(first posted 2/10/2013) Not only does the 1973 Imperial hold the record for the longest production (non-extended) sedan and coupe, but another Imperial also holds another record as well.
Here are the numbers, measured at its ample hips, I assume: 82.875 inches. This was in the rear, where its axle and rear fenders were pushed outwards so as to not impinge on the width of the rear seat. The 1954 had a new wider rear bumper that pushed its already great width to that record measurement. These were built in very limited quantities.
And it had a 235 (gross) hp 331 cubic inch hemi as well as unusual Ausco-Lambert four wheel disc brakes (full story on them here). I’d take it over the Fleetwood 75 in a heartbeat, although servicing those brakes might be a bit of a challenge.
I’m astonished, I’d have been certain the widest car ever came later, like that Caddy. Not bad looking, considering.
Here’s an Imperial Club page with lots more pictures about a ’54 Crown Imperial that Tito gave Sukarno, that he used as a presidential car.
Ironic that Tito and Sukarno, who were autocrats aligned with neither West nor East in the Cold War, would exchange what could be taken as a powerful symbol of Imperialism.
1954 was the last year that Chrysler marketed the Imperial as a Chrysler product. From 1955-1983 they were Imperials without Chrysler identification (although they were sold at select Chrysler-Plymouth dealers). Also the last year of the Keller designs that were quite old fashioned by this time. The cars had standard air conditioning.
I have no personal experience with the Ausco-Lambert brakes, nor have I ever seen one in person, but word from Imperial circles is that while complicated and certainly needing a large learning curve to understand, once functioning properly are pretty reliable.
Yes these cars are technically the widest, mostly due to the width of the body panels and trim, but the car with the widest interior is the 1958-60 Lincoln Continentals.
http://www.imperialclub.com/Articles/54WPC/index.htm
Good article on that car. At least it came with a hemi.
They only made 77 of them so good luck finding one!
Something in the dim recesses of my memory tells me that starting in 1974 (maybe 1975), Imperial ceased as a separate brand and reverted to the top model of Chrysler, something it had not been since 1954. Perhaps 73ImpCapn can refresh us on this one.
Chrysler Coporation built and badged Imperials as Imperials-only from 1955-1983. There were no Imperials built from 1976-1980. My 1981 Imperial has no Chrysler markings on it on the outside of the car, just on certain labels in the engine compartment and on a plaque in the trunk. When Chrysler discontinued the Imperial brand after 1975, they physical car that was produced was rebadged as a Chrysler New Yorker Brougham which lasted from 1976-1978. Many consider that an Imperial-without-the-name as it was basically the same car. Chrysler made many of the previously standard features optional but most cars were sold well equipped. What is ironic is that, while the 74-75 Imperials sold poorly, this basic car, as a New Yorker, sold quite well. Someone posted in another thread about the Japanese selling high content cars in the 1970s and surmised that that might have lead to their dominance in the car market. I am not sure that had a significant bearing as even today, in retail, the American market is tended to be attracted by a low base price and work up from there.
When the Imperial returned on the EEK platform for 1990, they specifically called it a Chrysler Imperial in the marketing literature. It just became another premium Chrysler sedan along with the New Yorker and Fifth Avenue.
The 1955 jumping off point for Imperial as a separate brand is easy. What is hard is identifying when that stopped. I have seen contradictory references at Allpar – one place claiming that the 75 was the last, another that the 83 was the last. There is also a reference there to the 71 as changing vehicle nameplates to say “Imperial by Chrysler.” Top it off with the fact that Imperial was included in the Chrysler-Plymouth brochure starting in 1971 (when it is depicted on the back as one of “Fifteen Chryslers.” Also, from 1971 on they all refer to your Chrysler-Plymouth dealer (not Chrysler-Plymouth-Imperial.) Another point is that I do not recall reading anything at the time about dealers having to be compensated when Imperial was dropped after 75. I would suspect that around 1971-ish the car got rolled into Chrysler-Plymouth Division and made available to all dealers so as not to be liable for franchise termination fees. This would make sense in light of an Allpar article which indicated that Imperial was almost killed at the end of the 1973 model. Management was certainly engaged in a winding down behind the scenes.
