True confessions: I’ve been wanting a ’55 Chevy since…just about forever. I first fell for it on the streets of Innsbruck when a tourist or GI parked theirs in the Altstadt. And that passion grew exponentially after we moved to the US in 1960; it instantly became my favorite non-new car, even before I knew about its reputation and desirability. It was all-too obviously the best all-round American car, and it hadn’t yet gotten fat, low, and lazy.
Like a lot of older guys who lusted after a ’55 Chevy and acted on it, I passed. Why? I didn’t want just another typical ’55 Chevy look-alike. So I commissioned a unique one from CC’er Chris Cieslak, reflecting my vision of what Chevrolet sadly failed to build at the time: a 1955 Model 150 Business Coupe. If Chevy had built it, it would have been the most desirable body style with the go-fast crowd from day one, and become utterly iconic. This would be an all-too familiar sight.
Good thing they didn’t, ’cause now I have the only one in the world. And it means business.
This latest upwelling of desire started after my recent dive into utility sedans and business coupes, and was reminded that Chevrolet built the last one in 1953; what a colossal mistake they made by killing it two years early. Some 13,555 were sold, along with 6,993 Club Coupes, which had rear seats. Presumably that was not enough to warrant building more of them, even though the ’54s were essentially the same body. But if Chevrolet had any inkling of just how massively popular its ’55 was going to be, especially with the go-fast set, they might well have kept the body style for a few more years.
It’s not like I haven’t already shared my passion for the ’55; I had a full-on MM session here a couple of years ago. But I was still a bit uncertain about which body style it would be for that mental exercise if I were to buy one back in 1955 and keep it for years to come. But no longer. It’s my own body style now; the Niedermeyer Business Coupe.
I saw one of these brand new Opel Rekord P2 coupes in Innsbruck just before we left. Maybe that’s where some of the inspiration came from.
My Business Coupe is 100% stock; not a hot rod or retro-mod. I special ordered it with the 195 hp Corvette 265 V8 that featured the first appearance of the legendary Duntov cam. It was primarily intended for the Corvette in ’55, but Chevy was happy enough to oblige. Theses cams were also available over the parts counter for $28 back then. Cheap thrills.
And these are real horsepower, as certified by a Notary Public in Wayne County, MI. It’ll happily spin to 6,000 rpm.
Naturally it’s got the heavy-duty three-speed with overdrive that was teamed with the 4.11 rear axle ratio. That means wicked acceleration, but a mere 2160 rpm at 60 mph in OD. And at 100, it’s still only just purring along at 3600 rpm.
Of course I also ordered the heavy duty suspension, tires and brakes, and…no more. Just the way the ones that were tearing up the NASCAR circuits in 1955. Too bad these guys didn’t have business coupes. It knocks some hundred pounds off the weight of the sedan; my coupe’s curbside weight is a mere 2,945 lbs. It flies.
The Ford Deuce Coupe finally has a worthy successor. It was a long time coming, and I’m rather surprised no one’s built a ’55 Chevy Business Coupe until now.
Thanks, Chris, for realizing my vision so faithfully, and making my dream come true. It’s as good or better than I could have hoped for. I’ve finally got a ’55 Chevy, but the only one of its kind. That alone is worth its weight in pixels.
Much obliged, Paul. Thanks for the post!
Chris, what a great photoediting job — thanks for doing this!
Thanks, Eric!
I was inspired by your idea and include my own virtual Club Coupe. I am planning on building one in 1:25 scale. I used a Sport Coupe for the dimensions which was a true coupe that year but was a pillar-less hardtop. My first two cars were both 1956 Chevys and had a 2dr 210 sedan and a 2dr BelAir Sport Coupe. There was considerable differences in the tulip panel aka cat walk.
Bob
Nice!
I commend you for the adroit work with the ordering sheet. Not many could pull that off at under the age of 5. 🙂
Also, a minor legal nit – the notary did not certify the data in the sheet, only that Harry Barr was the one who signed it. It was Barr who stated that the data was true as represented.
