Imagine my surprise when, while driving along a local street in my town, I spotted this sleek white beauty! It’s a 1960 Chrysler Saratoga 4-door hardtop, one of only 4,099 produced. Actually, about 77,000 Chryslers (of all models) were made in 1960, and you kind of wonder what happened to them all. A similar Saratoga sedan was previously written up by CC’s own Laurence Jones, but considering the fact that–at this point–you may only see one or two ’60 Chryslers in your lifetime, I think this pristine example is worth a closer look.
The first thing that strikes you about this car is, “This is big!” And the fins give the body a dynamic sense of forward thrust–and they do it beautifully! This is a Saratoga, mind you, 4″ longer than the lower priced Windsor (as if you needed more length!)
Such beautiful penmanship, formal with just a little bit of lively flair. That thrusting spear, the golden medieval crest…
How many lions and crowns are there on this car? You’re truly King of the Road in this Chrysler!
Here’s another one, at the back of the trunk lid. Part of the thrill of seeing cars like this in person is discovering all these little finely wrought details that you miss just looking at photographs.
These delta taillights EMERGE from the fins. Is there a purer form of ’50s “Googie” design than this? You can buy the car just for the taillights!
The front end looks like it’s “smiling” at you. I actually prefer the ’61 front with the diagonal headlights, but this is nice too. Let’s get a closer view…
Look at that leaping golden lion! Another masterpiece by an unknown and unheralded Detroit sculptor. Chrysler should resurrect this design and place it on the grilles of all new models. I predict sales will increase by 20%!
From every angle, this car says “Whoooosh!”
Of course we have to mention the “Astra-Dome” instrument cluster–lighted at night by painted florescent numbers and letters, which glow an unearthly green.
The interior? Lush!!
So there it is–as the great Charles Phoenix would say, “Behold the glory!” But the glory was all-too short lived. It always amazes me that cars like this (and other contenders for peak Space Age, like the ’59 Dodge, Cadillac, Mercury, Chevy, and others from 1957-61) were not exotic one-offs, but mass produced, “ordinary” cars driven by ordinary people. What were once common sights on American streets and highways rapidly disappeared from view as the ’60s became the ’70s. And I, for one, miss seeing them.
This Chrysler reminded me of a 1960 De Soto model kit I had as a teen.
Nor do I see too many cars like this at car shows. It seems to me a car of this kind would be highly desirable by collectors. The sleek style…the 383 cubic inches of V-8 power…the push button TorqueFlite transmission…the unibody construction…the super-light power steering with torsion bar suspension which makes for such easy handling. Why haven’t more of these been preserved? The old car hobby has a lot of “meatballism” in it and is, in my view, too monolithic–at shows one typically sees the same specific high-profile models again and again–often hot-rodded or customized in some way. While everyone has his own tastes and desires, I think the real gold is right here.
Monolithic car shows, indeed! Too many tri-five Chevrolets and 1969 Camaros! Last one if this body style I saw was at a Mopar show and it was a DeSoto.
Great review! I never noticed the leaping lion before – even the mascot was in motion. I also just realized where Robbie the Robot got his helmet from. There must be a Saratoga missing its instrument cluster somewhere..
Long before there was Lisa Catera there was Sara Toga. Sorry. This is a nice find and the colors are great. I’ve always thought that there was a bit of 56-57 Hudson influence in the 1960 Chrysler front styling. I think that the reason that more of these haven’t been preserved is that rust did them in before they got old enough to be collectible.
Long before there was Lisa Catera there was Sara Toga. Sorry. This is a nice find and the colors are great. I’ve always thought that there was a bit of 56-57 Hudson influence in the 1960 Chrysler front styling. I think that the reason that more of these haven’t been preserved is that rust did them in before they got old enough to be collectible.
Yess Paul, you`re absolutely right.
The average carshow is infinitly boring, Camaros, Mustangs, Firebirds etc. over and over again.
This car on the other hand…….
I have really vague memories of riding in a 60 Chrysler as a tot. I remember noticing the grill that did that Vee into the bumper. That car would have been a low trim Windsor sedan, though, and painted black.
I love the 60 and prefer this front end to the canted headlight 61. Chrysler reprised this grill on the 74, with the V-bottom grille (though less of a V than in 60).
I recall seeing ads – I think Chrysler called itself “Lion-hearted” for awhile then, and I remember reading about “Golden Lion” V8 engines.
I suspect that a huge majority of 60 Chryslers were 4 door sedans. Chrysler buyers were sedan people, and the hardtops, wagons and convertibles tended to bring really small numbers of buyers.
The 1960 Chrysler is Exner’s best post-1957-58 design (except for his 1963 cars, all of which were purposefully more conventional in appearance).
One of the lunch ladies at my elementary school had a white four-door hardtop. I’m guessing it was a Windsor. I remember being fascinated by the instrument panel. This was in the early 1970s, when 1960 models of any make were already rare in our town.
