A previous post featured a GAZ 13 Chaika, but these photos I discovered on eBay show a much nicer example, with a lot of detailed, close-up shots. So I thought it was worth documenting this car on Curbside while the eBay listing is still up. This may be the only car of its kind in the U.S., and the “Buy It Now” price–that’s a lot of rubles!
Here’s how the seller describes what he has:
Gaz 13 ChaikaMade in USSR. Top Government Officials Car.
Gaz 13, produced from 1959 to 1981.
Only 3,179 examples built during the 22 years of production.
Not more than 150 left in the world.
This, exclusive luxury car 1963 year made.
Very few, if not only one car in US.
In 1996 it was restored in Molotov Garage (best restoration firm in Moscow).
Since, that time kept in garage in California.
Restoration completed 1000 miles ago.
Car runs and drives like new, ready for any parade, shows or touring rally,
beautiful car, must see AUTOMOBILE!!!
Good Luck and Thanks for Looking!
I first became aware of these when I was probably in junior high school and I had a copy of AUTO PARADE 1961, which had pictures and descriptions of cars all around the world made that year.
They were listed under the name “Avtoexport”, which seemed strange because I don’t think the Soviet Union was exporting that many “avtos” in 1961.
If this doesn’t stimulate interest in Russian cars, I don’t know what will!
Ч A й K A” across the front, means “seagull” in Russian.
From front to back I see ’56 Packard, ’55 Mercury, Checker . . .
. . . ’57 Pontiac or 58-59 Rambler Ambassador at the rear . . .
and ’57 Lincoln fins!
I also see Forward Look Mopar in the windshield design. Whoever designed this Chaika was cribbing from everyone!
When I had my black ’58 Cadillac, I used to fill up at a Shell station run by Russian émigrés. Seeing my car, they would excitedly cry out, “Chaika, Chaika!” Also they would say, “Looks like John F. Kennedy’s car!” ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I was briefly dating a Russian girl from school, and I took her for a ride in my Cadillac. She had an accent like Boris Badinov’s sidekick Natasha, and she exclaimed, “Thees eez lahk Roosian cahhrr!” [Unfortunately, she didn’t end it with “Dahhling!”]
Back to our Chaika . . . You’ve got to check out the inside. Here we can really see the Packard similarity, right down to the silver “V” molding in the dashboard!
If that’s a real wood steering wheel, I would say that’s even more beautiful and luxurious than the American Packard!
Those are not typical AM/FM numbers on the radio band. Maybe the Russians use different frequencies? Or is it a short wave set?
Engine chromed and detailed to near perfection! Here are some technical specs from the eBay listing:
Rear seat luxury suitable for the leader of a great superpower!
As a matter of fact, judging from these photos, it seems as if everything on this car is so well crafted!
I’ve seen a few Russian products made during the Soviet years, and I have to say I’m really impressed by their beauty and solidity.
A lot of things have that Fabergé jewelry-like quality . . .
Clock with timer in sparkling gold finish!
This sewing machine is like a work of art!
No, it’s not Sputnik, but a Russian vacuum cleaner!
Chaika vacuum. This model to me resembles a streamlined train from the 1930s!
I have this Russian straightedge with rollers for drawing parallel lines. What amazes me is how heavy it is! I asked someone of Russian descent why these things are so heavy, and he replied, “That’s because we measure production in weight!”
So, were Soviet products and technology really so inferior, as many Westerners presume? If I were an apologist for the Soviet system (which I am not), I would say that since the state-controlled industry produces ONE product of a certain kind, it aims to produce the BEST version of that product, without regard to cost-cutting, because there is no profit motive and no competition.
I believe this reads: “We slay lazy workers!”
And while I certainly have no first-hand knowledge, I would suspect that there was little tolerance in the USSR for the slacker, meatball, acceptance-of-mediocrity attitude in factories that is stereotypically associated with American workers and companies.
With all this industrial design talent, why did the Russian auto industry resort to aping out-of-date American car styling clichés instead of coming up with their own fashionable look, as with the other products I’ve shown?
