The Forward Look Network | ||
| ||
Mecum Orlando Jump to page : 1 2 Now viewing page 2 [50 messages per page] | View previous thread :: View next thread |
Forward Look NON-Technical Discussions -> 1955-1961 Forward Look MoPar General Discussion | Message format |
Sonoramic60 |
| ||
Expert Posts: 1287 | Dave -- Thanks for the info. Do you know if the '60 Phoenix had a build record with it? It truly is a desireable car in which I would love to "cruise the gut" and even probably engage in an occasional "speed demonstration." Joe | ||
moparsteve |
| ||
Elite Veteran Posts: 1155 Location: somerville mass | did anyone here buy a car? | ||
Doctor DeSoto |
| ||
Location: Parts Unknown | mikes2nd - 2017-01-14 9:50 PM I think the back end of the 62's are great(going finless) and they last even on the 880 Custom for 63. Not a fan of the those diagonal headlights... or the pignose Desoto. I agree on the 57 Desoto and it can pull off same body color wheel covers which is not an easy task. most look dumb. I have to admit I think the 58 Desoto is probably the best... Ford quickly ripped that one off with their 58. I wonder if they got a tip off on the Desoto design, its pretty close but typical ford ulgy awkward... ======================================== The 57 Ford was a pretty curvy hunk of sheetmetal that played well with the ornamentation, but the 58-59 base for all their makes but Lincoln were actually very square, relying on the ornamentation to give the look of being all curvy and swoopy. The 58 Ford IS close enough in a lot of detail ideas to kind of look like a 58 DeSoto at a quickl glance. God knows I've turned around many times to go back and look at a 58 DeSoto I saw out of the corner of my eye, only to discover it was just another Ford ! Your comment about Ford ugly-awkward resonates with me. They had a few really pretty, well proportioned and detailed designs over the years, but by-and -large, they really had a styling penchant for awkward, like the enormously bulbous assed and blunt-faced post-war (42-48) cars. The 49 was novel and pretty good looking, but Studebaker's similar design showed just how Ford liked to keep it boxy and just add ornaments. The 58 Ford rear treatment has always made me scratch my head, especially if a person knows what a 57 Ford look like ! Who thought THAT was a good idea ? But, like always, Ford seems to defy their own cheapness and awkward-ugly and fill the roads with them. Just look at how many of those gawdawful ugly round Taurus cars they sold ! The 60 Ford is the one stand-alone design for the Ford make I would actually own. Actually, I wouldn't. But I think the design in extremely UN-Ford .... well integrated from every angle, but again, Ford would undo any good they achieved by putting cheap trim on them (the dash and interior has all the George Jetson pizzazz of a riding lawnmower), cheesy looking wheelcovers, the grille *could have* been made of something substantial, but instead looks like some cheap aluminum kitchen utensil. And most got that shipping crate roof that Elwood Engle thought was so awesome. Oddly, that last detail is starting to look good, given how cars for the last 25 years look more like a suppository than a car. But people LOVE Fords ! What is up with that ? They always have, too. Ford could roll out the worst POS ever imagined and throngs would line up for miles to buy one ! Am I so skewed from the mainstream opinion of what makes good design, or do that many people simply not care about design or cheaply made ? Are that many people just sold on Walmart type "cheap" and up-front price is all that mattered/matters ? Oh, and BTW - the 300H convertible I found was not in Ukiah, as previously stated, but farther north in Garberville. | ||
Viper Guy |
| ||
Expert Posts: 2002 Location: Branson, MO | mikes2nd - 2017-01-13 11:50 PM I think the back end of the 62's are great(going finless) and they last even on the 880 Custom for 63. Not a fan of the those diagonal headlights... or the pignose Desoto. I agree on the 57 Desoto and it can pull off same body color wheel covers which is not an easy task. most look dumb. I have to admit I think the 58 Desoto is probably the best... Ford quickly ripped that one off with their 58. I wonder if they got a tip off on the Desoto design, its pretty close but typical ford ulgy awkward... I agree with Mike regarding his take on the '62 Chrysler and I'll take it one step farther - in my opinion the side character lines and rear fender line blend very nicely with the rear end and tail lights. I will admit I'm no design or style analyst, I either like, don't like, or am neutral as to what I see. I like the '62 Chrysler and would like it even better with a '60 nose. Plus I like the Astra Dome gage cluster as much or more than any other that has ever existed. As for the '55 through '61 DeSotos I rate the style in my opinion best to least as follows: '60, '57, '55, '58, '56, '59, and '61. Yeah I know I have a '59 that is next to last on my list but I also consider value with high priority. My '59 is not all that bad in looks, has received lots of positive comments and awards, provided many miles of driving pleasure, and no problems or costs outside of routine maintenance - just gas and go. Edited by Viper Guy 2017-01-14 5:58 PM | ||
hemidave |
| ||
Expert Posts: 4654 | Sonoramic60 - 2017-01-14 11:06 AM Dave -- Thanks for the info. Do you know if the '60 Phoenix had a build record with it? It truly is a desireable car in which I would love to "cruise the gut" and even probably engage in an occasional "speed demonstration." Joe Joe, I don't know if it had the build card, but like you, I like to "clean the cobwebs out" once in a while and not only admire my cars, but enjoy them for the purpose that they were built. | ||
Mike McCandless |
| ||
