A car is a utilitarian object. Its purpose is to move people from place to place. But what I’m showing you here today is much more than that. It is an avant-garde artistic creation–a dramatic statement that embodies the hopes and dreams of its time. And the fact that it has survived to this day in its present condition–is a kind of miracle in and of itself.
Seller’s description:
When I received these photos via email, I knew I had something worth sharing with you. Not only is the car in “cream puff” condition, but the accompanying high-quality images show lots of close-up details–fascinating little details which you would be unable to really see unless you saw this car in person. Almost like going to the Plymouth dealer in 1961 and experiencing this glittering new car for the first time.
In 1957, Plymouth (along with the other Chrysler Corporation divisions) shocked the world with their fabulous, futuristic “Forward Look” cars. Because of the highly competitive nature of the automotive industry, all manufacturers engaged in a race to see who could come up with the most startling, advanced, “out-of-this-world” new models to present to the public. Stylists’ imaginations ran wild–hence higher tailfins, lots of chrome, bedazzling instrument panels, “longer-lower-wider” bodies, evermore powerful V-8 engines, and more extra-cost options that made auto travel easier and more convenient.
Jets, rockets, and other “Space Age” themes were the stylists’ major inspirations. And every year, a NEW model had to be introduced to top last year’s car. It was called “planned obsolescence” by some, “progress” by others. Either way, the result was the creation of startling new designs that, while not always “beautiful” in the classical sense, stirred and captivated your imagination.
As you look over a car like this 1961 Plymouth Fury, you start to appreciate the attention to detail incorporated into the various design elements. Someone, sitting at a drafting board, had to come up with a taillight housing that looks like a modern jet . . .
. . . or a dazzling Fury script in silver and gold that expresses the excitement of the age.
A trunk emblem, often hardly noticed, becomes an abstract work of art in itself. The original Mayflower ship’s sails are now abstracted into a rocket, launching upward into space to soar among the golden stars of heaven.
Wherever you look, more details catch your eye, contributing to the overall styling theme.
Inside, the drama continues with this spectacular instrument panel, unlike anything made before or since. The idea here is, when the showroom prospect sits behind the wheel for the first time, he gets the impression “Wow, this is a truly advanced new car! It would feel amazing to drive this!”
Everything looks so elaborate and deluxe. It’s hard to believe Plymouth is a “low-priced” car.
There’s nothing really “new” here–these are the same standard gauges every car has. It’s all in the presentation. A black forest cuckoo clock tells time just like an electric wall clock does, but it does it in a more interesting way. Same principle.
That’s original upholstery, my friends–beautiful and unrestored!
The headliner is this kind of woven “bamboo”-type fabric, which I never knew about. Chromium bows arch overhead.
Under the hood, the 318 V-8 paired with TorqueFlite transmission gives surprising pep, according to seller Charles Phoenix. That combined with Torsion-Aire balance makes this car “drive like a dream.”
**BONUS**:
In 1961, Plymouth and the Dodge Dart were “twins under the skin”, but with different looks. Here’s a ’61 Dart Phoenix that was for sale on eBay some years ago. It shows you the difference between the Plymouth and Dodge versions:
I’m in on the magic–my 1960 Dodge Dart Phoenix. I agree with Charles–these are great-driving cars with fascinating looks!
Sadly, very few of these early ’60s Mopars have survived. They were purchased, had their adventures, and then were tossed away (quicker it seems than most other cars). Which is why seeing the well-preserved examples above is a special treat.
Compare a ’61 Fury with a ’65. The newer model is cleaner, more restrained. Objectively you could say it’s more aesthetically pleasing. But it just doesn’t speak to me like the soaring ’61 does. Why this paradox exists I don’t know. Life is full of paradoxes.
Further CC Reading:
Cohort Pic(k) of the Day: 1961 Plymouth – Maybe It Should Have … by Paul Niedermeyer
Vintage Ads: 1961 Plymouth – Solid Beauty – Curbside Classic by Paul Niedermeyer
Curbside Classic: 1961 Plymouth Fury – What Planet Are YOU From? by Laurence Jones
The famous (or infamous? ) sharing of parts. The chrome taillights are similar to those from 62 IMPERIAL. The Dart dash was shared with final 61 DeSoto. Et al. While the beauty? Of 61 Plymouth was FURY ously debated, IMO and likely others, it was far better than 62 downsized plucked chicken, one of the ugliest cars ever.
The ’62 cars Exner later referred to as “plucked chickens” were the Chryslers and later ’62 Dodge 880. Plymouth had no full-size car and the first B bodies, the downsized Plymouths and Dodge Darts were not the cars referred to as plucked chickens. I love those, best “full-size” cars of the era, way ahead of their time.
That was always my take, as well, since the rounded rear fender humps and taillights of those cars most resembled the look of a chicken without its tail feathers.
If I were to say a car looked like a ‘plucked chicken’, it would be one of them.
Salvatore Dali approves. Hard to believe cars like this were approved for production. You can’t take your eyes off it.
Charles Phoenix (the seller) has a youtube channel where he reviews cars like this. He has a funny Charles Nelson Reilly/Paul Lynde style.
“I know.”
He posted about this exact car seven days ago – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvqQBc58J7g
These look like something out of “The Jetsons”.
My fave “Forward Look” Mopar, the ’60 Chrysler was introduced just a year earlier than this abomination. I consider the Chrysler perfect, it still is stunning today. OTOH this Plymouth is one of the ugliest cars ever, one stares at in disbelief…
We’ve went from cars with super wow factor, to cars with blah factor.
Just wow…..this has to be the most original `61 Fury HT left! And since it existed on the left coast it dodged the tin worm. The interior in many respect looks showroom now. Not even a shoe mark on the kick panels in 64 years! I love it.
I got laughed at numerous times over my “love” for Exner’s last gasp `61 models. When I was little, Mr. Chamberlain at the end of my block had a metallic turquoise 4dr. HT with a white roof. His wife hated the thing, but he called that front end “the monster that ate Tokyo!” By about `69 or so, he only had about 18K miles on it; it never went further than the Ace hardware on Center St.!
Good morning Stephen! Your automotive knowledge, topics, and subjects, are among the highlights of Paul’s site. Always appreciate, and look forward to your very impressive work, and delightful presentations.
I’m a bit surprised, you would foremost consider a car as a utilitarian aid, to help people remain mobile. Given the often eclectic and premium automotive subjects you present, I pondered you’d perhaps categorize cars foremost, as status symbols.
However polarizing the design of the ’61 Plymouth Fury was, and such a brand and financial risk, I have always appreciated the audacity behind this outside-the-box design. Sometimes wish corporations were a bit more risk-taking and market-leading, in their product presentation.
@Daniel M.: Thank you so much! I hope to keep the articles coming.
Not what I’d choose to own but yes, a wildly over the top design and in fantastic condition .
-Nate
It would be one kind of task just to keep a car like this *cosmetically* impeccable, but adding in the care involved in maintaining its drive-ability is really quite something.
I missed the “how many owners has it had?” info, but it’s all quite remarkable, no matter how many or how few.
Thanks for sharing this one—-and for the close-in photos.
Indeed, I’d be scared to death to take this miraculously preserved specimen out on the road for fear of some yahoo running a stop sign and plowing into it. Or, just as bad, the ancient brakes failing with similar dire consequences.
This really belongs in a museum.
This is a beautiful car from side view, but the front details are a bit weird. My question is if there is any headroom for the rear passengers. Or they didn’t care about that concern, style was more important than practicality.
Had a ’61 Belvedere ex-undercover cop car with HP 361 engine for a while and named him “Broderick” after Mr. Crawford of TV fame. Great car to drive and so cool-bizzaro looking, pale green with a white top so flew under the radar when on patrol. Had to be the oddest-shaped grille design ever. The guy in Texas who bought it painted it black & white and kept the name.
This design is purely emotional. It’s an art piece as much as an auto. It demands attention. It is non-conformist, refusing to be conventional. It is too cute by half. A triangular pizza topped with spaghetti, a submarine sandwich and the waitress.
The whole thing is unnecessary. Half that Exner stuff was too much. Look at GM. Look at Ford. What’s the point of doing this again? To be the competitor in a tuxedo at a swim meet? No – to sell cars.
At a time when Lincoln Continental was the look, this car was a rhinestone dowager dressed for a Sci-Fi convention unmarried basement comic book collectors attended. The market told Exner auto design shouldn’t be lead by the theatre Glee kids.
I love the comparison photo of the last, truly full-size Plymouth before the disastrous downsizing, and then the return to full-size with the 1965 C-body. It makes one wonder how differently the styling transition might have been from 1962 to 1964 if the downsizing hadn’t occurred.
