Quality Of 57 Imperials

["John Harvey" <50scars@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

     In truth, Chrysler's 57s were not significantly more rust prone than
anyone elses' offerings of 57.  Nor were their quality problems
significantly worse than anyone elses' either.  I think it had a lot to do
with the fact that the 57s were not nearly as good as the few previous years
had been, and the  buyers really bitched about it.  Maybe the startling
advancement of the styling brought different buyers, and they expected more
from Chrysler than they got. With the products of Ford and GM, well, they
had been making style leading crap for years, so nobody really noticed.  Up
until 57, Chrysler had a reputation for excellence in engineering, although
the styling was kind of doudy.  57 changed all that.
     We lived in Detroit at that time.  RUST is still a SERIOUS problem in
Detroit.  GM cars suffered the "Magic Circle"--the rear quarters would rust
out giving a radiused wheel opening.  This was appearant by the end of the
second winter.  Ever since they started putting the headlights in the
fenders instead of pods on top of the fenders, the top of the front fenders
rusted out above the headlights. Chevy and Pontiac from 49-54 had a rib that
rusted from the top of the front fender about 6 inches in front of the door.
Everyone's front fender rusted at the lower rear corner by the rocker panel.
Rocker panels started rusting the first winter.  Ford had aluminum headlight
pots in 1949 and 1950--This took out the whole front end of the fender in
short order--aluminum and steel are an extremely corrosive atmosphere.  The
dog leg on 4 door cars always rusted faster than the rocker panel did.  The
area above the rear wheel opening was a very common area to rust.  If you
look at Hemmings, you will see companies offering "Patch Panels".  I don't
know if they are still making these, or if these are NOS, but in Detroit, by
the end of the second winter for the model, parts stores stocked patch
panels.  There were a whole lot of parts stores, too, giving rise to the
idea that maybe none of the cars were all that good back then.  GM had
terrible problems with frames rusting out on 63-66 Chevrolets and Pontiacs.
The State of Connecticut added inspection of the frame on these cars to the
inspection routine in 1969.
     My personal preference is the styling of 55-56, but the 57s certainly
are lovely wonderful beautiful cars.  In my opinion, Imperial kept the
desirable styling from 57, unlike the face lifts given Plymouth, Dodge,
DeSoto, and Chrysler for 59.  The handling of the torsion bar cars was just
unequaled by anyone else.
      It is my considered opinion that any 57-59 car you find today,
especially one that is complete and running, is one of the good cars.  It
was good enough that people saved it for more than 40 years.  The lemons are
long gone.  Depreciation was really significant back then.  That means that
replacement with a different car was cheaper than an expensive repair
relatively soon.  And pain-in-the-butt cars got traded before they lost any
more value rather than put up with because the owner was upside down in it.
You couldn't buy a car with almost nothing down, and a 60 month payment
book.  You had to put enough up front that you always had a little equity.
     This shows how much cars have improved over the past 40 years.  Now
they will give you a 60 month payment book on used cars.