Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Then something familiar, MSRP barely higher at $8730:
And in the showcase, an OJ special, this one with the MY 1992 facelift. Eddie Bauer model, nicely equipped, I'd guess these were in maybe the upper 20s:
When it comes to the '61-64 generation, my favorite is actually the '63, style-wise, but I could be happy with any of them, I guess. Now, when I was a kid, I had an aversion to the '64, but I think I got that from my Dad. He had a bad habit of driving Mom's car, and he was hard on cars. Granddad (Mom's Dad) got tired of that, so he found us a light bluish green '64 Galaxie 4-door, for Dad to use. However, Dad hated Fords. So, he tended to still drive Mom's car (a '68 Impala 4-door hardtop and then a '75 LeMans coupe), and go out partying and such, and Mom would get stuck with the Ford. So I think it was the whole "Like Father like Son" thing, where since my Dad hated the car, so did I!
And the odd thing...my Dad's first car was a 1964 Ford Galaxie XL hardtop coupe, with a 390 and an automatic. He bought it off some guy that just got drafted. In retrospect, Dad said that was a really nice car and he should have held on to it, but he just hated Fords! His dream car was a '63 Impala SS hardtop coupe with a 409 and a stick. He ended up finding one for sale. He told me it had the 425 hp setup. Years later, a mechanic told me there was no such thing in '63. But, I just looked up the brochure, sure enough, there it is!
My Dad ended up selling it, when he got drafted.
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
This showed up as an odd car spot in a group I read, never seen one like this before:
the only one!
My favorite, widowed aunt had a cocoa brown '58 Fairlane two-door sedan with white cove and top. I always liked it, and the reverse-opening hood I thought was cool when I was a kid.
I could like up to a Fairlane 500 two-door Victoria. Not crazy about the looks of the Skyliner and not much of a convertible guy in general.
Pretty reasonable proportions and lines for a '58 car I think. But you couldn't give me a Mercury of that year! Edsel in the lower ranges, yes!
The two-door sedans in Ford's Fairlane lines in '57 and '58 almost looked like two-door hardtops--thin door and window frames covered in bright metal. I remember a really nice '57 in red and black at Hershey some years back.
Still, it wasn't without its faults. Consumer Reports noted that the cheaper Custom line was roomier inside than the Fairlane line, despite being on a shorter wheelbase. Another thing about the '57 Fords, is they had just the slightest hint of a perimeter frame, and the advantages you get from one. It didn't flare out to the edges of a car in the way that the perimeter frames of later years did, but it angled out just enough, that they were able to give a slightly recessed footwell in the back seat area.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
I'll say that putting my mother in either my old Cavalier coupe or my van required 1) helping her up and out of the Cavalier and 2) lifting her into the van. One time I drove my '63 Lark Daytona over to see her at the nursing home and took her for a ride. Stude advertised chair-high seating and my Mom could slide right in and slide right out with no assistance and no ducking.
That general concept finally became mainstream again with the '77 full-size GM cars and '78 mid-sizes.
https://youtu.be/tIb_fLEpXB8
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
It was also heavier than that small size would suggest. A base weight of 2867 lb for the V8. A 2-door Hornet with a V8 wasn't that much heavier, at only 2990 lb. Considering how much shorter a Gremlin is than a Hornet, it seems odd to me that the weight savings was only about 123 lb.
When I think about it, I think in general I always have liked fastback cars with big quarter windows, LOL.
Out back, the taillights look too big. If they made them smaller, closer together, and more outboard, I think it would look nicer. And that car was definitely NOT designed with a vinyl roof in mind! And, once personal luxury coupes was where it was at, the design was definitely not suited to that type of treatment! Seems to me they might have almost done better just keeping the 1973 hardtop in production, and then once the opera window look because in vogue, just slap a landau treatment up in there like Mopar tended to do. GM did it as well in '74...at least, I've seen Toronados and Electras from that year in both true hardtop, and fixed opera window form. And, if Buick did it, I'm sure Olds offered it on the Ninety-Eight that year as well.
AMC was usually pretty hit or miss, and later in their life it seemed to be more misses than hits. But, I guess you gotta give them credit for trying.
He said it was perfect for its purpose and he didn’t have to worry about parking it in Camden.