83 was the last year that the Imperial was marketed as a separate make. There was only 5 years between the final full size Imperials and the J/Y Imperials of 81-83. It was partly Iacocca’s decision to do the Imperial and call it an Imperial (especially as a coupe) because of his success with the Mark III. My 81 is referenced as an Imperial in all literature, owner’s manual, the car itself (aside from generic emissions stickers) and even on the trunk the label reads “Imperial built by Chrysler Corporation” on signage at the dealer and such (only certain dealers sold Imperials from the 50s through the 80s while any dealer sold the 90-93 editions) tried to differentiate. DMVs usually list the Imperial as a model and Chrysler as a make (as it is the case in NC) regardless of year. That has been an ongoing discussion in Imperial circles for ages.
I dont dispute some of the behind the scenes activities (like the brochure thing) I just haven’t dug deep enough to present a legal like argument on the subject. It has always been accepted by most everyone that I talked to that the Imperial, as a marque, was marketed from 55-83 and before and after as a Chrysler model. Imperial was always a slow seller compared to Lincoln and Cadillac so there was never going to be a business justification for separate facilities, although Chrysler did make an effort to offer a unique dealership experience. I had a work colleague up until 2011 that was a Chrysler dealer man back in the day and he told me that (at least when the 81-83s were out which is when he worked there) there were procedures in place to handle Imperial cars. Of course the warranties were longer but also brought some minor amenities like free rides, loaners, towing, and of course ALL maintenance (except tires) was included for the first two years.
Imperial was almost killed after 1973 when Chrysler made the decision to redesign all the full size cars for 1974. But Elwood Engel talked Chrysler corporate management into slapping a unique nose onto the New Yorker and a few other twists. The design was applauded by many in the press and popular, but due to the energy crisis all big car sales sank. They sold about the same amount of cars in 1974 as they did in the couple years before it. In 1975, however, sales sank by half and Chrysler decided to pull the plug. Ironically, the 76-78 NYB was basically an Imperial without the name and sold 62K of them for 1977.
It is probably splitting hairs somewhat this discussion since so much of the tooling was shared after 1968. At least from my perspective with my 81, Chrysler Corporation DID make a big effort to differentiate the car and it was assembled on its own assembly line in Windsor Ontario Canada. Only about 1/3 of the Chrysler-Plymouth dealers sold and serviced Imperials during those years. I have all of the paperwork and material that came with my car including the FSM usually differentiate.
Not saying you’re wrong here…but I recall reading where the 1959 GM full-size line were so wide they technically violated the law. Had it been enforced, those cars would have required tell-tale lights (the three amber and three red lights in the center) front and rear like the H1 Hummer or commercial trucks.
Not sure where I read that – might have been AUWM. I can’t Google things on this device. I suppose Federal standards were still in flux between 1954 and 1959…
I recall that it was the 1960 Fords that were so wide and therefore, technically violated the laws of some states. As you said, if enforced, marker lights would have been required. That is the reason the 1961 Ford was toned town some and made a little narrower.
I do not ever recall reading anything about GM products being out of compliance in this manner.
Mr. Bill
Hamlet, NC
You’re right, it was Ford full-size cars, not GMs.
I dont know anything about legal compliance and width, but I know the late 50s full sized Fords were toned down due to complaints from owners about parking problems. The Lincoln’s had a rear canted “Breezeway” rear window that was nifty but made eye sight difficult at times.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_automotive_superlatives
I like the Lincolns…..but Mercury did it first…..and stayed with the design the longest
Yes I have read many times that the ’60 Fords, which were rushed, violated maximum width requirements in some states. The states agreed to look the other way if Ford changed the ’61’s which they did.
Bogie owned a ’53 Crown Imperial in Billy Wilder’s Sabrina, with Audrey Hepburn.
The photo with Bogart gives you an idea of the scale of these behemoths.
Yeah, but at 5′ 9″, Bogart wasn’t exactly a big guy (certainly not by Hollywood standards). He had to wear lifts and/or they dug depressions so that the other actors in some of his movies wouldn’t tower over him.
There’s a Nash-Healey in that garage too, I wouldn’t mind having that and the Chrysler!
The Crown clearly remained stuck in 1949-52 and did not get the body updates of the 53-54 Chryslers, other trim details like the grille that they were able to adapt. Of course, with such low production numbers, you could hardly blame Chrysler. I believe that the 53-54 wagons also kept it old school for the same reason.
You could argue that the lwb Crown was the “real” Imperial of those years. I am not sure that a “regular” Imperial even made it to WWII. Chrysler seemed to abandon that market to Cadillac and Packard, and did not make a real push to restart the Imp as a luxury car for the driver until 1949.
These would certainly have had plenty of luxury cred (of a conservative kind) in the early 1950s. Chrysler brought a factory limo back for 1955-56, but farmed the job out to Ghia from 1957-66. A Ghia Crown Imp is on my short list of must-finds for CC.
I can probably find you one if you want.
http://chryslercrazy.com/meet/
I will be attending this in May, and there is a chance a Ghia limo will be there as one or even two have been there regularly in the past.
Of course the most famous owner of a Ghia limo was First Lady Jackie Kennedy
http://www.imperialclub.com/Yr/1960/Kennedy/index.htm
Of course, part of the thrill is finding it yourself out on the street. However, if you have a line on a Ghia limo in the Indianapolis area, . . . . .
There at least one body update for the Crown in 1953 who was shared with the other divisions, the one-piece windshield.
Chrysler Australia really did a miracle to update the old K.T Keller school of design with some zest of “Forward look” with the Aussie Royal like it was shown in these illustrations from an Australian brochure of a 1957 Aussie Royal http://www.oldcarbrochures.org/index.php/New-Brochures—January/1957-Chrysler-Royal-Brochure-Aus
The Imperial saga is very confusing because in 1937, Chrysler applied the name to all of its non-Airflow eight-cylinder cars. However, there was also a long-wheelbase Custom Imperial to replace the big Airflow Custom Imperial, priced in the same realm as the Cadillac Series 60. That continued until the war, although the Crown Imperial was added above it in 1940.
I think one of the Imperial’s big problems was that Chrysler didn’t maintain a consistent image for that nameplate — it was really all over the map well before Chrysler tried to make it a separate marque. I assume the cheaper 1937-38 Imperial was aimed at the Packard One-Twenty (the list prices were very similar), and those cars certainly sold better than any of the ultra-luxe models, but Chrysler didn’t have Packard’s cachet, so the Imperial was always perceived as a fancier Chrysler, rather than a Packard/Cadillac-class car.
Airtemp air conditioning was still an option, even for the ’54 Crown Imperial.
Mr. Bill
Hamlet, NC
A/C was standard on the Crown cars the executive sedan and the limousine. The ‘standard’ Imperial sedans and coupes a/c was optional.
http://www.imperialclub.com/Yr/1954/Leader/Page18.htm
Craig: I was referencing pages 77 and 78 of the ’54 Chrysler Salesman Guide which states air conditioning is optional at extra cost on Custom and Crown Imperials.
http://www.imperialclub.com/Yr/1954/Leader/Page76-77-big.jpg
http://www.imperialclub.com/Yr/1954/Leader/Page78-79-big.jpg
There is also a picture of such a 1954 Imperial on the Imperial club website that does not have air conditioning.
Mr. Bill
Hamlet, NC
Dear readers, are there going to be any, any American true luxury cars going to be produced at all? Luxury means true luxury, prestige, not an amoured, heavy truck chassis in drag like Mr Prsdnt got to help himself out with. Are Americans these days able to produce anything really worthy of the name ‘luxury’ that measures up against limousines from overseas?
Probably not. The words “prestige” and “luxury” have different connotations today. Where is the greatest wealth being generated in the US? Silicon Valley. Can you see Mark Zuckerman in the back seat of a giant limo? Not likely. Nor the rest of his cohorts. More likely a Tesla Model S.
The Rolls Royce Phantom is still in the tradition of old school luxury cars. Where does it sell best: in China. But that may change as well in 20-30 years, if not sooner.