The 1960 Chrysler is the best-looking car Exner designed – without much, if any, restraint – after the 1957-58 models. (The 1963 Darts, Valiants, Dodges and Plymouths were handsome, but he was under strict management orders to make sure they were in the GM-Ford mainstream.)
One of the lunch ladies at my elementary school had a white 1960 four-door. I believe it was a Windsor, and it was in good shape. I remember being fascinated by the instrument panel. This was in the early 1970s. By that point, any 1960 car was a rare sight in my hometown.
The “Forward Look” Chrysler products do have quite a following ranging from the “Christine” clones to the Chrysler letter cars. They don’t often show up at the average pony car/Chevelle shows, though. However, any nice Chryco product from this era, convertibles and two door hardtops especially, can bring some hefty prices!
Forwardlook.net has lots of eye candy, and info about these cars.
The business where the Chrysler is parked seems to have quite an eclectic fleet of cars as customers. And it is a more interesting place than most car shows. Is that a Buick Skylark 4 door hardtop? There’s an R107, a ’69 Firebird convertible, a first generation Monte Carlo and a big red convertible I can not identify. I’d probably make a stop there once a week during a bike ride just to look around.
I agree 100% that this is exactly the kind of thing I’d like to see a lot more of at shows. It’s just an amazing piece of historic Americana, and cars like this are essentially ignored in favor of the muscle era that came later.
Maybe as fewer Boomers dominate the hobby there’ll be more interest in what are now overlooked classics. I was perusing Hemmings the other night after Joe Dennis’ Chevelle piece yesterday, and scrolled through GM A-bodies from model years ’68-’72, just doing some mental shopping to entertain myself while watching TV. I was not surprised, but certainly disappointed that there were so few 4-doors, whether hardtop or sedan. There were also very few cars restored to original spec. Those that were in “survivor” condition but not high-spec, high power muscle machines usually had commentary in the ad about modding them with a bigger engine, creating a “tribute”, etc. It’s just sad that the current flock of hobbyists can’t seem to appreciate anything that didn’t rock their worlds at 16 years old. I guess a lot of people never outgrow adolescence.
Being in the insurance industry, I do some business with Hagerty, so I get lots of newsletters and industry updates from them regularly. I have been encouraged to see that younger collectors seem to have a much more widely varied set of interests. Of course now that my own generation are solidly into our 50’s there’s a surge of interest in F-Bodies and Supras and Z-Cars from the 80’s, but I’m hoping that segment of the culture won’t be the vast majority as has been the case for so many years now. There’s a lot of very interesting metal out there. It’d be nice to see more of what we so rarely see, for a change.
Not “painted florescent numbers” but electroluminescent (or, as Chrysler called it, Panelescent) lighting.
Wait – is that a European model, or did Chrysler have a particularly optimistic version for the 300 models?
That must be a Euro model – the speedos I’ve seen on Astra-Dome Chryslers go to either 120 or 150 mph, though I’m not sure what models or options determined which one you got. I was going to note these were electroluminescent, not fluorescent – I see I’m not the only lighting geek on this site. Chrysler used EL dash lighting several times – on early ’60s Chryslers and Imperials, on first-gen Dodge Chargers, and more recently on 300s starting in 1999 (and LHS too).
Or Canadian?
Nope, not Canadian but metric. Which means it would have been shipped to any country outside of the U.S.A. and the British Commonwealth.
Canada did not adopt the metric system until 1978.
Coolest gauge cluster ever
The 1960 Chrysler along with its near-twin Desoto are among my favorites of the Exner Forward Look cars. I also like the 1957-58 Chryslers and DeSotos.
Can someone explain the rationale behind the higher seat back for the driver side of the bench seat? I would guess it provides better support for the driver but isn’t tall enough to serve as a head restraint. I don’t believe any GM or Ford product ever had this.
On the red convertible in the photos, I’m thinking it’s a mid-60s Ford of some kind, but cannot be sure.
On the red convertible, that greenhouse says 65-68 Galaxie to me. I’m going to guess 1965 based on those angular taillights standing up at the back.
If I recall correctly, it was supposed to provide more support for the driver’s upper back and shoulders.
Chrysler’s of this Era had a low dash mounted rear view mirror. I’d say that the cut down seat was to aid visibility.
No, Geeber’s right. The seat wasn’t cut down on the right, it was raised on the left.
Charles Phoenix also always focuses on those awesome details in his Joyride YouTube series. He’s done some other Chrysler vehicles from this period but not an actual Chrysler. If you don’t already know –
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOVUcCor-rUgGCwnAPTnqYw
“I know!”