2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve
2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve
In my mind I used to think they took the '73 Chevelle concept and pushed it to the limit, with the big quarter windows and quad round taillights. Have to give AMC credit for making those quarter windows roll down.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Then the staple of mid 70s TPiR, a Nova. AT and trim options mentioned, MSRP $4215
And in the showcase (alongside a groovy TV/speaker set), a decent looking Vega GT (with a "140 dash 2 engine"):
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
Although, he was a tasteful dresser next to his successor, Rod Roddy!
At first I thought it was a photoshop job, but I've seen pics of it, from several different angles. So if it is photoshopped, they've done it to at least three different pictures!
It's awkward, but let's face it, there's only so much you can do with that front-end, on the cheap. To really make it work you'd have to modify the bumper and hood. But I gotta say, I don't think it's any worse than the stock.
I think I remember full-size Mopars had them optionally after that, but every single Matador sedan from '74 to the end had them.
And, I always thought the coffin-nose was odd. I don't know what effect they were going for, but I don't see why they thought for a moment, that it would look good. A bizarre combination of too much overhang in the grille area, but not enough in the headlight/turn signal areas. At a quick glance, it makes me think a bit of a swollen '75 or so Dodge Dart.
One good thing about the Matador, in sedan form at least, was that it was fairly space efficient. Once the EPA started publishing interior volumes, it was rated at 110 cubic feet of interior volume and a 20 cubic foot trunk. However, I saw a brochure for a Matador that mentioned a 19.1 cubic foot trunk. However, it was a slightly older model, so the difference there could have been a full-sized spare, versus a compact.
For comparison, once GM downsized, their B/C body sedans were rated around 109-111 cubic feet, with trunks around 20-21 cubic feet. And oddly, the larger C-bodies weren't necessarily larger inside. For instance, an Electra and LeSabre are both rated at 111, and a Sedan Deville is only 109! The difference could be that the C-bodies had thicker, plusher door panels that cut shoulder room, which offset the gain in rear legroom. And perhaps a DeVille was even plusher than an Electra? Ford's Panthers were rated at 111 cubic feet, with a 23 cubic foot trunk, in '79. Mopar's R-bodies came up a bit short, at 108/21. They were more low-slung and had less headroom, and the rear legroom dimension came up a bit short, as well.
So the Matador, an old-school intermediate from a less-efficient era, managed to actually compete pretty well with the downsized full-sizers from the Big Three. It's a shame they didn't have the money to re-skin the car and square it off to make it look more modern, similar to what Ford did with the LTD II/Cougar/T-bird versus the Torino/Montego/Cougar/Elite of '76. Or Mopar with their R-bodies versus the intermediates the were created from. But, I guess in the end it would have been the engines that killed them, unless they could have bought them from someone else. The AMC 360 was down to 12/17 by 1978. In contrast, just about anything Olds put a 403 in was rated at 14/20. The worst rating I can find for a 403 is a Toronado equipped for California, at 12/17. Meanwhile, in Cali, the AMC 360 got choked to 10/16.
I can't find a pic of a 2-door model with them, though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16qsYreBJZE
2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech, 2006 Acura TL w/nav
And power, just like a Mark V:
https://youtu.be/cjj-Yml1L5Q
Cutlass S slant back grill from the same year. 442 option had same grill treatment.
"RARE 77" 442
I like the Cutlass S, except that slanty front end.
2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve
Only J.W. Wolfe lasted into my adulthood. Ristvey-Charles I've heard of and know the building but I have zero memories of it. Moyer's closed sometime in the '61 model year.
In 1960, Chrysler Corp reorganized, into Dodge division, and Chrysler/Imperial/DeSoto/Plymouth division. That's why Dodge got the Dart, on the 118" wheelbase, because their dealers were losing Plymouth.
As for DeSoto/Plymouth dealers, I don't know what tended to happen to them, once DeSoto went away. I guess some of them started selling Chryslers? If they were too close to an existing Chrysler/Plymouth dealer, that could have been a problem though.
Nice Desoto walkaround and drive.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CHM0q0fgyU
If the wheel well was body-color, it would show up in this pic. Funny thing though, I can't remember what color it is. I'm picturing a dark gray. I don't think it's black, but I could be wrong.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8jW11iQwBM&t=903s
Johnny said it was a 1974 model, so by August of '75 it was over a year old unless there were some shenanigans underway at Jaguar. He said 1974 was the last of the V-12s. Price was $10,2xx and it wasn't awarded.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6