That was one of the things that held the Imperial back. Chrysler never really put the Brand on it own. I can't talk on the 90's (I do like my IMP over a 5th ave) but from 75 on back you can't judge a book by it cover. the IMP's had many things that could not be had on a NYB. I have shown many of my NYB friends that my 75 LeBaron drives, rides and have a totally different feel than a NYB. NOW befor I get jumped I am in no way sayen that a NYB is not a fine car.
-------------- Original message from "anthony romano" <mamrom@xxxxxxx>: --------------
Why was the Imperial and New Yorker virtually the same in body and features? Cadillac made itself completely different than the top of the line for Buick, Pontiac, and Oldsmobile 98. Lincoln also like Cadillac stood alone against any other Ford product and their other divisions. So again, if the Imperial was to be recognized as a class unto itself it had to be different than the other Models. I believe it fail to do so. Example of today- The Imperial concept car of 2008 looks so similar to the 300 than why would you even look at the Imperial or get excited about it. Why pay more for and Imperial when there is no real difference except for the price tag! In my opinion the New Yorker/5th ave. sold more in the 90's because it looked the same as the Imperial ,but was cheaper! A loaded 5th gave you just as much as the Imperial- In fact , one can argue that the Interior on the 5th was more luxurious than the Imperial. Help me understand The Chry
sler mentality on this matter -Regards -Anthony
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network