Re: IML: New Yorker & Imperial virtually the same car??

["Bill Watson" <wwatson5@xxxxxxxxx>]

The 1957 to 1966 Imperial shared virtually nothing with the Chrysler New
Yorker, outside the powertrain and brakes.   Unlike the Cadillacs of that
era. the Imperial body was unique to the Imperial, while Cadillac shared its
body with the Super/Roadmaster/Electra 225 (depending on year) and the Olds
98 from 1961 (the 1952-60 Olds 98 used the 88 body with a longer wheelbase
and trunk).   Even the Cadillac Fleetwood 75 was based on Fisher Body's
C-body starting in 1950.

I believe Chrysler intended to make the Imperial a true comptetitor in the
luxury market with the Imperial-only body in 1957 and an Imperial-only
assembly plant for 1959.  But the Imperial just did not have the sales
numbers to make it all happen.   Imperial always came in third, with 1957
Imperial model year production hitting the peak at 37,557 units.   The 1957
Lincoln, with a finny version of the 1956 model, produced 41,123.  And that
was the closest Imperial ever came to beating Lincoln.   Cadillac production
for the 1957 model year hit 146,841.  Sadly, Chrysler never separated the
Imperial from Chrysler.  It was always marketed by Chrysler or
Chrysler-Plymouth, never having its own sales/marketing staff, never mind
its own division and general manager.  The "Imperial Divison" of the 1960's
existed on paper only  It never existed in real life.

The 1958-60 Lincoln used its own body, but Ford lost money on them.  The
new, smaller 1961 Lincoln Continental was a do-or-die situation.  Either
Lincoln made money, or it was gone.  Thus the Lincoln used the same body for
nine years with a "reskining" in 1966.   For 1970, the Lincoln was based on
the large Ford-Mercury body and has shared bodies ever since.

The 1967 Imperial went to the unibody C-body, sharing its instrument panel
and roof lines with the Chrysler New Yorker.  Every other piece of exterior
sheetmetal and trim was unique to the Imperial.  But the Imperial was still
not making the financial returns on that amount of investment to make it a
viable proposition.  Thus the fuselage Imperials shared the New Yorker body
with a different front clip and rear end treatment.   The 1974 Imperial was
so late in getting approved Chrysler did not have time to engineer and tool
the usual longer front stub frame.

The 1980-83 Imperials, although based on the Cordoba/Mirada, had completely
different body sheetmetal, although sharing the front fenders and outer door
skins with the C/M models.  The instrument panel frame was shared, but that
electronic marvel in front of the driver was Imperial-only.   As was the EFI
on the 318 V8 engine.

The 1990-93 Imperials were Fifth Avenues with different grilles, taillamps
and interior amentiies.  The biggest diffrence between the Imperial and the
rest was underneath the car - the brakes amd suspension.  And if you compare
the styling of the cars in that era, it was getting hard to tell the
difference between makes for all North American manufacturers.

So, basically, the Imperial existed to make a presence in the luxury field.
A car for an owner of a Chrysler New Yorker to move up from.  Chrysler made
the Imperial as unique as financially possible.  Chrysler gave the Imperial
more luxurious and better quality interiors, more equipment, superior brakes
and suspension.  It spent the money where it truly counted to make the
Imperial a superior automobile.   A 1967 Imperial front door looks different
from the New Yorker version, as does a DeVille from an Electra 225.  But
that's it - looks, nothing more.  GM could give the Cadillac its own
instrument panels, exterior sheetmetal, etc. as the sales were enough to pay
for it all.  Chrysler just did not have that (pardon the expression) luxury.

Bill
Vancouver, BC


----- Original Message ----- 
From: anthony romano
To: mailing-list
Sent: Sunday, July 23, 2006 5:04 PM
Subject: IML: New Yorker & Imperial virtually the same car??


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 Chrysler mentality on
this matter -Regards -Anthony



-----------------  http://www.imperialclub.com  -----------------
This message was sent to you by the Imperial Mailing List. Please 
reply to mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and your response will be 
shared with everyone. Private messages (and attachments) for the
Administrators should be sent to webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To UN-SUBSCRIBE, go to http://imperialclub.com/unsubscribe.htm