I just thought I would put my 2 cents in.
although I'm not up on my mopar's as others. but I grew up believing that cars like the imperial and probly many others including the likes of GM, and Ford were being built as above average standards.
and not like the cheepo's that were also built by these manufactures.
IM going to compare apples to oranges here for my example as to show my point. any fullsized car weather it be a caddy or imperial with frame or unibody. are equally just as good as anouther, but when compared to other cars like a camaro/firebird, or a mustang, that although are built well, they are just not build by the same standards.
my point is true on some types of autos frame vs uni-body. are just as tough. but If I were in a car wreck I would feel much safer in my imperial ( god forbid that never happens) than in a pontiac firebird.
and yes I do own a 1986 pontiac firebird trans am. and I drive it once in a while , but as soon as my 59 imperial gets restored, that pontiac will probly be up for sale, my reason for selling it is important to the point im trying to make.
I have ownerd the car for 3 yrs, and have restored the car to a new condition, but my problem with the car is that the unibody is to rigid. by this I mean the when driving this car it rides like a cap you can feel every bump in the road, and when ever I saw a pothole in the road my butt would draw up to my sholders.
when I bought the car the unibody ( mainly the roof) had ripples and a few small cracks. this was from the body over flexing, more than the factory had desighned it to. after buying the car and restoring it . I built a complete frame for it,( I had help from a engineer from DANA corporation that builds frames for ford and GM). after the frame was custom built to strengthen the unibody. the car rides much beter and no more twisting and flexing of the roof and more critical parts of the car.
vehicles that were built as a unibody ( in my opinion) are not as durable as a body on frame , ( maybe in a car wreck but maybe not . as this has not been proven to me by no one) , when unibody cars started to be produced most or if not all roads were being paved, and car manufactures thought the a unibody would not wear out as quickly, but most roads even paved roads, proved to be a little to ruff on the unibody cars in my experience , these unibody cars would develop premature wear on suspension mounting points and as visible on the exterior of the body.
I own 9 vehicles 5 of these are pick up trucks with a frame. with no body cracks or signs of twisting.
the other 4 vehicles are as follow
1. 1986 pontiac firebird, was a unibody that had showed cracks and twisting from day to day driving, ( no wrecks). with 138k miles on it
2. 1978 chevy impala, not much of a frame at all on this car, but it does have signs of twisting.76,k miles on it
3. 1959 imperial, full frame no signs of cracks or twisting of the body, 73,k miles on it
4. 1982 chrysler new yorker fith ave, did have a serious problem with front wheel alignment, that had to be repaired at a frame shop that cost $350. 167,k miles on it (is now wrecked)
trucks
5. 1980 ford f150, new paint and 460 engine. no rust or any body damage, no signs of cracking or twisting . 188,k miles
6. 1969 chevy c/10 complete frame off restoration. had no signs of wear on frame or body . 327,k miles
7. 1985 ford f350 all orig, rust free dent free and this is my work truck that I drive every day. no cracks or twisting, and I pull a goose neck trailer with this truck, 234,k miles
8. 1972 dodge. all orig. has 225 slant 6 , no signs of twisting or wear. 176,k miles
9. 1997 plymouth voyager ( wifes mini van) has signes of twisting no cracks just yet, but maybe I havn't found one yet. 73,k miles
my point is with my vehicles that I own to this day, only the ones that have a frame on them , don't crack or show twisting of the body due to everyday driving. unibody cars are ok by me. but they just dont hold up to daily driving as well as a car or truck with a frame . a frame car bend and twist a little and bounce right back while driving daily, the body mounts keep the body from being damaged which the body on a frame tends to hold it's true shap and form much longer, I hope you all get what im trying to say here, It doesnt matter if a 66 or a 67 imperial is better, we should be lucky that the imperial's didnt suffer the fate as so many other autos have, in my opinion newer cars of today are through away cars, you buy one drive it for about 5 yrs and through it away and get a newer one. thats how the car manufacturers designed these new cars. ITs not a safty issue anymore ITs about the all mighty dollar.
my brother inlaw has a 2004 ford escort , and last november he hit a deer in the car at 4 am while going to work. the deer didn't do much damage , the airbaggs had done much more damage to both the car and the driver. the airbaggs deployed and destroyed the entire dash on both sides of the car the windshield was blown out of the car from the inside,, and the factory and everyone else said that they were the best safty feature one could get on a car,, I SAY BULL SPIT!!. safty is not on the automanufactures minds anymore than what we all eat for breakfast this morning.what with all the recalls on seat belts and brakes,
back in the good old days one didn't have problems with such,
this is my opinion and I dont want to cause any fuss with other members so if what I say may have offended anyone than I sorry. just wanted to speak up.on the fact that what some people may belive to be safer might not be safe at all. unibody's are not safer in my book.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network