----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 8:16
PM
Subject: Re: IML: Imperial- Under
achiever..SAY WHAT???
It is unfortunate that such an opinion has been based on a total stranger
mistaking an Imperial for a Lincoln. Was this person a car collector? Were
they interested in cars at all?
I can name several years of Imperials
that had a distinguished style
of their own. Maybe by calling them Chrylser Imperials, you aren't
discussing the same cars that I am, but The word
never doesn't apply here. It seems to me that a
1991 Imperial looks no more like a Lincoln than the man in the moon. I have
had uninformed passengers ask me if my
1980 Lincoln is an Imperial, not because it looks like one, but because they
know that I collect Imperials, and because they are uninformed.
There were some years where the styling of the Imperial closely (and
possibly deliberately) mimicked the style
of the Lincoln. That was mostly because the same man designed both cars. I
don't think an Imperial ever looked like a Cadillac, but that is my opinion,
to which I am also entitled, and that is all it is.
As far as "History" is concerned, it's already out there. We are talking
about old cars here. That means they were built a long time ago. Some
models have already been classified as Milestone Cars, which was a category
created to denote and recognize a particular group of automobiles that stood
out from the rest, not cars that looked like (or were) also-rans of some
other make. These cars could not be called Classics due to the fact that
Classic Cars denotes another group of cars that were designated as such for a
specific reason many years before.
The automotive hobby, just like everything else, is in a state of
continuous change. I am sorry that someone thought that your 1991 Imperial was
a Lincoln, but I wouldn't use the incident to make such a broad statement as
"Imperial never held on to a look of its own".
Paul W.
-----Original Message-----
From: mamrom@xxxxxxx
To:
mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 2:57 PM
Subject: IML: Imperial- Under achiever
Two things that come to mind when you talk about the Chrysler Imperial.
One is that it always finish in Show (3rd place) for you non- horse fans and
it never had a distinguish style of it's own. Let's face it- the Imperial
adopted a lot of style from Caddy and Lincoln over the years and
even today the concept car of 2007 looks like a baby Rolls. In my
Opinion, in which I'm entitled to- is that The Imperial never held onto to a
look of it's own that you knew it was an Imperial. Point in case, I went to a
strangers home with my '91 Imperial and He said; "Nice car- "What is it a
Lincoln"? So my question is out there for comments- Will the Chrysler
Imperial be noted in History as an underachiever because of what I've mentioned- Lack of distinguishation-my word
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network