsome is as handsome does". A '65 Plymouth Fury isn't nearly as attractive in the eyes of most people, but it's about the same size, it has a sturdier front bumper, is bigger inside, and has a larger trunk. IIRC, the '65 full-sized Fords were a bit bigger inside as well, although I can't remember how their trunks were.

IMO, that's why it's hard to design a really beautiful looking car nowadays. Function can't follow form anymore. A car has to be aerodynamic, safe, roomy enough, have enough luggage capacity, incorporate all sorts of safety features and creature comforts, conform to various bumper and crash standards, etc, but can't be too big externally, or nobody will buy it.

texases · March 2013

'65-'66 Chevy may be my favorite '60s style, period. Even looks good (maybe better) as a 4-door hardtop:

ateixeira · March 2013

Sales fell because a brand new ES was sitting next to it in show rooms, also bespindled, and cheaper.

uplanderguy · March 2013

Although I get tired of red, that is as nice a '65 Impala SS as I've seen in a long time.

I know another guy who doesn't like the 'bullet' taillights. I like them, for one reason since they were the sixth consecutive model year for three round lights on each side of an Impala. The '66 square lights looked OK to me, but not as nice to my eyes. I also don't like on the '66 how it has a molding right smack down the middle of the side, like a Bel Air. Still, the '66 is a pretty car.

Those '65 and '66 Impalas were comparatively luxurious inside, too--I'd say more so than a Catalina or base LeSabre or Dynamic 88 even. Those cars gave you three-speed automatics, longer wheelbases, and bigger standard engines, but the Impala seemed like it gave you quality where you could easily see it (not disparaging the others; IMHO all the '65 GM full-sizes were nice cars and the Pontiac/Buick/Olds advantages were indeed advantages). Over one million '65 Impalas (not counting Biscaynes or Bel Airs) sold that year, a record never duplicated I believe.

I know a guy who says if you looked underneath a '65 and then looked underneath a '64, it would be apparent how the '65 was cheapened, but I think the styling was definitely improved. I can hardly think of two consecutive model years of the same model that looked more different (I think we've had that conversation here before).

ab348 · March 2013

Oh, FFS, Shifty. Every time I start to think you aren't a total jerk, you go and say something like that.

You ought to ask to be reassigned to the Funny Furrin Car Forums and let someone host this one that actually likes old cars.

Mr_Shiftright · March 2013

Oh, c'mon, do you *really* want to talk to someone who likes everything all the time? zzzzz

Besides, if someone were to call me an "elitist", that would be a supreme compliment! :P

Without discrimination, everything turns to mush, doesn't it?

fintail · March 2013

But the GS is a far higher quality car, RWD or AWD, a lot more gadgets, more prestige. At least in NA. How did GS sales fare in 07 when the new ES rolled around? I bet they didn't tank like this.

Not really apples to apples, the cars (should) appeal to different buyers. Maybe they just have it a couple dollops of styling too many, the ES isn't this flamboyant.

Even the people at "Club Lexus" have a laugh

fintail · March 2013

Sightings in the rain today - red Volvo 544 I see now and then, Volvo Amazon coupe in workplace parking garage, early 80s Volvo turbo wagon, beautiful as-new looking champagne color 83-85 W126 300SD turbo, brown W126 300SD (car wears it well), 80-83ish Corolla sedan.

Mr_Shiftright · March 2013

I saw one of those 60s Dodge "vans" made like a pickup. What did you call those things? My mind says something like "D100" ???

fintail · March 2013

From what I can find, it was an "A100".

Mr_Shiftright · March 2013

AH...did it have some model name?

Apparently these things are starting to be collectible (after a fashion).

fintail · March 2013

I can't remember a name. I remember later Dodge names like "Adventurer", but I don't think they were used on the van-trucks.

