Re: IML: Of 57s quality/engineering and what might have been

[DONALDDICKINSOND@xxxxxx]

In a message dated 4/5/2005 1:36:17 AM Eastern Standard Time, wwatson5@xxxxxxxxx writes: 
> Should also point out the problem with the 1957 models was not the assembly,
> but the engineering and tooling.  The 1957 bodies were not as stiff as the
> previous bodies - remember the 1957-58 Imperial 4-door hardtops needed the
> convertible frame.   The 1959 bodies were a vast improvement over the 1957
> models, but it would be 1960 and the unibody that would start Chrysler down
> a new road for body quality.
>
> Bill
> Vancouver, BC



I agree with Bill on this one, Engineering which was supposed to be Chryslers strong suite, did not "engineer" a good line of cars for the 1957 model year.  Of course marketing pressures for the "1960 new" product probably contributed to the many quality design related issues.

After reading the very good article in "Collectible Automobile" on the 1960 - 1963 Imperial I wonder what might have resulted if Chrysler aggressively went after the owners of 1957/58 Imperials.  Even if this meant offering them money losing deals on the 1960 model.  I'm convinced that they lost forever the majority of the 37,000 owners of 57 Imperials and as a result killed the brand.           



Don Dickinson
Prospect, KY 

1955 Imperial Newport, Canyon Tan and Desert Sand
1967 Imperial Custom Convertible, Ivory and Burgundy