And it looks like they’re still playing the same game! This ZiL limousine proposal looks like a Chrysler 300 in the front, and a few other influences along the rest of the (heavy looking) car.
I actually think this car is quite spectacular! Chrysler should start making it and call it Imperial!
Here’s another Russian stunner . . .
This is what Buick should be building. Call it Limited or Riviera!
Good cars for video games!
As for this 1963 Chaika for sale, only a real decadent capitalist pig would be able to pony up $220,000 to Buy It Now. Will it sell, comrade? “The Free Market” will decide!
Also related:
CC 1976 GAZ 13 Chaika – Apparat Chic, Or A Short History of Long Soviet Cars T87
Beautiful pics. I’m tempted to think that the cowl and dashboard were partly copied from a ’55 Plymouth. The windshield is definitely more Chrysler than Ford, while the middle body is Ford.
The radio is shortwave, with buttons for the familiar 49, 31, and 25 meter bands. The right button is УК for Ultra-Short wave, in other words the Russian FM band 65 to 74 MHz.
The rear has an interesting second beltline, more or less continuing the Packard cusp around the whole car.
I’ve always felt that the Soviet centralized planning had a lot to do with their cars invariably looking 5-10 years late by the time they came out. With no capitalism, there’s no competition. With no competition, there’s no motivation to get the design bureau working hard and fast to get their product out before the (non-existent) competition. And there’s no motivation to update the product as soon as the (non-existent) competition introduces a better product. So the designers are working slower, not bothered by the knowledge that, by the time the car is introduced, the firms they’ve copied from will already be one, possibly two, generations beyond the original copied design.
Also, between the reports I’ve read over the years (with some propagandistic bent included, no doubt) and conversations I’ve had with the couple of Soviet emigres I’ve met in my life, I think you’re giving a bit too much credit to the motivation and dedication of the Soviet worker. As one emigre told me decades ago (and I still remember the comment), “They pretend to pay us, so we pretend to work.”
That said, I have no doubt that a product destined for governmental big-shots would have an extra level of quality control built into the production process, with extra penalties for slacking.
Gulag or ?
Syke wrote: “Also, between the reports I’ve read over the years (with some propagandistic bent included, no doubt) and conversations I’ve had with the couple of Soviet emigres I’ve met in my life, I think you’re giving a bit too much credit to the motivation and dedication of the Soviet worker. As one emigre told me decades ago (and I still remember the comment), “They pretend to pay us, so we pretend to work.”
Ordinary Soviet – era factories were rife with absenteeism, and also alcoholism was a massive problem. Citizens were “guaranteed” a job, and just about the only cause for firings was for “political” reasons. IIRC most Soviet products were stamped with a production date, consumers tried to avoid stuff made on the weekends, or on Fridays or Mondays, workers on those days were either drunk or hungover. Some Ukrainian pals said that “vodka breaks” for all were a common part of factory life, and these guys worked in engineering! When Gorbachev came to power in 1985, the first thing he did was to ban drinking on the job and heavily restrict liquor sales. Many, many hated him for this…people just home – brewed and continued drinking away. Workers would also fritter away work time to take “extended” breaks, this was to go stand for hours in long lines at stores for the few and scarce goods available…”everybody did it”, it was just a facet of work life.
The Baltics, especially Estonia and Latvia, produced a lot of “advanced” stuff – consumer electronics, appliances, telecommunications, IT – and the standard of work in those places was somewhat higher. But even East Germany eventually banned the sale of Soviet colour TV sets, as they were extreme “fire hazards”…they’d explode and burn, causing much injury and damage. I bought some Soviet (Melodiya label) classical record albums in Prague and East Berlin, the crude LP sleeves were pasted together with *horse glue* that stank to high heaven (the odor *never* dissipated over many years!) – this was how primitive things could be in the old USSR…
The higher – level Soviet cars were apparently virtually hand – built to spec for the Dear Leaders, so probably less latitude for drinking on the job in those places…thus better quality.