The sad part is the downsizing wasn’t a bad idea, at all. It was just executed very badly.
This is how the ’62 Plymouth Fury was intended to be before the downsizing. FWIW, it wasn’t all that right for the times, in terms of that bubble-top roof and extravagant “side fins”. Everyone else was going to convertible-style coupe roofs and cleaner sides. I don’t think these big Mopars would have sold any better than the downsized ones; possibly worse.
The pie-plate headlight nacelles did the front end styling of the 1962 Plymouth no favors, even on the original full-size car. Really, the only car on which those looked good was the 1963 Turbine Car. Of course, those wouldn’t have been much good in even a slow front end bump. I might go so far as to suggest the Turbine Car’s front end was the worst in terms of preventing front end damage (with the 1969-70 NASCAR Mopar wingcar specials a close second).
The wart-hog front end of the 1962 Dodge wasn’t exactly a styling tour de force, either. The substantially more restained Engel copy of the 1962 Chevy for the 1964 Plymouth was way more successful, both in looks and sales.
So, yeah, considering the rest of the continued outlandish styling of the original 1962 full-size proposal, probably wouldn’t have made much of a difference in sales.
There was an alternative design they once studied but rejected as shown for the proposed 1962 DeSoto done by Don Kopka.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/16/9a/d8/169ad89e91934263dfd2114870ffd382.jpg
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/04/9b/b0/049bb03a9fd37bc73b83ce59c53d38a8–cars.jpg
Stephen, with the help of your enthusiasm I have come to really appreciate these big Mopars from this era. They are a refreshing contrast to the all-too familiar GM and Ford products. These Mopars fascinated me as a child, but in later years it was all-too easy to pick on them, as the oddball creations of a somewhat challenged design team at Chrysler at the time. Now I am quite utterly captivated again. And this example, shot in front of that perfectly chosen building as a backdrop, has really made my morning.
Thank you, Paul. I agree–the opening shot with the long, low, horizontal lines of the Frank Lloyd Wright-style architecture go well with the long, low, horizontal body lines of the Plymouth. Charles found the perfect backdrop. I like finding the best backgrounds to photograph classic cars, but it isn’t always easy.
Great article, excellent writing and a superb car. The seller, however, didn’t pay attention to his ad, where he says the car has power brakes and the view under the hood doesn’t show it.
I’m always aware that you’ve got a copy of my first-memory car, the ’58 Ford Custom 300. It’s the best example for me to show how “just a car” is a source of youthful (well….infant in this case) memories!
The first car fits right in with that mid-century building in the background, too. I honestly wasn’t 100% certain the lede photo wasn’t actually taken in 1961 at first.
These have become a favorite of mine. I am still a little cold on the front end, but the lovely minimalist rear more than overcomes that weakness. A car as a plaything has 2 jobs – be enjoyable to drive and to get attention. This one aces both tasks. If only it was turquoise or pink.
A close look shows that the Dodge upholstery cloth is different. The Dodge stripe pattern repeats, while Plymouth uses the light stripe to separate the other colors from each other. Only Chrysler of that era could offer such meaningless differences that nobody could spot.
Some Exner excess is always nice to see, we simply didnt have enough of these cars when they were new Chrysler Canada didnt CKD the entire range of body styles so Fury hardtops werent on the local menu, a school friends parents had a moredoor version, I still like them.
These were cars that were easy to dismiss when they were just five year old used cars. Back in the early ’70’s when I was in high school, I thought that these were just ugly and weird. My Dad bought a ’61 Dodge Seneca two door sedan stripper in ’75. I drove it quite a bit and I STILL thought that it was just weird and ugly.
However looking at this perfectly preserved example of the fanciest two door hardtop, I can appreciate what the designers were trying to achieve. It really is a Mid Century Modern/Googie design. The first photo in front of the Mid Century styled building really brings that point home. The rear quarter panels look like a test run of the following Imperial front end with the floating headlamp housings. I think that the long flowing horizontal lines and roof are quite attractive. The front end is unforgettable and maybe some Lexus designers have gotten infected with the same bug!
It’s funny that the entire Mopar line was redesigned in 1949 in a more practical manner, bigger on the inside, smaller on the outside, and tall enough to wear a hat while driving. That dull styling hurt sales for many years even though the car themselves were well engineered and well built. Maybe Chrysler corp. figured that it wouldn’t hurt to take more chances stylistically. But the styling of this Fury was just not in step with the times, it might have done better in the mid Fifties.