You lawyers, always bursting my bubble. I was sure he sat there at the dyno watching the big gauge.
To me the early to mid 50’s cars “in the low priced field” were the perfect size, before they got “fat, low, and lazy.” You could easily seat six, the trunks were huge, and the hoods didn’t stretch out a mile in front of you.
’58 GM cars have a following, but I never liked them. Lower in stance, but peak chrome. Bigger engines available, but needed for the extra weight.
This may be of interest, posted somewhere on this thread:
https://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/threads/the-photoshop-thread-to-end-all-photoshop-threads.300531/
Call this the Anya Taylor-Joy of cars. Beautiful in a slightly out-of-kilter way.
When I saw the photo, I wondered why I had never seen one of these before. Alas, it doesn’t exist in steel. But since the world is going virtual, we can have Deuce Coupes and ’55 Business Coupes for all, and no one can nitpick about pollution or safety issues.
Whoa you had me fooled for a bit, thinking there was an obscure shoebox Chevy body style I somehow wasn’t familiar with…
The business coupe is no longer a thing, but the business coup still is.
Interesting idea and well done photo manipulation. You do realize that someone will see this and build one shortly.
The 1950-’51 Studebaker three window business coupes have a following as well, but the two door sedan is a virtual give-away in demand. Except one fellow was creative enough to shorten the rear roof behind the B-pillar to create a small parallelogram quarter-window coupe which completely changes the appeal of those cars for the better.
Paul, I share your admiration of the ’55. Such a simple, timeless design. Looks great as a business coupe (nice work, Chris! I am a graphic designer and use Photoshop on a daily basis, so I know quality work when I see it.)
You pour post reminded me of something I saw in a book of 50s car design I have. Chevy apparently was mulling a three-passenger “executive coupe.” Never came to fruition, but they did some styling studies and mock-ups.
Thank you!
I want to dislike the proportions of those coupes, but I really like the belt/roof lines.
Yeah, the decklid looks too long. The mock-ups are more ungainly than the drawings, too.
I remember now coming across those some years back. Maybe it left a subliminal impression?
Perhaps! Whatever the case, it’s not unreasonable to imagine such a clean design like the ’55 as a business coupe. Obviously, Chevy was thinking along those lines, but I’m glad they didn’t produce any of those awkardly-proportioned ideas.
Thumbs down on these; they look more like an El Camino than a coupe.
Good call. The roofline and back pillar of the middle one are rather attractive, but the “great plains” deck is way too long.
While business coupes originally gave the traveling salesperson a place to securely carry their samples and catalogs, they later appealed to some for their cozy two passenger cockpit. Could these be considered the basis for all the PLC love that manifested itself in the 1970’s?
Traveling salesmen, who always wore hats in this era, liked a tall cabin to accommodate their headgear. I imagine a ’55 Chevy would have been fine in this regard, but one wonders if a ’59 would be so accommodating. Little matter, hats were on the way out.
Paul & Chris,
At first I also thought this was a real vehicle. Kudos to you Chris for a great job.
But what made me start thinking this was not real, was the lack of the dip in the upper back quarter area. Chevy would never have left that out!
Tried, but just not enough room between B&C to make it look good 🙂
I thought it was real, too. It was early in the AM, with no comments. Figured Paul had made una fortuna on CC and had it custom-made…
Paul apparently checked the seldom chosen “every option” box for transmission type.
We’ve just read about the car’s overdrive performance, and we can see the ‘glide column too. For the lazy days when one doesn’t feel like shifting?
Great choice, Paul.
Naturally it’s got the heavy-duty three-speed with overdrive that was teamed with the 4.11 rear axle ratio. That means wicked acceleration, but a mere 2160 rpm at 60 mph in OD. And at 100, it’s still only just purring along at 3600 rpm.
Outstanding combo even for a stripper 4-door six.
