Here’s a ’59 Olds I saw last May, at the Sycamore Mall cruise-in Iowa City. Though it sported some reverse-chrome wheels and lakes pipes, this basic two-door sedan still had a very no-nonsense vibe, despite its wild 1959 GM styling.
The Dynamic 88 was the easiest way to get an Olds of your very own that year; prices started at $2,837, and production totaled 16,123 units. For comparison’s sake, a Ninety-Eight Holiday hardtop coupe had a base price of $4,086, and it’s likely that many went out the door with plenty of added options. At the same time, a bechromed ’59 Impala hardtop coupe could be had for a hundred bucks less than the plainer Dynamic. Decisions, decisions…
I was very happy to see this one at the show; it is a regular attendee. It’s nice to see that at least one two-door sedan has survived to the present day. They weren’t all full-boat Super 88 and Ninety-Eight two-door hardtops and convertibles, you know!
CC effect going at full blast again Tom this is a rare car here and I shot one for the cohort on Friday in a Hotrod garage in a nearby town I also shot an immense collection of Rootes cars but you guys wont want to see that
Bryce, do you have any photos of any Sunbeam Alpine/Rapier fastback coupes? If so, I would absolutely love to see them on the CC Flickr page.
Have you seen the Sunbeam Alpine GT CC? https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-european/curbside-classic-1968-sunbeam-alpine-gt-the-british-barracuda/
Yes, yes I have. But I want more photos of them, knowing that our friend Bryce might have seen a Sunbeam Rapier/Alpine H120 hi-po model and took photos of it.
Not yet but I do know of one in our club same guy has a H120 motor in a 59 Humber 80. Other snag Ive got hundreds of shots Ive taken lately and Ive hit my bandwidth limit on Flicka. Im reconfiguring my computer and will try yet again to send stuff direct to Paul.
I’d like to see a Humber Hawk please.
Hawkes are very rare there are none in the Humber Hillman club I belong to though there is a 55 on the cohort its for sale if yer keen
I’m late commenting, but I’d love to see all the Rootes cars Bryce 🙂
My Favorite Big Oldsmobiles. No matter what our fearless leader says, I love the “Corvair on Steroids” look.
You must have anticipated my comment while I was writing it 🙂
Except for the front end, I have a hard time seeing very much Corvair in it, especially from the rear!
Yeah, me too. There was real art in making this pile of iron look so light and fresh.
I have very mixed feelings about these. A full-blown multi-tone four door Holiday hardtop can be pretty impressive from a psychedelic perspective, but fundamentally, the ’59 Olds styling was rather pathetic.
It seems that the Olds studio was sleeping off a hangover when these cars were “designed”. It’s by far the least original and most derivative of all the GM ’59s. It’s as if they took a Chevy body and quickly slapped on a new front end and some goofy rear rocket-fins. “Here you go! We can do a ’59 too” It lacks any cohesiveness or originality.
But it sure makes for a fun period piece now.
I agree that the 59 Olds was far and away the least attractive 59 GM. One thing to keep in mind though was that 59 marked the end of GM’s A,B, C body line up. Caught with their pants down by the Forward Look cars
GM scrapped the existing plans and went on a frenzy to come up with a rebuttal. That led to GM using a sole body shell and going so far as to require all the cars to share the same front doors on the 4dr and the design that won was the one from Buick so they could get it to market quickly and cheaply.
Chevy did a very good job of making it their own but Olds and Pontiac didn’t fare so well.
I beg to differ on the Pontiac – the market loved it, it pointed the way to the Bill Mitchell slabsides of the rest of the day and established the split-grille design cue that (after a momentary 1960 absence) would be with the division to the end.
The Olds studio came up with a lot of really outré ideas for ’59, most of which were not used either because they were TOO far out or didn’t fit with the need to share the common body shell.
I think the weakest part of the ’59 styling is the front end — the headlight treatment look unfinished. The studio did a better job with the 1960 models on the same shell, I think.
Ideas like this one from Olds prototypes at MrJynx. From the cowl back it’s nearly identical to the production ’59.
More than one Detroit styling studio explored the possibilities of the new quad headlights in depth. In hindsight this looks insane, but it wasn’t obvious in ’56 what worked and what didn’t. While the production ’59 Olds got about as far-out as headlight placement ever got, it’s conservative compared with their more outré ideas.
Here it is in steel and glass. They weren’t kidding around, this prototype took real money and time to build. Just imagine if it had been chosen to be the ’59 Olds.
Can’t resist. Click to enlarge, look long and wonder. Is there some alternate universe where these roamed the earth?
That thing…is like a being from outer space.
Most cars have a “face.” Some are severe; some smiling; some strange…the FoMoCo hidden-headlight models, especially the 1968s with their obvious grilles but no headlights…looked sinister.
But that thing…looks like a mutated giant INSECT!
Exactly. There were a number of studies of this level of bizarreness.
I think there was a Buick one that had stacked headlights in the center grille too.
It looks like a locomotive, maybe someone from GM’s EMD divsion had been temporarily assigned to Oldsmobile.
One thing for sure, you would have been able spot an Olds at night no problem.
Given the emphasis on longer, lower, wider at the time, that straight-on shot of the front end (third photo) makes me wonder why somebody couldn’t have thought of hiding at least the inboard headlights. Leave just the small low-beam headlights exposed and clean up that mess in the middle and the front end would look a full city block wide.
It was only eight years earlier that the LeSabre show car made waves- good waves. Possibly the Tucker had some influence as well.
I would say the Chevrolet was the least cohesive of the 5. The front end of the Chevy went from as crazy as some of those above Olds proposals (as the the Buick). But Chevrolet stuck with that batshit crazy (literally) rear end once settling on a rather tame-ish front end.
I think the Olds has the most continuity with the past too, with the ovoid tail lamp not too far removed from the jet-tube tail-lamps from previous seasons. Compared to the Pontiac, it’s not needlessly glitzy.
I would say the Buick is most pure to form (and was the focus of the redesign) followed by the Cadillac, Olds, Pontiac and Chevy at the most ridiculous. There’s a many a reason Ford was able to scoop #1 for ’59, and let’s not discount looks. Subjectively I rank the Olds better looking than the Cadillac, but to me the 1959 Buicks were the best looking ’59 GM cars.
I have bad associations with these.
Not bad as in, someone driving one snatched me off the street…no, bad as in, when I was a little kid just noticing different cars for the first time…all of these were rotted and rusted and dirty. A neighbor had a new Olds convertible (new being 1966) so I knew what an Olds SHOULD look like. And then, rolling to the city’s lawn-leaf drop site…comes these old Olds, tons of patina, the chrome art-deco Hollywood grille lettering streaked from dirt…they must have been MADE old! What kind of backward, benighted people would actually build such a car? Oh, how much they learned in seven years!
Of course, in those days, a 1959 was just an old car. The car shows of the time had Franklins and Packards and Cadillacs and Airstreams – and the occasional old Model A. Nobody messed with this sort of Harley-Earl nightmare.
That was a remarkable era, no question. I’m truly glad a few survived; but to me, that car just screams POORHOUSE!!
The cars of that era rotted out like tin cans. My Dad had a 59 Biscayne 2 dr bought new. In 1964, he traded it on a 64 Biscayne. The 59 was loaded with rot, especially around the headlights. A local doctor ended up buying it as a second car. The dealer repaired the rust, and decked it out with carpet, radio, WWW’s, and full wheel covers. It was really sharp for a cheap car. I’ll bet the Doc spent a bundle on the car. He must have liked the 59 look.
My Dad had the 64 until 1972. It was nothing but rot, holes all over, the trunk had massive holes in it, the back fenders literally ripped horizontally. From the middle chrome strip up, the car looked like new.
Cars back then were made to last 4-5 years max, and to look dated in a couple.
The 59 GM cars were real lookers,the Oldsmobiles were overlooked being in the middle of their cars.Save some bucks and buy a Pontiac or spend a bit more and buy a Buick?I like this car in fact I’d sooner have it than a 59 Cadillac!
That front end is truly bizarre in the way the 59 Chevy rear end is bizarre. What throws it off is that “light between the headlights.” WTF is that? Then the wheels are tucked up under it like a fat woman on roller-skates. BTW I’m saying this as a dyed in the wool Oldsmobile man.
Apparently 1959 wasn’t a great year for ‘Olds build quality: I recall a Collectible Automobile article stating that one disgruntled owner rearranged the grille letters on his car to read “SLOB MODEL”.
Ha! Best scrambled logo yet.
In that wild GM styling extravaganza known as 1959, they needed something for their sober-minded engineer customers to buy. Hence the toned-down Olds.
That it didn’t sell very well is perhaps because the engineers were able to scope out the rotten build quality
Picky mode on, Tom …. I believe those would be known as “lake” pipes, not “lakes”. Even though they are named for the dry lakes in Southern California where the early hot rodders raced, I have only seen the term used in the singular.
Hmm…I’ve always heard them referred to as lakes pipes. Maybe it’s a Midwestern thing.
I grew up on the West Coast and it was always lakes pipes, even in old hot rod magazines. Lowriders loved them in the 70’s. If it’s supposed to be lake pipes so be it, but I think of flood control projects without the ‘s’.
They’re most typically called “lake pipes”, but I’m sure they’ve been called “lakes” plenty of times too.
What’s really interesting to me is that this is from a completely other world than the ‘Stang next to it, and as such, looks weirdly “modern” and thus, dated. The Ford looks completely classic yet totally contemporary, still, even after almost 50 years. Planned obsolescence hard at work.
Part of that might be, that you grew up with the Mustang around…so you think of it as “modern.” Whereas the Olds, less so; more rare and certainly less crisp and taut.
I know that’s it for me. A 49-year-old Mustang looks, to me, contemporary. As does a 45-year-old full-size Ford. But a 60-year-old Chevrolet looks old and obsolete, to my eye.
Back in 1959, when I was in junior high school, Carl Lord, an incredibly energetic and dedicated teacher, organized a class trip to the assembly plant in Lansing. Among other things Captain Lord (he had been a Captain in the army) also organized a trip to a Tiger game. Anyway, the Oldsmobile plant was the most memorable. Lastly, I disagree with the styling assessments above; the Oldsmobile and more so, the Pontiac, were the only coherent looking GM cars in ’59.
This is another car that brings back memories. We had a neighbor-Mom who drove one of these, a white 4 door sedan with blue interior. She was my Cub Scout den mother for a year, probably around 1968 or so. This Olds was ancient for our neighborhood, and very out of place. Within a year or so the family bought a used 67 Delmont 88 in an odd color combo – black car with turquoise painted top and turquoise interior.
I got to sit in the middle of the front seat once on a field trip. I remember the odd Power Brake pedal – if memory serves, it was a suspended pedal with a fat, black rubber bellows under the pedal that went down to the floor. Does anyone remember this? I also recall a cool speedo that changed colors.
I remember always liking the looks of the 59 Olds, but as I look at this one freshly, I am not so sure just what I liked about it. I do think that the big letters in the grille and the “88” used as a hood ornament are pretty cool. Otherwise, I have to agree that the other 59 GM cars were better looking. Actually, the back of the Olds is not so bad. I much prefer the 60 model. Cool find, can’t say when I saw one of these last.
I wonder what would be its retail value as estimated at Antiques Road Show?
This just sold this afternoon.
Spotted at Auburn
Just Now, i was thrilled to see a 75…ninety eight in sky blue 2 door white roof…no rust.
did not impress my other half. i let it be known how rare those are now.
now to read more about this no nonsense 59.
funny how that goes. thanks. i always thought this was ignored in all the 59 styling hoopla at GM
Advert art for the ’59 Olds:
http://www.plan59.com/cars/cars155.htm (dashboard)
http://www.plan59.com/cars/cars528.htm (convertible)
http://www.plan59.com/cars/cars529.htm
http://www.plan59.com/cars/cars530.htm
That site has many other examples for other years & makes.
And, one of my favorites, the vacation home of the future:
http://www.plan59.com/av/av404.htm
I’ve always wanted to take these advertising illustrations (and particularly, those by Van and Fitz) and overlay the images with an actual photograph of the car, just to see how much artistic license the illustrators took with the proportions.
But as others have noted, the solid black of the featured car does nothing to accentuate the lines, and I’m usually one to favor black on modern cars, which lack this one’s surface detailing.
As you all know, I am a hard-core Olds man, but my favorite of the GM 59’s are the Pontiacs. However, this is a great find, and I can certainly appreciate it.
Good find Tom!
Laurence taught me once that the 59s introduced the “barbell” headlamp arrangement and that went on to become an Olds trademark. It was not particularly good looking and I wonder what they were thinking.
Made the front end look too wide and too much like a Mercury.
The feature car would look a lot more prestigious in any color than black. Two tone, as in the ad, really brings out the lines in a otherwise plain car. WWW’s, even with the cheap dogdish caps, enhances the look further. I wish I had pictures of my Dad’s 59 Biscayne. It was two tone silver blue, hoods and sides, and dark blue, roof and trunk. The dressing up the new owner had done really made the car spectacular.
I feel the monochrome cars of today look much like the black feature car. Ho hum, not much excitement. Yesterday, I saw a black DTS, a couple years old. It seemed very plain in relation to other available colors. Even the common silver dresses up the car.
That’s why Cadillac puts all the junk on the cars, gold packages, carriage roofs, etc.
Ditto!
1959 Chevrolet meets 2009 Chevy Malibu. Presumably same fate as a 1959 olds in similar fashion.
JP, to answer your question about the odd brake pedal, yes, I recall that my parents’ 1955 Olds 88 had the same rubber bellows doodad extending to the floor. Must have been an Oldsmobile thing. My brother and I would play with the brake pedal, it made a kind of soft whooshing noise when the pedal was depressed, at least until the vacuum reservoir was depleted. I always liked the jet tube taillight design of the ’59, the last you would see of this styling cue, but that barbell headlight thing always suggested to me that the stylists were trying to fill up the extra-wide grille space, only making it look wider in the process. The linear dashboard pictured in the Olds advertising art from Neil’s post was pretty cool, though.
I have owned my 1959 Olds Dynamic 88 4D SD since 1989. Placed the car in the garage and started once a year. Just started it again the other day, brought it to get the brakes fixed and carb redone. Car runs great. Very light on its wheels considering it weighs over 2 tons. I agree what others feel regarding how other 1959 vehicles are more desirable, hence Chevy. But no matter where I drive my car it always put smiles on peoples faces. You dont see to many around, but I think thats ok….it is all part of America’s Vehicle Heritage…….