Totally agree with everything you say about work morals in the USSR but I have to differ about the cars being many years behind when they were NEW. I believe that – when both Chaika and ZIL prototypes came out – they were more or less up to date in so far as the US parallels were concerned. Later of course they were not developed, the cars being produced in the same form until replaced by a totally new model (which again was up to date with was made in the US on that time) and the whole cycle repeated itself. Technically they could have redesigned them every say 3 years or so but such development was reserved for military equipment – it was a question of priorities. The tech was always there, the money less so (and none at all in the end).
Spherical and cylindrical vacuum cleaners were all the rage in the Fifties, but these are very nice examples. I wouldn’t mind having them, unlike the Seagull! (Did you notice it doesn’t have hydraulic lifters?)
From reading the book The Russians by Hedrick Smith, once-famous New York Times Moscow correspondent, the issue was that average citizens had nowhere near the means to buy consumer goods like this. How good was the quality? No idea, but Smith said to pack extra ball point pens and toothpaste to hand out as gifts because the Russian versions were so bad.
I used to have a Hoover vac that looked alot like the Sputnik vac shown here, except rather than wheels, it exhausted its air on the bottom, pushing the vacuum off the floor. It floated around effortlessly like a hovercraft!
I bet your kid could go for a ride on that if you souped it up a little
Real Dogmars on the rear were an option I see.
Coincidentally, there is a 1953 Packard limousine also being offered for sale on eBay right now. I’ve posted a photo grabbed from the listing rather than a link that will expire. It’s interesting to compare this limousine body (built by Henney?) to the Chaika and note the similarities and differences. It would be fun for the same collector to acquire both and show them side by side.
I have first-hand experience with Soviet cameras. Nobody can claim that their workmanship and finish were exemplars. In fact those products really did show a “slacker, meatball, acceptance-of-mediocrity attitude.” Even where fine designs from elsewhere were copied, slack production tolerances resulted in performance which varied all over the place, from very good to unacceptable.
Some Soviet photo equipment was imitative in design (some were made with designs and production machinery appropriated from Germany after WWII) but others were quite original. The Soviet designs were often rugged and sturdy, if not as smooth-operating and precise as Japanese and Western European photo equipment.
After Communism crashed and burned, many of the by-then obsolete camera designs, uncompetitive by then, were ditched. Some continued to be sold from enormous backlogs of product which had been built to boost production statistics…but without a market and without buyers.
The Kiev 35mm rangefinder, a copy of the Contax, is a good example. After the war the Soviets took everything they could get their hands on meaning factories and people. So everything Zeiss had ended up in Russian hands and they started making knockoffs of the Contax. It has been understood that the early ones were made from Zeiss parts. Mine is circa 1954 by Arsenal.
Later models used Russian made parts and there the quality takes a hit. When I looked for mine I purposely avoided 1970 on up and concentrated in the 50s where it is hard to find good examples. I have a 56 taken apart right now to fix the shutter if I can ever remove one damn screw. Just like a car it is always that last bolt.
I have a few old Soviet cameras, picked up on e-Bay, sourced from the Ukraine, after I got interested in playing with film photography again (maybe because old cameras are cheaper than old cars). Two are copies of Leicas, a Zorki and a Fed, and one, like tbm3fan’s is a Kiev Contax copy. On the used market, they’re remarkably good cameras for the money, to be 60+ years old, with unusually sharp lenses and dead-on rangefinders. I like them because, If I drop and break one out hiking, it’s a $100 loss, as opposed to a $1,200+ loss for a real-deal German original. I agree that conventional wisdom on these as the quality suffered more as time went on, kind of like GM cars in the ’50’s through the ’80’s. My luck with commie cameras has been much better than my purchases of old Kodak Retinas (from Kodak’s German subsidiary), which I also love. I’ve been tempted by old Leicas, but buying one conflicts with my inner cheap-skate.
It’s definitely a dark history though. Like you both said, taken by the Commies as war reparations from the Nazis to start. The FED is named for Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky, founder of the Soviet secret police, an organization we knew as the KGB.