Back in the 90s, a friend of the family had an immaculate 60s Dodge van - also had a very nice Studebaker Champ pickup, so one could say he had unique tastes.

stickguy · March 2013

how about a modern recreation?

a few years ago, someone local here had an early (1st or 2nd generation) Plymouth Voyager converted into a PU. They created a bulkhead out of what appeared to be plywood, but the did put in a window!

I imagine the structural rigidity left something to be desired. And no, I have no clue what they were thinking.

lemko · March 2013

I LOVED those 1965 Chevrolet taillights! The 1966 Chevrolet is dull compared to the '65. It's the 1965 model with a lobotomy.

tjc78 · March 2013

a few years ago, someone local here had an early (1st or 2nd generation) Plymouth Voyager converted into a PU. They created a bulkhead out of what appeared to be plywood, but the did put in a window!

I must have seen the same thing in November. I wrote about it here.

I certainly hope there aren't two of them in SJ.

andre1969 · March 2013

I LOVED those 1965 Chevrolet taillights! The 1966 Chevrolet is dull compared to the '65. It's the 1965 model with a lobotomy.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I like 'em too. It just happens that I like them both, in their own way.

One other nitpick I just thought of, with Chevies in particular from that era. I never noticed it before, until we started looking over these cars with a fine tooth comb at car shows...but the 3-piece bumpers on the Chevies bugs me. It seems like a cost-cutting move to me, but I wonder how much they really save?

On the plus side, I guess if your bumper only gets slightly damaged, it works out better, because you might only have to seek out one part of the bumper, rather than the whole thing. I just looked on eBay out of curiosity, and there are a couple of bumper endpieces for sale. So, that's cheaper, most likely, than having to buy a whole bumper!

omarman · March 2013

Is it the old Forward Control truck from the 60's? I never see them on the road any more but they're supposed to be collectible and have a following.

uplanderguy · March 2013

On my '63 Lark, the wraparound pieces were separate and called 'winguards' and were an option. I was happy to be able to buy NOS still in the boxes for $35/pr. in 1993 at South Bend. My '64 had one piece wraparound bumpers. I wasn't aware that those Chevys had multiple-part bumpers, although an owner at Hershey once showed me that some had a separate, lower vertical bumper piece near each end of the front that others didn't (whether this was an early vs. late thing or different plants, I don't know).

Along those lines, andre--I have noticed multiple times over the years that some '68 Bonnevilles and Grand Prixs have the handle below the glovebox inside, and also the "Bonneville" or "Grand Prix" nameplates on the lower half of the glovebox, but it seems like most do not (same dash on Bonnevilles and Grand Prix as on Catalinas). Have you ever noticed that? My college roommate drove his parents' '68 Bonneville Brougham and it did not have either of those things.

andre1969 · March 2013

I never noticed that some had the grab handle and some didn't. I just tried googling some pics, and couldn't find any '68's with the grab handle. 1968 was the year that they started going overboard with crash padding and such, so maybe that handle was viewed as a dangerous projection?

Every pic I've seen of a '67 Bonneville or Grand Prix has it, though.

At some point in time, Pontiac brought that grab handle back, because my '76 Grand LeMans has one. My guess is that it first showed up in the '73 Grand Prix and Grand Am, and then the '75 Grand LeMans? I'm sure it was a lot flimsier and impact-friendly than the older, 60's handles. Whenever I have a passenger in my LeMans, I warn them NOT to grab it, for fear it might rip off!

uplanderguy · March 2013

Every '67 I've ever seen, Bonneville and Grand Prix, had both the handle and the nameplate (nameplate at high center of dash w/o A/C; on the glovebox door w/A/C). Here's a '68 Bonneville convertible with both (need to page down though). I've also seen Grand Prixs with both the handle and the nameplate. I never seen a '68 with one, but not the other, which makes me think it was specific to a certain plant:

http://www.under1981.com/1968BONNEVILLECONVERTIBLE.html

uplanderguy · March 2013

Geez, that little A-100 looks brand-freakin'-new!

Those 'pie pans' around the headlights are the same ones used on Dodge 'big' pickups and trucks at the same time.

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

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles