'57-'62 Imperial

["jsadowski" <jsadowski@xxxxxxx>]

I have to agree that there is no accounting for peoples tastes. I happen to like the 60 far better then the 61. One critique of the 61 when it was introduced said something to the effect that the front & rear looked as though they were done by different stylists that never spoke to each other & then stuck them together.

 

I think the 60 styling is in the correct position that when you look at the brows of the fenders, they look very late 50's. However, look at the sides & you'll see the 61-63 theme present. Also, the interior is much the same as 61-63.

John

----- Original Message -----

From: Imperial59crown@xxxxxxx

To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Sent: Friday, January 23, 2004 11:54 PM

Subject: Re: IML: '57-'62 Imperial

I think the '61 Imperials style was done to compete with the wild for it's day 1959 Cadillac. Chrysler was just a little slow getting around to it, which is why I stated in a previous post that the '61 Imperial should have been introduced in 1959. If you want to take it a step further, I think the '60 Imperial should have been produced before the '57 through '59 style. It has always looked like an older version of this styling type, and the '57 through '59 look more refined. The '60 has always reminded me of the '57 Cadillac which had very similar fins, only more pronounced. This is the era of Imperial I loved the most, but the '60 with the smiley face and humpback fins never set well with me. Then came the '61 which was totally wild, but I like it. I always liked the '59 Caddy also, and along with the '61, they are the only two Caddy's I ever liked. Who can account for peoples tastes?

 

Bill '59 Crown