So then ;
What series designation were the ’55 business coupes ? .
I’d not say they ‘ a place to securely carry their samples and catalogs’ as it was just a large gray cardboard covering from the floor up to the parcel shelf .
I too like Business Coupes, in the 1930’s the Chevy ones had slightly larger fuel tanks .
-Nate
“What series designation were the ’55 business coupes?”
When the coupe body style was dropped at the end of the 1953 model year, Chevy switched the business coupe concept (e.g., no back seat) to the two-door sedan body, and called it the Utility Sedan. I believe that it was only available in the lowest trim level, the 150, as had also been true of the business coupe since the end of World War II. The Utility Sedan continued to be available until 1961.
I think Chevy dropped the coupe body because over time the coupe and two-door sedan had become more and more alike, and it no longer really made sense to make both of them. They had once been very distinct from one another, but by the time of the 1949 styling generation they had become pretty similar in size and shape. The coupe’s roofline was still a little bit shorter, though, and the two bodies had different styling in the rear window area.
I think Chris’ photoshop is intended to represent a “true” business coupe, with a shorter roofline than a two-door sedan, as opposed to the “Utilty Sedan” that Chevrolet actually built in 1955. To my eyes, though, the roofline looks a little *too* short; how does this compare to the roofline on a real 1949-53 Chevtolet business coupe?
To my eyes, though, the roofline looks a little *too* short; how does this compare to the roofline on a real 1949-53 Chevrolet business coupe?
If you put a vertical line down both cars at the rear edge of the rear side window and at the point where the roof meets the trunk, they are in the same place on both cars. That wasn’t part of the brief; it just came out that way as it looked best. Any longer and it would have been too hard to distinguish from the 2-door sedan.
Thank you Sir .
-Nate
That is some photoshop job! Good going, Chris! Two issues: 1) Paul will go to sleep each night for months dreaming of this car. 2) If Paul is lucky, as 58L8134 suspects, someone will build one. I hope that they build two of them because Paul will buy the second one. Blueprints included, of course.
After working on this piece, I kinda want one myself!
I did a double take too! I thought, how is it I never spotted one of these before? At first I thought the back end was a bit too long but it quickly grew on me. The Tri-Fives seem to follow a very Ford-like trajectory, A beautiful initial design that just loses the thread with each passing year. It would be interesting to see a 3D rendering.
Nice job! Noticed that you removed the beltline dip of the original – very subtle, but really makes it much more purposeful and (dare I say) European. I’m glad you didn’t go too far in shortening the roof, too – enough to make a (subtle) difference, but not enough to unbalance the proportions.
Now, hearing the comment that if these had been made, it would have been the hot rodders’ ’55 of choice, let’s see what today’s version could be: I think it would look rad lowered a bit with the wheels from the 5 window Ford. I gave it a slight chop, too. Subtle, but tough.
I would like mine equipped with a Detroit Speed or Haidt’s suspension and a nice small block/6 speed combo. Then I’d drive the snot out of it…
Having probably offended Paul and most other Curbivores, I’ll get my coat….
I like it!
Thanks! I loved what you did with it and got inspired! Taking out the beltline dip was a great move…
Huey ~
You’re talking about a full custom here, I can’t see how anyone would dislike your ideas of how to finish it .
I’d do a different thing but then _I’d_ be driving it so who cares if you’d make it glorious Hot Rod or I’d make it a comfy touring and rally car ? .
-Nate
Great point, Nate! There are some cars, like the ’32 Ford and the ’55 Chevy that seem to strike a chord in people and be able to be adaptable to a broad spectrum of interpretations – from original or restored (which is what we’d do to Paul’s special order ’55) to Pro touring, to Gasser, etc.
In my opinion it has to do with the original vehicle being a great and appealing design – I think Paul’s idea here, so ably realized by Chris, would have become the iconic version of the Chevy, had it been made back in the day.