Love it. Like a photo of a moment. We mustn’t try to put it in context; just enjoy it. Beautiful car. Fun post.
All those door panels and chrome trim look all nice….Very straight metal…The only unmatched chrome on the Fury is that right rear corner around the trunk….I’ve seen worse on brand new Hondas…..Other than that the fit and finish look as good as a brand new Toyota……And everyone says that older American cars were just thrown together…..I just laugh when I hear people say this…..See my father worked for Ford back in the day,from “59-“91…..And unless people were actually there and saw how a car was built,they should just keep their mouth shut…..Because all these restoration shops don’t know jack about how a car was built….Sure they can restore a car…..Anyone can restore a car….But only the men and women of the UAW knew how the cars were actually built…..I salute them all,and they know who they are.
Your comment reminded me of this 1961 Plymouth commercial. I believe the quality was there. Warning: This tune will get stuck in your head…
I really enjoyed this article and all of the stunning photos, especially the first one! The ’61 Plymouth wasn’t my favorite back in the day; I like best the 1957-58 Chrysler and DeSoto models plus the 1960 versions of both brands. But this Plymouth is outstanding in its condition.
When I was growing up, our next-door neighbor was a Plymouth man. He had in succession, a ’56, ’58, ’61, and ’64, all Belvedere 4-door sedans IIRC. The ’61 was battleship gray. The funny thing is that his wife didn’t drive and always rode in the back seat, Miss Daisy style. Word was that she didn’t like the way he drove!
Perhaps you linked it in the article and I missed it, but I did see this on YT: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvqQBc58J7g
Shot at the same location as the photos, which is a very period-appropriate background. I am also a fan of all the Chryslers from the mid 50s-early 60s, the more outrageous the better. The world was better off for having had their quirky vision of auto styling in it, even if perhaps the company wasn’t. Of all the wacky cars they did, I’ve always considered the 61 Plymouth perhaps the wackiest. I can’t say that I think it’s conventionally beautiful, truthfully it’s a little awkward from most angles, still I think it’s fascinating and would definitely want one if I could have a large stable of collector cars. I hope this amazing survivor it finds a great home.
Is coastal CA the #1 place for car preservation provided consistent garaging and care, with its mild temps and low humidity?
The first shot of the profile of the car is perfect. Love the view of the car. The view from behind and inside the car is just as nice. The view, from the front, has always been hard for me to process. The car looks so angry from that direction which makes it appropriate for it’s name…FURY… now get out of my way!
Stephen, thanks for this. My very first post on CC centered on the wagon version of this car, as it was the very first car in my COAL and the earliest car I can remember.
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/cars-of-a-lifetime/coal-1961-plymouth-suburban-it-means-car-to-me/
Ours was a shade darker Mopar tan/copper/bronze, but the dash and interior was the same as the one you write about.
Sadly, the car is long gone.
But I do still have the keys.
Lord! Spectacular! I’d be afraid to ever risk it on a public road. It’s just so pristine!
Needs one of those “period correct”, a/c units.
That’s a cool roof line on that Coupe.
As quirky, odd, as they are, they’re such an improvement over the “60”, editions!
That dash looks like it inspired the robot from the film Short Circuit.
Plymouth really nailed the look of this era with this terrific example.
As for the ’61 Dart Phoenix, not so much.
I never cared for these cars(maybe because there were too many dull, low grade sedans) but this one changes my opinion. An Exner spaceship ready to take off.
My parents had a blue ’61 Fury sedan, definitely the wackiest car they ever owned.
I can appreciate what Exner was trying to do here but the details don’t come off.
Like why are the inner and outer headlights not parallel?
Charles Phoenix is a great follow on IG – he specializes in slide shows of old Kodachromes and has published several books about them.
Well preserved …too bad it is such a butt ugly car ….but the ’62 was even worse. This is the time period that Plymouth was ousted by from third place in sales by Pontiac.
No. 3 in 1961 was AMC, followed by Pontiac, Oldsmobile, and Mercury, so Plymouth had fallen to seventh place. (Mercury was only very narrowly ahead of Plymouth in 1961 — by fewer than 2,000 cars — but it was ahead, thanks mostly to the Comet.
Well preserved …too bad it is such a butt ugly car ….but the ’62 was even worse. This is the time period that Plymouth was ousted by from third place in sales by Pontiac.