Gorgeous. Thank you for this. As a kid growing up in the 60’s, I used to see quite a few ’60-’61 Chryslers. And you’re right. it seemed like they were here, and then they were gone. And at the time, no one cared to notice. I know what you mean about the car shows. Parades have become that way as well, in which the classic cars have been replaced by a long line of over modified late model Jeeps
Mopar styling really ran the gamut from ’57 through ’62. Wondrous to tasteful to nauseating (looking at you, ’61 Dodge).
This car falls in the tasteful category, and seems still quite appropriate for its era.
A beautiful car.
Space age heraldry. What wonderful kitsch!
‘gules with lion or saut and three castles or sinister’.
It looks like it’s ready to climb to 70,000 feet and defend us from the Commies.
Here’s a photo of a ’60 Desoto ad. Ready for blast off!.
I mostly love how this car looks, though I think the way the tail fin abruptly starts in the middle of the front door is a bit awkward. I’m not sure about the grille shape either. The boomerang taillamps are amazing though, as is the gauge cluster (and the dash in general). The uneven front seatbacks were odd – why wasn’t the front passenger worthy of decent shoulder support?
The fins were smoother on the 2 doors and convertible for sure, but still beautiful cars.
Definitely awkward on the four-door, in profile, the car almost looks bent in the middle.
Leapin’ Lions! What a beauty!
My memory of 1960 though is that Chrysler products were looking dated in styling. Even GM’s panicked styling lurch of 1959 was jerked back strongly the following year.
‘The Forward Look’ didn’t seem capable of evolving with the times, and the Chrysler comes across as an alternate 1960. It’s more like peak-1957 (and I mean that admiringly). I can imagine some Ford and GM salesmen denigrating Chrysler products in their showrooms with the snarky phrase ‘Actually, it’s 1960’. I can’t imagine driving this car without a wearing a fedora or a trilby, and once JFK became the first public figure not to wear a hat everything changed. 🙂
Wow, thx. I didn’t realize JFK was first major public figure not to wear a business hat. 1960, 1961 really was a new era in America in a lot of ways.
The hat industry never recovered.
Actually I read an article by Chrysler designer Jeff Godshall in Collectible Automobile magazine a while back where he said that the 1960 Chrysler Corp. cars were much better rust proofed than the 1957s. And I believe he stated 1960 was first year for most of their cars to be unibody construction. I think Chrysler started improving quality of the 1958s & 59s so that those & the later cars were pretty solid.
When the 1960 Plymouth was unveiled, some reviewers said, “Suddenly it’s 1957!”
I’m stunned!
No one has mentioned why there are leaping golden lions on this car?
The engines!
In 1959, Chrysler started to advertise the car’s new wedge-head “B” engines as “Golden Lions” and the cars as “Lion Hearted”.
Please tell me that you dorks knew this, right?
Yesterday while on the freeway I was passed by a pickup with a two car trailer in tow. On it a 59 Fury and 59 Suburban that appeared to have bee rescued from a field in E. WA. Both definitely had signs of sitting out in a dry climate, with mainly surface rust. The lower right rear quarter on the wagon had been cut off, presumably the start of a rust repair, but otherwise looked good.
So yeah lowly Plymouths and a year older but still close enough to call CC-effect to me.
My appreciation for the 1960 Chrysler has grown (although not for the 1960 Dodge and Plymouth) especially the two door hardtops. Glad to see they left the “toilet seat” off this one……a perfect example of “what were they thinking”!
Chrysler was the only non-ugly corporate make during this time for Chrysler. Dodge was goofy, the new Valiant looked like a potato with wings and a toilet seat, and Plymouth was absolutely hideous and deliberately misshapen. Then things got even worse.
Again in 1961, Chrysler gets hit fewer times with the ugly stick – but gets Asian eyes, Dodge gets a look that makes its cars look like an orangutan taking the short bus to a “special” school, and Plymouth decided it needed to look like Mothra. Then things got even worse.
It is as though Chrysler was deliberately trying to make their cars look as ridiculous as possible to determine who their biggest fans were. In 1962, Dodge went for the Warthog face look, Plymouth this time looked like it saw something shocking, (probably the Dodge), and Chrysler just keeps looking Asian.
Luckily for Chrysler, all this ends when they plagiarize Lincoln in 1965!
Tough years! Space age? Try Alien-age B-Movie Sci-Fi costumes!
“the new Valiant looked like a potato with wings and a toilet seat,”
A quote worthy of Tom McCahill himself!
…except McCahill was quite a fan of the ’60-’62 Valiant.
When the Valiant debuted, the Rambler American sported a vintage 1953 body. The restyled 1961 model was hardly a beauty queen. The Studebaker Lark used the basic 1953 sedan body with the ends chopped off.
The Valiant was different, but at least it looked new and fresh in 1960.
Yup. Its design was polarising—people liked it or loathed it; I doubt it inspired many “Meh, it’s okeh” reactions. I’m sure plenty of people rejected it out of hand because they didn’t like its looks—either explicitly, or because they’d been through the 2nd half of the ’50s and wanted nothing more to do with tailfins of any description. Still, that was far from a universal reaction; take a look at what people were saying about the Valiant’s styling at the time. Also here , and here and here .
The big challenges for the Valiant were the corporation’s poor quality reputation earned with the 1957 cars, and the initial attempt to sell the Valiant as a standalone brand.
Most people would have expected it to be a Plymouth, just as the Falcon was a Ford and the Corvair was a Chevrolet. Chrysler quickly reversed course for the 1961 model year.
It also didn’t help that 1960 was the year that the corporation took the Plymouth franchise away from Dodge dealers, and gave them the Plymouth-like Dart as a substitute.
I have a Chrysler key chain with a Golden Lion, must have been a short-lived promotion. All references to the Golden Lion motor seem to disappear after 1959 or thereabouts. This is definitely one of the better-looking fin cars IMHO.
Another “where do i sign?” moment. Thanks
You talk of 77,000 Chryslers sold in 1960 – is that just hardtops or all models, for which it doesn’t sound that many to me?
Low sales numbers go a long way in explaining the low survival numbers.
What a grand car! Those taillights are not only fab, but also functional; they gave side-on visibility about a decade before any such thing was mandatory (side marker lights became mandatory on 1/1/70).
And that spaceship-shaped-and-lookin’ electroluminescent instrument panel is a wonder to behold.
Wait, but…no spare-tire trunk lid on it!
Operator…? (What’s meatballism?)
I agree about the unfortunate, boring, and tiresome homogeneity of large swaths of the car hobby. To visit many a car show is to believe that the American auto industry only ever made a few models of car, virtually all of them 2-doors, all of them with V8 engines, most of them painted one of a very small number of colours, etc. I recall deliberately pointing my camera away from the cookie-cutter B5 blue Barracudas and Hemi Orange Challengers at MoparFest when I went to cover it for Allpar a decade(!) ago.
The ’60 Chrysler completely reflected space-age optimism in its styling. From the trapezoidal grille to the delta taillights at the end of the high-flying fins and “Astra-Dome” instrument panel, they are the ‘Jetson’ personified. Chrysler buyers bought based on the solid engineering and prestige reputation that had long been Chrysler’s appeal.
Why more don’t survive? This Saratoga four door hardtop, priced $4,002 new, was $700 retail by January 1966, and any 1960 Chrysler was a $50-$100 car by mid-1969. Large sedans were demo derby fodder and the outdated style and six-eight year replacement cycle conspired to reduce the survivors to a handful.
As far as the boring uniformity of current ‘cruise nights’, its a group think, fit-in mindset,
I’ll jump on the 1960 Saratoga love-fest. A favorite aspect was how, as a mid-level trim, the trunk lid is missing the ‘upscale’ toilet seat.
The only thing I would change is the grille to the much nicer, inset New Yorker version, but that’s it.
It was a memorable roof-line. That C pillar / tail-fin combination (with no toilet-seat) was Chrysler’s best of the era. On the Mercedes W111, the look would last until 1971.
The Chrysler was definitely the best looking of the Mopar fleet back then. I’ve always liked the big Chryslers from the late ‘50’s and early ‘60’s. They had their own sense of style that stood out from the Ford and GM offerings, and it’s a shame there aren’t more survivors. When I was a young boy in the ‘60’s I always liked looking at different cars (still do) and in my mind the coolest car on our street was a black ‘61 Chrysler 4-door sedan that belonged to a nice old man and his wife next door. Several years later we had moved to a different town and when I was walking home from school one day I saw an identical Chrysler parked on the street. I didn’t know whether it was his old car or not (he had passed away a few years before) but it was still great to see another big old black Chrysler.
Seeing this takes me back to the times in my childhood when Uncle Chick, Aunt Dorothy, and Aunt Grace would visit (he and Aunt Grace were siblings).
He always bought Chrysler products. And frequently towed an Airstream trailer behind them. I was too young to know what the model of each one was, but they were definitely different from what MY family’s cars were.
I have read somewhere that after a period of about 50 years, the survival rate of a car or truck goes down to about 1% of production. I don’t know how accurate this is or how much it varies from make to make, but with a total production of 77,000 60 years ago, that means only 770 or so survivors.
One of my favourite Exner cars. He seemed to get every aspect of the design just right.
That DeSoto model you showed was one of my favourites. Here’s one I built back in the seventies.
My father was one of the 4099 buyers of the ’60 Saratoga 4-door hardtop & it was the car I learned to drive on. Ours was dark gray w/white top & trim. With the torsion-bar suspension, it handled pretty well & was a wonderful highway cruiser.
Thanks for posting. A beautiful (IMO) car & certainly rare these days.