|
This reminds me of our cruise-in last week. We had our '68 Crown
convertible parked w/top down. It looked good and it wasn't dark. One of our
longtime car club members came by and started talking about our car. He walked
down one side, around the back, and up the other side. He kept saying how much
he liked the style of the '70 model. When he got to the front of our car, he
stopped and said, "Wait a minute, that's not a Cadillac!!" He thought our car
was a '70 Cadillac!
The clincher here is, this man is our Cadillac member. He has a '59, two
Allante convertibles, and just sold a '64 and has had other Cadillacs in the
past. I thought it pretty to pull one over on him with a Walter P. Chrysler
product!
From: "Currell Pattie" <currellpattie@xxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: IML: comparing Cadillac to Imperial Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2003 22:47:32 -0400 Reply-To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Interesting subject. I like both marques (have a 53 Imperial sedan, 67 Cadillac Calais Coupe with 15k miles). I'm not disagreeing, but I think you have something of an apples and oranges deal going here, with Imperial getting a little benefit. The '67-'68 Imperial (especially the '67) was a high water mark in Chrysler Corp styling for the period, at least for me, where the '69-'70 styling cycle for Cadillac was a retrograde effort for Cad compared to the '67-'68, which was in turn not as nice as the '65-'66. if |
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network