And your point that we all have different visions of these vehicles is very apt – that’s what makes the car hobby fun. It is “whatever floats your boat”. The appreciation of a broad spectrum of vehicles and the stories behind them is what makes this site in particular so interesting and so much fun. I appreciate enthusiasts who may have favorite marques, but are not limited by that.
FACT : Hot Rodding drastically shortens the life span of any vehicle .
So what ? there are always old beaters that will be scrapped if not saved one way or another .
I like Hot Rods because it often shows a different or unique way to get what one wants .
I modify most vehicles I get but very carefully as I want them to better suit my needs, not be crowd pleasers .
-Nate
I share that attitude, Nate – my Ghia has to be a daily driver, so I spent time initially getting it to drive as well as possible in stock condition and most mods are going towards durability and safety – new seat belts, better headlamps, larger oil capacity and electronic ignition, for example. I already put in a narrowed front beam and am changing to 5 stud so my Fuchs wheels fit because, well, old VeeDubs look great on them. I can also run better, more modern tires on these than on the stock 4 1/2Js, critical on these to prevent front end lock up. And lowering the nose a bit has not only improved the looks, but massively decreased sidewind sensitivity. I’m taking the plastic wood off the dash because that is flaking anyway and I like the painted look….That’s the great thing about a car that is not too rare or precious and one where there is great parts availability.
So, nothing radical – I want to be able to do some long trips in it – one of which will be to the Corvair museum!
@Huey ;
Cool beans ! .
As long as you drive the damned thing I approve .
I know so many who have fake Hot Rods that they only drive 4 miles once a month because they’re so awful to drive or ride in .
That’s not how it was in the 1960’s, I liked stock then too but as least the Hot Rodders made them fun to drive as well as interesting to look at .
-Nate
Oops ~
I forgot to mention my old buddy had a 1965 ‘Ghia coupe, I kept it sharply tuned for him, he drove it _everywhere_, 20,000 miles with a rod knock daily freeway driving it from San Fernando to Down Town L.A., eventually he let me build him a low compression 1600 twin port engine, he lowered it and made it 12 volts, replaced the taillights with 1959 Cadillac taillights and a few other mods, it rode like a buckboard but he loved it and piled on the miles .
-Nate
Offended Me? Hardly. That’s perfect. Those genuine racing mag wheels would have been the ultimate custom wheels back then, and very expensive. Usually seen on only on racing cars. I love their look, and yes, if I had been a well-heeled young lad in 1955, this would have been exactly what I would have spent my money on. Well done!
I’m touched to hear that, Paul! I was actually being a bit tongue in cheek, as I know you have such wide and varied automotive tastes.
Your idea here certainly got me thinking! What I love about CC is that it appreciates all things mechanical and has such informed and tolerant commentators. I’ve been reading your articles since they first aired in TTAC and have learned huge amounts through them and those of the writers you have encouraged and brought on board. CC is unique in its eclecticism and has become the “go to” site for me and I’m sure, many others.
I’ve got a similar idea for a work van that I’ve dreamed about since reading this article. Sure, the ’05 Astro I have now is the next best thing, but what if things had worked out better with my ’96 Aerostar?
Picture the appearance of a standard-length cargo van like the one below, but add the 3-seat bench from the XLT Wagon to allow up to 3 more passengers. Better yet, get the 3rd row from an Eddie Bauer model & have the fold-backward seat/bed conversion! Leave the standard 3.0L Vulcan V6 in place but upgrade the transmission to the 5r55e unit that came with 4.0 models (and Rangers & Explorers) beginning in ’97. OR, just swap over the entire powertrain setup from my 2011 Ranger (2.3L Duratec I4, same trans) & make 4.10 gearing standard–my dream van & my Ranger in its current form would likely weigh very similar, hence why I chose the standard-length body with just 2-row seating. With that aerodynamic front end, 30 mpg could be well within reach!