The symbols of prestige and luxury are subject to social conditions. Drive a Mercedes S-Class in Germany or any Scandinavian country and everyone will instantly think you’re a Russian Mafiosi. Is that genuine prestige? In many parts of the US, a RR Phantom has a similar image. Look at how well Maybach went over.The world has changed a lot since the 1950s.
If you were suddenly very rich, what you drive?
I would agree. Also another facet, and touched on by Paul indirectly, is that today, most people drive their cars, including executives. The only people that are driven are people in need of security and people going to prom and homecoming, aka ordinary people celebrating a moment in time.
Also, most cars today, except for the bare bones economy models, are pretty well equipped. Back in the day, when these cars we have been discussed in the last few posts were made, a lot of features were only found on super premium cars. Case in point, my old 1979 Seville had 4 wheel disc brakes, electronic fuel injection, fully automatic climate control, automatic headlamp control, power everything, a sunroof, a premium (that even still sounds good) sound system, and a few other small touches that are all pretty well standard on most cars today.
Now the differential is not in size, opulence, or equipment as it had been historically, but performance, design, and exclusivity.
Now what I *DO* think is lost today is individuality of design. Years ago, cars were pretty well distinctive to their heritage. Up until the 1990s, Cadillacs looked like, well Cadillacs, Buicks were sort of a middle management Cadillac, Pontiacs were sporty, Lincolns and Chryslers were like Cadillacs beastly baroque vehicles, European cars were like BMW/Mercedes driver oriented cars and big sedans but noted for their rather sterile interiors, and Japanese were smart well engineered rolling beer cans. Of course that is stereotyping like h*ll but you can’t totally disagree.
Now, even on domestic cars, it is difficult to find a wide range of options to make a car unique. Colors have decreased as well and people don’t take care of cars as well as they should (but the cars have been designed to take the abuse and last longer).
So while I drive a small pickup for everyday use, when I do take out one of my more distinctive cars I make sure I have extra time when I stop for gas, etc because people will always look and talk.
Imagine going through the car wash in one of these… vvv
Styling individuality is one of those things that’s hard to judge in retrospect. Seen in comparison to other cars on the road today, most older cars stand out in ways they wouldn’t necessarily have at the time. Of course, there have always been a few cars that stood out from the crowd even when they were new — the ’47 Studebaker Starlight, for one, or most old-style exotics — but the distinction between, say, a 1954 Cadillac and other 1954 cars was not as dramatic.
I must get a 1980-81 sign series Lincoln before I croak- preferably with the infamous ‘touring’ lamps
Good question. Maybe we’ve touched on regional difference in the concept of luxury here, between the US and, say Europe, Latin America etc. The Mercs S, Audi A8, bigger Lexus etc. are still considered to be luxury, prestige luxury in our spheres, and not just fit for maffiosi (not considering the S500 and S600). They are widely being driven by corporate execs and politicians but not based on down market merchandise like the American luxury cars do. An A8 is not a streched and pimped VW Polo with porn interior. In the US the differentiation between luxury and mass market seems to have blurred, due to the fact that Mr American Average is already driving kit that easily equals traditional luxury cars in terms of goodies and even size. Not so in Europe and the like, where size is being priced and hence still exists as a determining factor.
On the American side, the fact that imports are 1/2 the market now for new vehicle sales probably has anesthesized the buying public somewhat to the ‘bling’ that defined luxury in the past. That coupled with the socio economic trends discussed above people just don’t value that aspect anymore.
In Europe, where gas prices and taxation play a larger role in buying decisions, it is easy to see how size is directly proportional to luxury. I am sure this will start a flame war of sorts on here, but the US is relatively lucky that we enjoy reasonable gas prices compared to most industrialized countries only oil producing countries that subsidize supplies within their borders enjoy very cheap gasoline. Of course, the US being a large country, most drivers here are used to being very mobile and the average number of miles driven per year by the average American driver is probably among the highest in the world.
In the US, at least, SUVs have now become (although I am not sure it will last now) more of the bling vehicle with proliferation of Escalade, Navigator, and certain Jeep models.
The Escalades, et al, have not been proliferating since the last oil crisis of a decade ago. Escalade sales peaked in 2004 at 62,250. They seem to appeal to a small but enthusiastic group at 22,632 in 2012. Navigator is only 8K sales in 2012.