G. Poon wrote: “Some Soviet photo equipment was imitative in design (some were made with designs and production machinery appropriated from Germany after WWII) but others were quite original. The Soviet designs were often rugged and sturdy, if not as smooth-operating and precise as Japanese and Western European photo equipment…”
Hmmm…kind of like a Lada Niva 🙂
I remember in the early 70’s when I got the photography bug and was shopping for a nice camera. The local photo store (Normal, IL) had a couple of Soviet models on offer, but the owner said they could “vary” in quality, “Okay if you don’t expect or need much”, he said. These cameras were really basic and cheap, about half the price of the Minolta SRT – 101 I eventually bought. He even had a Soviet enlarger in stock. In Western Europe there was a certain market for Soviet photo stuff, and also for some basic portable radios (and yes, even cars!). These were all bargain – priced to move, the Soviets really needed the hard currency from these sales…ISTR that some of these items were re – branded and sold via West German catalog houses.
The author has never driven a Soviet era Lada or Moskwich. Made even British cars look good. Shoddy, no QI and third rate materials meant most rusted and broke down at an alarming rate.
Sorry, but I lived in the UK for 12 years between 1989-2001 and seen my fair share of Ladas. They in fact rusted LESS than the equivalent British cars due to being built from thicker gauge sheet steel (the Italians got the rubbish stuff). I don’t ever recall Ladas with terminal rust in the Mk I-IV Ford Escort, Vauxhall Chevette or Moris Marina way. Yes they were shoddily built but even my babushka could repair them with the proverbial hammer and vice-grips. You had to sort out the stuff Ivan and Yuri forgot to tighten and then you had a reasonably reliable A to B car. Ask yourself why you still see tons of them on the roads of the remotest regions of Russia, Armenia, Tajikistan and Kazakhstan.
Could they have bought old tooling from the American black market? Were there Rosenbergs in Detroit?
Nope. That is a recurring myth. While the Chaika generally resembles a 1955-56 Packard, if you put the two cars next to each other, you would see that the proportions are different and likely no body panels, doors or even bumpers from one would fit the other. This comes up a lot also with respect to an earlier generation of Soviet car that even more closely resembles a ’41 Packard, but once again, not a single part interchanges. Did Soviet designers purposely imitate Packard designs, and maybe do some reverse engineering from publicly available examples or information? Sure, and it’s politically and sociologically interesting that they imitated the designs of vehicles that most symbolized capitalist success (later on, they copied Cadillac and Imperial design elements too).
The interior is by no means stock, whether the wood is real or not it’s part of the “restoration” upgrade – the seat pattern as seen on the back seat is very ’90s so that too.
Agreed on the interior. Massive updates.
Yeah, that interior has a lot of issues. Number one on my list would be how the dash frame doesn’t fit the dashboard itself at all. Those “best restorers in Russia” Molotovs should get fired.
Cadillac could pick up a few pointers from the last batch of photos.
Not too excited by what’s coming out of Detroit at present.
IKR??
They went all in on flossy rebadged SUVs
Jay Leno has the Chinese equivalent to the Chaika in his collection.
Hope someone can convenient Jay to bid on this example.
I’m a bit confused about how the ZIL 111 (shown in the drawing just above the modern cars here) is different from the Chaika, other than looking even more like a ’56 Packard.
The ZIL was a cut above. Politburo, army marshals and the like. Chaikas were relatively more common, though still out of reach of anyone but a select few.
To make an imperfect comparison, R-R Phantom VI = ZIL; Daimler DS240 = Chaika.
The ZIL and the Chaika were designed at the same time by the same person, so they do share a few common Packard-influenced traits.
This movie said it all about the social class of Chaika. ( even though, it was filmed in DDR about DDR, not СССР )
Einfach Blumen aufs Dach
Tatra87 wrote: “The ZIL was a cut above. Politburo, army marshals and the like. Chaikas were relatively more common, though still out of reach of anyone but a select few…”
IIRC in East Germany the top brass had Volvos (including stretch limos) and even Citroens, I’ve seen pictures of DDR leader Erich Honecker in both. Lower level comrades might have Chaikas or Tatra 603’s, I remember seeing a number when I visited East Berlin in the late 70’s…
[On a much lower scale, there were plenty of Volga taxis in East Berlin and Dresden, I took several trips in them. Ladas and Moskvitches were thick on the ground, some Zaporozhets, too…]
It’s much the same car, or at least quite similar. Soviet badge engineering. I believe the ZiL was the higher level car reserved for high government officials and the Chaika was for the next tier down.
