----- 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