I say enthusiastic because they always seem to be going faster and drive more erratically than is possibly necessary! They obviously don’t care about MPGs, a few hybrids notwithstanding.
I think you just brought it up yourself – the Tesla Model S. I checked one out at a Tesla store, and came away very impressed. If you’ve got the cash to spend, they’ll build you an electric car with a 300 mile range. It’s not cheap but it is impressive, and the interior is luxurious in the modern idiom – the entire center stack is one big touchscreen.
If I was rich, I’d probably have one of those – and 1961 Cadillac coupe.
Maybe I’m not typical, but if I were suddenly rich I would drive a 1949 Chevy Deluxe Coupe.
I’m very surprised these have more interior width than the C body Fuselage ChryCo. cars.
Love the big extended ’54, but I believe Dodge and even Plymouth used the very same inner stampings – probably even the same outer roof stamping. Probably was longer in the cowl area though, much like post ’66 Imperials.
All this seemed to account for very slow sales. Most luxury buyers don’t want their Lincoln to look like a Ford, for instance.
As far as new stuuf I think many are turning to supercars like Lamborghinis and Teslas like you mentioned.
“Luxury” today denotes lifestyle, more than automobiles or other trappings. A very rich person is likely to dress in t-shirt and jeans; and drive either a Prius, a sports-oriented car or a large SUV for his family. Or for his taste.
But the rich person today will be noted by vacations; by leisurely work schedule; by travel and by social gatherings. People in Aspen look just like people in Golden, Colorado look – difference is, they’re there for pleasure; they can and plan to spend some time at it; they’re far removed from gritty workaday schedules.
I know this; I’ve been to Aspen many times. Mostly work.
Their cars, aside from the odd stretched SJ Jeep, are much the same. Some limos, mostly owned by hotels. Nicer cars than you’d expect in a back-of-the-mountain town…but just-folks cars.
When ostentatious cars were the thing, there was SO little else a person could buy to demonstrate status. But, as noted, times change.
“like Mr Prsdnt got to help himself out with.”
Well, the Presidential Ljmo hasn’t even been a real car in over a decade…..they are truck based and weigh over 15,000 lbs. Nor is it “his” car. It belongs to the Secret Service.
They used to be leased for a nominal amount and lasted many years and often through different presidencies. Kennedy’s X-100 for example, it was re-bodied and used through the Nixon era.
“Some time after September 11, 2001, the Secret Service has adopted a policy to destroy presidential limos after they are taken out of service in order to protect their secrets. It’s become routine to replace the presidential limo every four years at the beginning of a new term, media reports said.”
http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/Americas/Obama-s-new-presidential-limousine-set-to-make-debut/Article1-368966.aspx
Sadly, we won’t see them at ANY museum in the future. Terrorists, foreign and domestic, have a larger and ever increasing arsenal. Secret Service technology has to keep up with that.
Not as long as CAFE is the law of the land.
It’s sad, but it seems that true American luxury cars are gone forever. Today’s definition of luxury is no longer who has the longest car, with the longest name, with the most velour and simulated wood. It’s about who has the fanciest features, touchscreens, etc. People today, especially with the big thing of being “enviormentally friendly” don’t want big 20ft long cars when they are just going back and forth to work.
On the other hand, though, the idea of luxury being the most modern, fancy features hasn’t changed. Proof is right here with this ’54 imperial. It offered the very high tech (for the time) AC and 4 wheel disc brakes, among other things. If you look at the features of a modern S class/A8/7 series/etc, you would find similar, very new/expensive/modern feaures.
So the definition of luxury has both changed and stayed the same. The actual features that make a car luxurious, like the AC on that ’54 imperial, is still a defining characteristic of luxury. However, the package that those features is wrapped up in has changed dramatically. No longer are they wrapped up in a 230 inch long sedan with seating for 6 and a 500 cubic inch V8 under the hood. Today it’s a 200 inch sedan with seating for 5 (in some cases, just barely), with a small turbo engine giving all the power.
It’s really something how the times have changed…
There’s a series of early 1960s confections from all over the world. Until gasoline completely runs out, I wouldn’t touch a modern car with all my (fictional) wealth in the world.