Expert Posts: 1886 | I was there and looked over both cars, hard. The G was a great car, looked awesome. Paint had a few imperfections, but not nothing crazy. Was a big price for a non air card in a common color, but was offset by a top level restoration. I think it went for a top of the line price, but you rarely seen one restored to that level come for sale. The H......well.....in my opinion, was a rough car. I think it went for a fair price. There was some BAD body work in that car. On the driver side, you could see 15 spot welds through the paint for a patch panel put in front of the rear wheel well. There was bubbling in area's that would turn to something more significant down the road. I tried to get the dome lights on, nada. Car would need to be redone to get to the top levels an H can reach, around 80-90k. The 61 Imperial had a closed hood restoration, such a shame. It was a nice car, but the motor stayed in during restoration. Under hood was a different white than outside. They had redone almost all the chrome and stainless, was a good car, but just short. Seller wanted 32,500. I was around when a buyer was 1500 apart and they couldn't close the deal. The 60 Phoenix was a nice car, but still had some flaws, not as bad as the H car, but there were restoration issues present. If you think cars don't sell at Mecum, you're wrong. As of Saturday at 11am, they only had 380 unsold cars. In total they run 3k. A LOT of cars sell after. I was unable to find the 61 NY convertible. I bought this red 66 Imperial convertible for 29,700 out the door. It's a nice car, high driver quality. I got it to go with the 65 I have: Edited by Mike McCandless 2017-01-15 7:19 PM | ||
Sonoramic60 |
| ||
Expert Posts: 1287 | Mike -- Thanks for checking. It does look like you got a very nice car. Looking back at the pics of the Phoenix on this thread, I did see some oil stains on the front of the engine. Since it has the canister power brake booster, I would assume it would have been a later production car as my early '60 Fury has the old bellows type. If so, being a later ram car, the Dodge should have had the fender well cutout panels. I don't suppose you could have been close enough to see if they were there. At any rate, it looks like you had a good time. Joe | ||
Mike McCandless |
| ||
Expert Posts: 1886 | I drove 10 hours down on Friday, in crazy traffic. Arrived at 10pm, parked and went to sleep. Was up at 7, went all day, took dad, nephews and girlfriend to dinner Saturday. Was on the road at 530am to get back, drove home in 9 hours. Will fly to Barrett Jackson on Thursday. Will go visit Bo hopefully, test drive a car at another place, then go see dad (he is driving from Orlando to Phoenix) and fly home Sunday. A lot going on! I only have interest in 1 car at BJ, we will see. | ||
Sonoramic60 |
| ||
Expert Posts: 1287 | Mike -- The C or the G? Joe | ||
Mike McCandless |
| ||
Expert Posts: 1886 | Possibly the C, but to be honest, my goal this year was to look for restored E-F-G convertibles. I have my work cut out for me. If the C goes for the right price, I'd be interested, but have a feeling given its run time, it will go for about 115-125k, which is more than I will pay. | ||
Greg P. |
| ||
Elite Veteran Posts: 769 Location: Oley, PA | Doctor DeSoto - 2017-01-13 11:59 PM I am not trying to impress MY preferences over yours. Rather, I am looking to learn something about a viewpoint that just isn't obvious to me. No pissing match desired. Just good "argument" for a different viewpoint. As an example, the swept-over curve at the fin tip of a 57-58 DeSoto/Chrysler strikes me as one of the cars' most elegant design points. Another, the way the color sweep of the 57 DeSoto matches the profile of 2HT roof makes it the best- ever two-toning design of the 50's. How would you cite the favorable attributes of the 62 Chrysler ? And ANYONE can jump in here. I am asking for reason-backed opinions from anyone. Doc, I'm a few days late on this answer, but I wanted to throw my hat in the ring. Certainly the design features that one person likes are about personal preference, i.e. if we all liked the same things, the world would be a pretty boring place. I personally like the 62 Chryslers, especially the 300s. I can't say that like them better than the 61s, but I think they have their place. To me they represent a styling transition from the 50s to the 60s. It was time for fins to run their course and move on. Don't get me wrong, I love fins, but at least part of what I love about them is that they represent a rather brief period in automotive history where style ruled. But I digress... The one feature of the 62 Chrysler line that I love are those taillights. As a youngster, I distinctly recall seeing them and pondering how the longest portion of the taillight lens faces to the sky and only the very end wraps down and faces aft in a conventional way. In my youthful mind, I imagined that the upper portion was there to send a skyward beacon to spaceships or possibly even alien visitors to our planet. Imagine how disappointed I was the first time I saw one at night and realized that only the rear-facing section actually lights up. If I ever own a 62, I think I will find a way to illuminate the top part, so I can complete the mission as intended. Or at least as I imagined it. (62 Chrysler Signalling Spacecraft.jpg) Attachments ---------------- 62 Chrysler Signalling Spacecraft.jpg (120KB - 136 downloads) | ||
Doctor DeSoto |
| ||
Location: Parts Unknown | Greg, That is a great story ! I guess I liked fins so much, when they got shaved, I just turned off to everything until muscle cars really got going about 1966. I have a similar tail light story .... 58 Plymouth. This pre-age 5 kid was fascinated those tail lights because they look like up-turned lollipops .... something VERY important to a kid that age ! | ||
Jump to page : 1 2 Now viewing page 2 [50 messages per page] |
Search this forum Printer friendly version E-mail a link to this thread |
(Delete all cookies set by this site) | |