They were completely different mechanically. I suppose you can at best liken them to Mopars of the 50s which had 3 or 4 different engine families.
Vacuum cleaner is not Russian. It’s Lithuanian, named Saturnas (Saturn in Lithuanian) as it looks like Saturn with rings.
Ralph L,
Because these cars were made in such limited quantities each year, it was not economical to manufacture all the parts from old USA tooling. What did make financial sense was to buy obsolete spare parts from North American suppliers.
For example, I bought a Chaika Gaz 13 in England in the late 1980s, However when I went to export the car to the USA, I discovered the actual British title said it was a 1974 model year car, not a 1959 model year as advertised, and it was too new to import to the USA. So I ended up selling it again.
However during the short time I owned it, I noticed the dash gauges and power window switches looked exactly like 1956 senior Packard parts. I pulled the 4- switch power window switch assembly off the door card, and on looking on the back side of the chrome housing, I found the manufacturer’s ID number, the exact same one as on the ones used in the 1955 & 1956 Packards! I didn’t have the time to check the dash gauges, but I’m 99.9% sure they were also surplus Packard gauge units, bought from the original supplier.
Consider that sub-manufacturer’s provide thousands of different small parts to manufacturers every year. They always over-produce the actual number of planned product, and this is so they can provide additional pieces for parts inventories at the dealers and the parts zone locations.
So the manufacturer of the power window switches for the 1955-56 Packards had every expectation of making these for several more years, and then suddenly at the end of 1956, they were no longer needed. So they would normally sell off the surplus pieces to a scrap wholesaler in Detroit.
Now for those who don’t know me, I was in the Packard parts business for over 30 years. I know who bought the majority of excess inventory not bought by Studebaker-Packard, and these power window assemblies never showed up in the huge bins and round tubs this company had in their warehouses. The actual inventory held by S-P in South Bend was quickly exhausted by the late 1960s.
So where did they end up? That’s the question. It’s my opinion that the answer lies in the Gaz factory! Gaz likely had an intermediary [perhaps a European buyer] grab the obsolete inventory in Detroit at scrap prices, and send them to Russia, by way of Europe. A price that was far cheaper than trying to make them, even if they had the original tooling. It’s also possible the Gaz buyers never even knew what the original end user [Packard] was.
And there is another thing to consider: Look under the hood of the Chaika, and also a late 1950s Chrysler product. Note how similar the power brake unit is, and also the Power steering pump/generator is, the those in use on the Chrysler cars. I did a quick comparison of the windshield on a Chrysler and the Chaika, and I suspect they are also the same.
The generator on my Chaika had a Russian data plate of the same dimensions, and in the same location, as on several 1950s Chrysler generators I owned. And on both the Chaika and Chrysler, the power steering pump is driven off the back of the generator. Co-incidence? I don’t think so.
I wish I had a chance to take detailed measurements from both American & Russian variations, and see if the Chaika was built to SAE or Metric specs. I’m betting the Chaika’s parts are a mix of both.
Interesting…
Didn’t the ’57-58 “Packardbakers” (Hawk excepted) also use real ’55-’56 Packard gauges? (56 only for the clock, as the 55 had a smaller clock used that year only).
For almost all, cold war era, big Eastern automobiles ( either by USSR or PRC, N Korea, all those red countries ) what I discovered is strange swap of parts from old Detroit iron. Here and there, small bits look uncanny familiar and might turn out to be from somewhere North America, especially those less attention paid ( AMC, Packard! )
But things like that are secrets among a very small group of people, for various reasons, even for the engineers or designers worked on them. I’m pointing to Hongqi CA7460 and those few people in Dearborn )
LOVELY car. I’d sure like to see an “SAE paper” on the engine, and the vehicle in general.