I think it has more to do with cars no longer being universal consumer products of aspiration. Everything can be as good as something “premium” or what is premium isn’t as spectacular as it once was. Hate to say it, but the Broughamification of the American car helped a lot to cause that problem.
The insanely rapid progress of technology and how much of it we all use has taken a lot of consumer attention and resources away from lusting for the status symbol associated with Automobiles. We’re pretty much in the rapid fall of cars into anonymous transportation conveyances.
It’s interesting to see that even the word ‘premium’ is being debased in modern society. Some years back our national telephone service provider introduced the concept of ‘premium’ phone calls. Was the service in any quantifiable way superior? Not at all. They just charged more for connection, over the same old network, to certain numbers and services the like of which I’ve never needed to use. Premium? Hardly! Just more expensive.
I have heard that the Chinese are into being chauffeured, or were. That sort of ostentation of the nouveau riche get old in a hurry.
Chinese cars: chauffeurs are so 2009
http://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2011/04/21/china-to-carmakers-chauffeurs-are-so-2009/#axzz2KXDU5zEg
Now they are a hired service of “black cars” for the Oscars, Proms and the likes of OJ Simpson.
Yes, I have studied the Chinese deeply, but it seems as though in the last 30 years there seems to have emerged two Chinas. One that is haves which constitute about 10-15% of the population that basically lives like most of the first world with all of the modern conveniences and such and the rest of the population that does not. Without getting into a political discussion, it does get under my skin somewhat that there is a bifurcated lifestyle like that and their government has such control.
Back to cars, some of that that Tim mentions above has to do with culture. China, and many other non-first world countries still adhere to strict social customs so it is more common to see people deemed “important” like government officials, business officials, and the like being chauffeured. Whereas in the US and in most of Western Europe, all but the most sensitive people drive themselves.
I know for GM, Buick is their #1 brand in China and they went so far as to build a plant there as well. If you remember from the 2012 Presidential election, some politicians tried to make hay about Jeeps being moved to China – which was in fact the same thing GM was doing – Chrysler/Fiat was going to build a Jeep plant in China to service the Chinese market directly. Apparently Wranglers are popular there as well.
I saw one of these in The Trouble With Harry a couple of weeks ago. Pretty good movie, but very different from the usual Hitchcock fare.
There was also an early Teens Buick phaeton. Not many cars in this movie but worth a look if you’ve never seen it.
(image from imcdb.org)
I would suggest that an overlooked factor in the homogenization of cars among the rich and the not-so-rich is the disappearance of the craftsman labor force needed to build bespoke cars.
Real and exclusive quality, regardless of size or bling, involves a lot of hand work.
In clothing, for example, it is still abundantly available. It can also be found for high end homes.
In cars it has largely disappeared.
Another non-air conditioned Crown Imperial. This substantiates Chrysler literature that a/c was an option, even in these models.
Some excellent points but overall everyone is being way too doom and gloom. I’m surprised no one made the point that our Escalades, Denalis, Tahoes and high-line F250s have pretty much taken over from where the Imperials, Continentals and Sevilles left off.
Have you priced a loaded Denali? Same territory as an old Imperial. These SUVs have as much comfort and prestige (for those who need it) as a new 7-series or S-class, but without the Beverly Hills old person smell.
The Cadillac brand is very popular in California. There are CTSs everywhere and would have one in the family if the rear seat wasn’t so damn small. I’ve heard this complaint many times from people who bought an E-class or 5-series instead. Lincoln could easily improve too with some effort and a solid hit.
For me it’s a chicken and egg thing with the high-end US sedans. Are they not being made because people don’t want them or are people not buying them because good ones aren’t being made? I would argue it is the latter. If there is a need for the core attributes of a large SUV in Los Angeles certainly there would be one for a larger, exclusive sedan done right.
Every time the Big 3 have pulled out the stops to recover from a market share defeat AND made a great product it has worked. 76 Seville, 86 Taurus and 04 300C. They didn’t bother trying in the 90s because of the SUV craze and were buying luxury car companies to do that job for them.