Now to why I chose the cargo van: ALL the Wagons came with liftgates! This isn’t a problem until you hitch up a cargo trailer with a center-mount A-Frame jack only to discover the jack comes RIGHT in the opening path of the liftgate (ask me how I know). Barn-style cargo doors don’t have this problem–and neither do the Astro’s Dutch Doors–hence why most full-size vans still use them.
And on the subject on towing, give it the full towing package (7-blade wiring, Class III hitch, brake controller, heavy-duty trans cooler) along with cargo area protection for maximum peace of mind. I’m now ready for some serious cargo hauling! 🙂
One reason why ’55 Chevy’s didn’t have more models is because they prolly already couldn’t make as many as people wanted to buy…
Up to ’54, Chevy’s still bore a lot of resemblance to 1940’s models… but Ford went more modern looking in ’49… and Chevy needed a quantum leap forward in styling… and by ’57 the less expensive, but Cadillac looking/riding/performing Chevy’s were selling like hot cakes… most people I knew bought one… when I look at the almost bejeweled ’57 Chevy convertible at 34:35 in this ad I see why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWdF3L_qxTk
I must’ve missed this post the first time around. Very interesting, and I love the Photoshop creativity. I have to say though, while I get the performance benefits that a little less weight in the roof might bring, to me the proportions of the proposed business coupe are just a bit off—the whole decklid area now looks way too long, in my opinion. I’ve always felt that way about the ’59 and ’60 GM products, as well: the shortened greenhouses of the 2-door hardtop models in those years just don’t look quite right to me, like they’re sitting too far forward on the body of the car (see photo), with way too much trunk out back. So, as much as I love the pillarless hardtop body style, for this reason I’d take a Biscayne or Bel Air from this era over an Impala any day of the week. To each his own, of course—just my $0.02. Also, Merry Christmas everybody! 🙂
Agree about the proportions of the roof. But a pretty neat idea anyway!
What a car that would be! Although I grew up in a MoPar family, One of Dad’s most anticipated rides was the brand new ’55 Chevy 210 he was given as a company car in his job as a packing machine mechanic for St. Regis Paper Company. Dad liked to stoplight drag on the occasion when he was a young father, and I have a memory of his racing someone in a ’54 Chevy while I rode shotgun as a 4-year-old. He was happily excited to learn he would be assigned a sedan with the new Chevy 265 V-8. At the same time, he was offered a promotion to a sales position in the company (which would require about 40K miles of annual driving). First action on the agenda was to take the family south from PA to Pensacola, FL for two weeks to learn the ropes. The whole family was packed into the Chevy for the ride. We took along the Argus C-4 35mm camera and came home with lots of slides, including these two of the Chevy.
Love any business coupe, and club coupes, too. Here’s my Mom, oldest and youngest brothers at a motel in the Carolinas in the summer of 1955, on our way to Florida in Dad’s much anticipated, first V-8– a Chevy 210 “company car” provided by his employer, St. Regis Paper Co.
Well, it won’t upload. It was two-tone blue with a crib on top.
It must be too large; reduce it to about 1200 pixels max. in width, and it should post.
Paul- thanks for reposting this, and happy holidays!
Would be the nearest modern equivalent, with 400hp V8, had Ford actually made one …
A configuration Ford actually makes. Slightly dressed up …
(Could also be a “business coupe” with a Diamondback aluminum rigid bed cover)
What a great reading stuff! Than you!
Mentioning that Opel P2 Coupe is worth having a look. Nice styling indeed, but an asthmatic poor engine producing 40hp or so. Any Chevy engine would habe been so welcome!
Joe
A few inches shorter rear deck, brings it more in line with the proportions of the 1954 Ford Club Coupe.
I like it. I have never been a real fan of the 55-57 Chevys, well, pretty much any Chevy, or even anything GM, but I like this exercise. My initial thought since I don’t follow them is that it was the real thing, just something that hadn’t hit my radar. Regardless, I like it!