Please let me say something out of my European view point also knowing the
USA very well as resident.
Everything in the car business is MARKETING. I call it the mechanism of THE
HAVE TO HAVE.
Here we had MERCEDES, BMW, ROLLS ROYCE, BENTLEY, JAGUAR, LANCIA, OPEL and
now VW competing in the luxury car segment.
MERCEDES WAS ALWAYS WINNING, that is marketing. So many tries to compete -
no chance.
MERCEDES is THE car to have.
Same in the sports car segment - Lamborghini was always far better in the
technical sense as FERRARI. ALSO PORSCHE.
But - FERRARI IS THE CAR TO HAVE.
I'm a car nut since born. AMERICA? A CADILLAC is the car to have. IMPERIAL?
NEVER HEARD OF TILL I BOUGHT ONE IN 89.
Packard and Cord I learned later.
This is the result of marketing. If you do a good marketing - You may sell
everything as the HAVE TO HAVE.
No doubt - my 60 imp is superior to a 60 Cadillac and superior to nearly any
other car of those times on European roads, but who knows that? IMPERIAL?
IMPALA?! OR WHAT? I think even letter cars are more "common" than IMPERIALS.
CHRYSLER DISCONTINUED this label too often and too long. That is marketing.
And how easy to restore a 60 cadillac and how difficult to restore a 60
imperial....
Also this is marketing.
dietmar frensemeyer
europe
1960 crown fds
-----Original Message-----
From: mailing-list-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:mailing-list-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Bill Watson
Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 11:25 AM
To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: IML: Collectable Automobile/Imp. Mystique
Great job, Jim!
I do agree with you that an Imperial 300 would have been a better move,
putting the car against the Eldorado of the time. And considering that the
1955 Chrysler 300 hardtop sold for $4,110 while the Eldorado convertible
sold for $4,809, the cars were actually closer to being competitors than you
would think. In 1956 the Chrysler 300B hardtop was $4,145 while the
Eldorado Seville hardtop was $4,665. Dump the Chrysler's cathedral lamps
and put on the Imperial's "sparrow strainers" and you got an Imperial!
By the way, the Imperial was rated as America's best handling non-sports car
by one auto writer, the late, great "Uncle" Tom McCahill. He purchased a
new Imperial every year from 1955 until at least 1963. Every year he
praised the car to the heavens, although by 1963 he was complaining that the
Imperial did not handle as well as it did and seemed to be becoming more
like its competitors. He also praised the engineering, quality and comfort
of the Imperial. At first he derided the taillamps on the 1955 models
("sparrow strainers" as he affectionately called them), but by 1963 he was
lamenting their demise.
A friend owned a 1968 Cadillac Fleetwood 60 Special and a 1973 Imperial
LeBaron. I had a chance to drive both on a number of occassions, this
shortly after both cars had been given new shocks and brakes. The Cadillac
seemed more opulent, but the Imperial had more subdued class (perhaps a
problem?). And you could drive the Imperial! Navigating the Cadillac
down a highway was a chore. The car wallowed and ploughed its way around
corners and was nowhere near as much fun as the Imperial. Another friend
said the Imperial even looked more dignified and graceful on the road.
The first Chrysler series to use the Imperial name was in 1926. From 1926
to 1930 the Chrysler Imperial had its own unique grille design (with fluted
hood), its own engine and its own emblem in some years. The first Plymouth
was introduced as a Chrysler Plymouth, but they quickly dropped the
Chrysler. They should have done the same with the Imperial.
The second chance to break the Imperial from the Chrysler was actually 1951.
In that year the Imperial was as different from the New Yorker on the
outside as the Windsor was from the DeSoto. Since 1940 the only Imperial
available was the big Crown Imperial. Yes, there were fancy New Yorkers
sedans sold as Imperial in 1941 and 1950, but they had made no mark on the
public's mind.
1951 would have been the perfect time (since the 1920's) to separate the
Imperial from the Chrysler. The Imperial had its own grille, front fenders,
rear fenders, taillamps, bumpers and even hood ornament. Let the Chrysler
use the 331.1-cid hemi with a 3-13/16" bore, but give the Imperial another
1/16" chew to 3-7/8", which would give the Imperial a 341.2-cid hemi
engine. Separates it from the Chrysler and trumps the Cadillac, all in one
swoop.
Take the engineering, styling and marketing of the Imperial away from the
Chrysler Sales Divsion, as it was then known. If the Imperial Division must
share its personnel with another division, slide it into DeSoto. Plus, have
the Imperial sold by selected Dodge, DeSoto and Chrysler dealers. Shake off
the Chrysler-only image as quickly as possible,
The Imperial shared its body with the Chrysler (plus Fury, Polara and
Monaco) from 1967. But that was nothing new in the luxury car market.
Cadillac had been sharing its body with the big Buicks since the 1930's and
the Lincoln began the move in 1968 with the Continental Mark III and the
1970 Lincoln Continental. And by 1959, the Cadillac C-body was shared with
the Buick Electra and Olds 98, and was basically a Chevrolet with longer
rear doors, longer trunk and longer hood.
And there lies the Imperial's biggest handicap - the inability to get away
from being a CHRYSLER Imperial. Cadillac always sold well because no one
ever confused it with a Buick or Oldsmobile, even though they all shared
bodies. As Jim says, when someone spends a lot of money on a car, the owner
wants people to know it and identify with it. Both Cadillac and Lincoln
had their turns learning this - the Cimarron and Versailles.
Lincoln really took off when it dumped the big Mercury look. The 1961-1969
Lincolns may have been the smallest of the three in the luxury field, but
they helped set a Lincoln identity that separated it from Mercury and helped
Lincoln develop into a true competitor of the Cadillac.
But Chrysler could never get the Chrysler out of the Imperial.
Bill
Vancouver, BC
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network