The Seville and Taurus have been covered to death but what is it about the 300C? I guess it’s still too new to be viewed as a “those were the days” kind of car but it was a speculator hit for Chrysler and America. For chrissakes Obama drove one before becoming President and say what you will about his politics he was, and still is, a pretty cool guy.
A clear case of build it and they will come if there ever was one.
Imagine what could happen if they went all out (e.g. a 300C) and put the Cadillac or even Lincoln name on it. Plenty of people would pay for that, they do now with the SUVs!
You don’t have to go back to 61 or 69 to find a Lincoln that surprised people. People forget about the 89 Taurus-based Continental or the 90 Town Car. They were both big hits and little more than great styling exercises.
I remember an excellent discussion in that thread about a rendering a young guy did for a future Lincoln flagship. It was the one where he got mad at some of the comments and had his post deleted. I thought he was on the right track and have no doubt Lincoln is working on something similar.
Stick an advanced powertrain option in it like a turbo diesel hybrid and watch the sales soar. Most of the people I know who have stretched their budget to get into a Prius do it for the image, not to have lower COE or own a Toyota. That’s how Californians buy cars and like it or not they are an early indicator for the rest of the country. Prius sales keep climbing out here, I think it’s the #5 seller now.
Consider also that such a car could have a pet name, either old or new, which would add greatly to the draw. The Germans are pretty much stuck with alphanumerics.
A lot of people talk about learning from your mistakes, as they should. I just wish more people would talk about learning from your successes.
Mr Bill is correct in stating that the 1954 Crown 8-Pass Formal Sedans and Limos had Air Conditioning as an option. I have a 1954 8-pass Sedan and it does not have Air Conditioning.
I have one, 1954 Chrysler Crown Imperial Limousine.
Hello Francisco,
I would enjoy talking with you about your Imperial Limousine. I have had my car for 9 years and it is about 95% original.
I may have missed it in one of the older comments, but this displaces the car I had believed held the title. The 1960 Lincoln was a svelte 80.3 inches wide. Not even close.
DID THE 1975 IMPERIAL BECOME THE 1976 CHRYSLER NEW YORKER? ANSWER – NO! The 1975 Imperial was the last of its line. The 1976 Chrysler New Yorker is the same in most part as its 1975 counterpart. The Imperial had ever-so-slight differences to make it an Imperial. For example, the interior upper door frame moldings were not bright stainless steel, but rather bright stainless steel with plastic wood inserts. Interior fabrics and leather were different. The New Yorker had two universal joints in the drive-line and the Imperial had three. Unfortunately, I cannot remember all of the little differences. However, the last Imperial was not carried over as a ’76 New Yorker. The ’75 New Yorker was carried over as a ’76 New Yorker. As for the Imperial limousine as featured, thanks so much for the article I love these tanks. The four-wheel disc brakes were offered on Chryslers and Imperials starting in 1951 when they brought out the hemi-head engine, originally at 180 horsepower. In the 1970’s I learned from a service representative at Chrysler that the brakes were so expensive to repair that Chrysler was offering $300.00 to customers for the repairs, new pads and mechanisms as needed. He also said that they worked very well. Might Mopars at work. In 1951, Chrysler was the first post-War car to offer air conditioning. In 1949, Chryslers had two-speed electric windshield wipers, not vacuum operated. The 1949 Chrysler also introduced production car use of a padded dashboard for safety.
If I were rich and had the entire lifestyle to go with the car. I would still have several cars, all leased! First a big Jag XJ, or Benz S class, maybe a Porsche Panamera, or big Bimmer. Than I would have a fun car like a Jag F, Porsche, or Aston Martin. Then I would probably have a Chevy Tahoe or Ford Expedition for my daily stealth driving. I wouldn’t have a limo, I’d have one of my assistants drive me around in one of my big cars.
In the Bay Area there are so many expensive cars driving around that most go almost unnoticed. I’d have to agree that the rich folks around here don’t seem interested in impressing anyone with a mere car.
Mr Humphreys’ car is so perfectly Queen Elizabeth, while the Imperial of 1957 is more like Princess Diana — could we say ?
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/wp-content/comment-image/438597.jpg
http://kilbeysclassics.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/57-chrysler-imperial-4-door-sedan.jpg
Or maybe we could substitute Mamie Eisenhower, and Jackie Kennedy . . .