I want to see an un-restored unit, preferably in good condition. I, too, think the “restoration” created a (much) better-than-new vehicle.
Solid lifters. Ha. It took decades after that vehicle was built, for US retail to decline to the point where they fail to sell a decent mass-market hydraulic lifter. (But at least we’re supporting a Communist super-power while willingly being a dumping-ground for low-quality junk.)
Soviet products may have been “heavy” and “substantial” because it takes some effort to sculpt the molds and run the machine tooling to reduce weight; and until the molds are perfected, the scrap rate would be high. “Simple” and “heavy” don’t just go together, they’re practically synonymous.
Seen the movie “K19”? I don’t buy that the Soviets can build a jewel-like car, but can’t build a properly-functioning nuclear submarine. Maybe it’s the result of American propaganda, but I think the sub is what is more typical of the Planned Economy.
The Soviets had nice-looking “stereo” equipment, too. There are advertisements for it, posted on a couple of audio-centric forums I belong to. Question is, who was able to afford the stuff; was it a toy for the ruling class, with advertising to prove to the West that life in the Soviet Union was grand?
Committee of the Communist Party’s limousine
Not shown in the photos are the pushbutton transmission controls. Mounted on the left like a Chrysler rather than in a steering column pod like a Packard.
3 Speed Hydraulically Transformer. Hybrid electric drive, robot in disguise or PCB cooled electric transformer?
Probably they could not find an exact translation for torque converter. I believe they started with the German expression: “hydraulisch drehmoment wandler”. See above on the engine description: “4-takt” meaning 4 stroke.
My mother-in-law had the identical clock to the one that is the second photograph. My wife probably brought it as a gift when she visited Armenia S.S.R. in 1969. It worked well and as has been pointed out, weighed quite a bit. As for the featured limousine, I saw its slightly lesser model about twenty-five years ago in a warehouse in Northvale, NJ. I was calling on the owner of the warehouse to sell him a truck. I looked at that car and thought, “AH, take young ladies to dacha for the weekend for fun. Give them presents.” It was a midlevel party members car of privilege. Love those new Russian upscale models. My wife also brought home a Russian imitation of a Zeiss Ikon camera. I never bothered with it because it lacked a coordinate light meter and other features that I had on my camera. Interesting product however.
That super special Russian car is illustrated next to a Gulfstream G5 – a slightly obsolete (1997) American product made in Savannah, Georgia. Wonder if the Russians have an airplane that Gulfstream, Bombardier or Embraer should emulate?
If Avtoexport is too expensive or hard to obtain, try Novoexport
You can get a Chaika-13 anyway!
And while I certainly have no first-hand knowledge, I would suspect that there was little tolerance in the USSR for the slacker, meatball, acceptance-of-mediocrity attitude in factories that is stereotypically associated with American workers and companies.
The opposite, really. There was a working class saying in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics:
We pretend to work and they pretend to pay us
I’m friends with a Soviet émigré couple, she was a QA engineer, he was a software guy, both of whom had mid-level jobs in those positions in an electronics factory in Minsk. The stories they would tell…
The problem, as others have pointed out, was motivation. There was no monetary reward, just fear. Heck, after Ford sold a Model A factory to the USSR Stalin blamed its shortcomings on “wreckers and saboteurs.” Henry Ford Jr. did try to buy this ZIL-118 design in the 1960s but he couldn’t make a deal (source: Russia Beyond, ‘The rise and fall of Ford in Russia’, 17 June 2019)
“… while I certainly have no first-hand knowledge, I would suspect that there was little tolerance in the USSR for the slacker, meatball, acceptance-of-mediocrity attitude in factories that is stereotypically associated with American workers and companies.”