Paul, this is another short but great article, *1954 Chrysler Crown Imperial: The Widest Production Car Ever.* Thanks for the never-ending flow of informative articles!
A couple of times you have made reference to “Lambert-Ausco” disc brakes. Just to avoid confusion, it is “Ausco-Lambert,” first offered in 1949 and available through 1954, though standard on the big Crown Limousines. Chrysler improved the basic “true” disc-brake design by Auto Specialties Mfg. Co., but the brake was very expensive to manufacture.
Thank you. Fixed now.
Paul, by the way (and I’m sure you’ve been asked before), are you related to the famous “Doug Niedermeyer?”
Of course! We’re both Eugeneians.
Speaking of 75 series Cadillac, what’s the last time you saw it drifting on the wet track? 🙂
http://youtu.be/GWCQEQ9SO_Y
“The 1974-1976 Cadillac Fleetwood 75 holds the record for the longest (extended-body) production car,”
I’m not sure this is true. The Fleetwood 75 had a 157.5in WB. The Checker Aerobus 12-passenger wagon had a 189in WB. I’m sure the Caddy had more overhang, but 31in more?
Maybe you’ve got something here!
So a production car constitutes a 500 or more production number.
So the question would be –
Did Checker make more than 500 157.5″ w.b. 8 door wagons and sedans?
We’re talking about private passenger “cars” here, not commercial vehicles. FWIW, the Checker Aeobus was not just an “extended” Checker Marathon; it had a drastically different frame, suspension and eve drive train. It was purpose-designed for commercial use, and was essentially a truck or van with body components borrowed form the Marathon.
Disqualified.
I would have thought the 1960 Ford would be the widest production car but I see that that Crown Imperial has it beat by an inch and a half. Damn.
ARHPG, I wonder if you have a copy of that section drawing of the Ausco-Lambert brake with the identifications intact; I struggle to comprehend how this interesting mechanism works.
I do have a better rendering of that drawing somewhere. I will look further. For now I’ve attached pictorial diagram of a front A-L disc brake from a 1950 Chrysler manual.
Chrysler’s use of the Ausco-Lambert disc brake system was intrinsic to the corporation’s attitude about quality engineering, and although Chrysler apparently spent quite a lot of time improving the basic Ausco-Lambert design, it nevertheless proved to be very expensive. Apparently an improvement in the standard braking system after 1954 obviated the need for these powerful brakes, and they were discontinued.
Thanks, ARHPG. A most interesting device, surely. My dad, a PE, was well aware of Chrysler’s engineering reputation, as I recall, though the ’39 Plymouth business coupe I grew up in was the only Chrysler product he ever owned. He purchased it as a newlywed, and traded it on on a ’47 Willys Jeep station wagon.
Chrysler’s secret: engineers Fred Zeder, Owen Skelton, Carl Breer and the brilliant Walter P. Chrysler himself. It has been said that Chrysler had more pioneering engineering “firsts” in the period from 1925 to 1950 than Ford and General Motors combined. Had WPC lived past 1940, the corporation would probably have maintained its “on-and-off” second place in the industry behind GM, strictly on the merits of engineering superiority.
I had always thought that the Imperial became a separate mark from Chrysler during the period from 1957 thru 1966, when I believe the rest of Chrysler Corp cars went to unibody construction, but Imperial retained separate body and frame. In ’67, the Imperial went to a stretched version of Chrysler’s unibody…
What I want to know is, why was this any wider than a regular Imperial? Usually limousines are the same basic width as the sedan version of the same car.
My guess would be thicker chrome trim? Though why they should do that I can’t imagine.
The limo had a completely different body from the sedans.
Here are the specs. Substantially longer and wider, including a 6″ wider rear tread (axle).
The Imperial limo used the same body as the ’49 Imperial limo except for the front clip. This limo body was taller and wider, especially at rear in order to have a wide rear seat between the rear wheels.
I have 2 wealthy clients. One, whose net worth is in the hundreds of millions drives himself in a Rolls-Royce Ghost. The other, whose net worth is in the billions, is driven in a Toyota Sienna.