Roader has already made the point that you are under a misconception, but I will pile on. I spent some time traveling in the Soviet Union in the early 70’s. That’s when I first learned of Shturmovshchina, or in English, “Storming”. Wikipedia will give you more details but stealing a brief quote from them, “ [Storming] was a common Soviet work practice of frantic and overtime work at the end of a planning period in order to fulfill the planned production target. The practice usually gave rise to products of poor quality at the end of a planning cycle.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shturmovshchina
An easy and quick example: in the hotels in various cities in which I stayed it was common practice to require that any televisions be turned off if a guest left their room, and it was enforced by the maids going into your room when you left you key (and you had to leave your key to leave your hotel). To save energy? No, because it was a very common problem for television sets to catch on fire. There were thousands and thousands of them made…all exactly the same design.
A friend told me that a the washing machine factory where he worked, once when storming time came they had no bolts that were required for some particular assembly, so they used bent over nails, and they assembled the washers and shipped them.
“They pretend to pay us, and we pretend to work” indeed.
…aims to produce the BEST version…because there is no profit motive….
In 1983 Gorbachev went to China to find out how they were having so much success with their economy. He found that instead oconfiscating all the profits, they taxed them. This gave the managers an incentive to be more efficient, to innovate, to focus on quality, in an effort to beat the competition. Unfortunately, there was a lot of push back from the Party ideologues and this reform never really got underway.
That may be true now but having audited several medical device manufacturing facilities in the PRC back in the aughts, with the exception of a Party owned/operated company in Xi’an, all were modern, well equipped factories with motivated workforces. Probably not coincidentally most were Taiwanese owned and were sprinkled around Guangzhou. The Party owned factory was a craphole in every respect, which exactly matched the atmosphere in Xi’an which was horribly polluted with coal burning emissions.
Perhaps Xi turned back Deng’s reforms in those intervening 15 years.
I have wanted one of these since an article in Cars and Parts magazine. I saw that auction and it is only a few minutes away from me. If the price was not so out of my range I would have gone down to kick the tires. I wonder what is up with the aftermarket rims?
I read WeChat saying its V8 engine is a copy of mid50s Chrysler products. Similar Chinese Hongqi CA72 was developed based of 1956 Chrysler Imperial, but Chinese did not exactly copies Chrysler engine for various reasons, it ended up to be domestic product.
Stalin had many Packards in his personal fleet. He favored American cars. That may account for the Packard look of many of the Soviet era designs.- lasting well after Stalin’s demise.
I was born in the USSR and these are cars from my childhood. Back in the day, they conveyed very high prestige. To Russians of the WWII generation, American Packards and Studebakers were highly respected, like Buicks in China. So copying them was natural. Very few Chaikas were privately owned, mostly they belonged to government organizations and central garages. So if some Politburo member or other bigshot needed to go somewhere, his secretary made a phone call and a Chaika was soon there to pick him up. That’s how it worked. When you saw one on the street, you knew that whoever was in the back seat was important. Regular people got to ride in a Chaika only on rare special occasions, like maybe a wedding, and even then you needed to have some pull. Restored Chaikas are still popular in Russia as wedding limos today.
This Chaika is indeed rare, but certainly not the only one in the USA. I have seen at least two, one in Brooklyn and another – a super rare convertible – at a classic car dealer in Freeport, Long Island. He told me that the car belonged to Khruschev. It was brought over when Khruschev visited the USA and was then left behind. I could have bought that car for $40,000. This was in the mid-1990s. The prices have gone up since, but I think this one is still overpriced.
Molotov Garage is well known in Moscow and they reportedly do good work. Unfortunately, “restoration” in Russia is more like “restomod” here. Very few people are into preservation and originality, it takes a special mindset that is not really common. So perhaps the restorers only did what the car’s owner requested, with the extra chrome and custom wooden wheel and c. 1990s “New Russian” style interior.
As far as the work ethic goes, one needs to remember that in a planned economy, the plan is of utmost importance. If production goals are not met, the entire factory loses their bonus and the management gets chewed out and loses privileges. So at the end of the cycle, you’d get screws hammered in and bolts untightened, anything to get the product out the door faster and meet the goal. Nobody cared about the eventual end user. There used to be many bitter jokes about this among the people, who came to expect having to immediately go over any new purchase with a file (“obrabotat’ napil’nikom”) and correct any factory defects before it was ready for use.