I apologize for not properly clarifying making the guidelines of yesterday’s QOTD about which car of the 1940s you’d pick. This is a PN MM (Mental Masturbation) exercise of the kind that I practiced way-too often as a kid, and can still pull off, all too well.
Here’s how it works: you’re going back in time to stay, and you have the resources to buy any American big car, thanks to a rich uncle who wrote it in his will that you get one new car each decade. You do have the knowledge of hindsight, so that you can wait and pick the car you most want in each decade. Or maybe not…something in between? Sorry; the mind is a curious thing.
The point is you’re a youngish guy and you love cars and you get to have one each decade. Its future value is irrelevant; you’re not bringing it back with you. You want the best car, and you’re going to drive it until the next one in the following decade.
So now you get to pick your big American car from the 1950s. Having done this exercise way too many times, I’ll go first. I didn’t need to, but I fell down the rabbit hole and I spent quite a bit of time MM’ing over this one again, and have come back out with even more knowledge, insight and appreciation for its qualities, which I’ll share with you not to sway your pick, but just because I finally have an audience with which to properly share mine.
It’s a bit challenging trying to explain to those who weren’t around way back why the ’55 Chevy was such a superlative car at the time, because of what it and its ’56 and ’57 stablemates have become and the heavy burden of their reputation and image. No, I have little or no desire to actually own one in 2019, except perhaps for a ratty six cylinder sedan as a counterpoint to this. But that’s off in the future; we’re now back in 1955.
And I’m going to take you along with me, and ask you to wipe out all you stereotyped perceptions built up over the decades and try to imagine what its qualities and impact really was like in 1955. Of course we also have to remember that the Tri-Five Chevys became such icons for a good reason (many actually), so we can’t totally ignore that either.
Let’s just say that the 1955 Chevy was one of those rare moments in automotive history when the best inclinations of engineers, planners and stylists converged. Very rare indeed. Unlike the ’55 Ford and Plymouth, which had underpinnings that went back some years, the Chevy was all new; totally so, except for the six cylinder engine and the Powerglide, both of which also received some changes for ’55.
It’s hard to imagine a time when ads featuring the Chief Engineer were used for mainstream big American cars. Porsche, BMW and Mercedes, yes, but a big mainstream Chevy? Ed Cole was a gifted engineer, and he truly did have the assignment of a lifetime, in directly heading up the development of a clean-sheet car including a clean sheet engine too. Realistically, this never happened again, except, in the case of Ed it did, with the Corvair. And there was a lot to be proud of.
The ’55 Chevy incorporated every feasible engineering advance available to Cole at the time: a stiffer frame, lighter but stiffer bodies, a modern ball-joint front suspension with significantly improved geometry resulting in class-leading handling, lighter and more precise steering, etc. It was the last time GM or any of the Big Three designed a new standard-sized car with handling, space efficiency, light weight, and all-round world-class roadability as the primary objective until the 1977’s. The 1958 Chevy that replaced it was all about massive size, a jet-smooth ride, and styling gimmickry, as were the next twenty years of big Chevys and all other big American cars. It was all downhill from here…
The crowning glory of the ’55 Chevy was the new V8 engine. The marriage of it and an all-new and significantly improved chassis with a firm ride and excellent handling for the times would set the standards in its class for decades. The Chevrolet small block needs no introduction, but it deserves accolades for being so significantly ahead of anything comparable, at the time, and seemingly forever. It was more compact and lighter (575 lbs) than the competition, and the combination of its short 3″ stroke and exceptionally well-breathing head gave it unparalleled performance and efficiency.
OK, we all now the Chevy V8quickly became the dominant engine in all fields of performance where it was class-appropriate. But that was no accident. Cylinder heads of an engine are the critcal component in determining an engine’s performance potential, as they determine the maximum flow of intake and exhaust gases. Of course other components like the camshaft, valve train, induction system, ignition and exhaust, all play a role, but the cylinder heads are the gatekeepers, and not so easily modified unlike the other components.
As a frame of reference, I’ll show you the Studebaker V8 because I just happened to find a cross-section of it. The Studebaker was new in 1951, at a time when high performance was just not factor in its design brief. Its initial version with 232 cubic inches had all of 120 hp, yet it had a massive block that weighed 695 lbs, almost the same or more than the big block first generation V8s from Packard (685 lbs), Cadillac (699 lbs), Buick (685) lbs, and Chrysler hemi (745 lbs). A tough engine, although its excessive weight on the front end of the fairly light Studebakers had a disproportionately negative impact on handling compared to the sixes. The Chevy V8 actually weighed 30lbs less than the six cylinder version.
Looking at its cross section, its ports are clearly not as ideally configured as the Chevy, the combustion chamber is not a wedge, the valves are smaller, and this along with its longer stroke and heavier valve gear made it rather unsuitable for higher outputs except with forced induction.
It’s not easy to see here, but Ford’s Y block V8, which arrived on year before the Chevy also suffered from poor porting and weighed some 625 lbs. There were some improved heads available in ’56 on a HO version, but by that time the Y block was essentially already history, to be replaced by the better-breathing FE in 1967. Ford also resorted to supercharging to keep up with the Chevy.
Plymouth got its first V8 in 1955 too, but it was hardly new, compact, light or inherently well-breathing either. It was the “polysphere” V8, which had a new, cheaper to build head on what had been the smaller hemi V8 that Dodge originally had. The hemis were all proving to be too expensive and heavy, and the poly was supposed to incorporate some aspects of their breathing abilities, but it didn’t work out that way.
“Hemi Andersen”, as quoted at Allpar:
You have to remember that this was happening in 1953-1954, as they planned for a V8 for the ’55 Plymouth. They still had six or seven years to go with the archaic flathead 6 which came out in the early 1930s, so they weren’t thinking very new; they were looking for a cheaper version of the existing Hemi.
This is why the 1955 Chevy V8 turned out to be so far advanced. Chevrolet came out with a whole new design, which Chrysler sort of finally arrived at with the wedge-head 273 in 1964, nine years late. The Y block Ford overhead-valve V8 was rubbish when it came out in 1954, but it improved, and the 312 was a pretty good engine in a lot of old stock cars.
Pete Hagenbuch (also at Allpar):
..the performance improved by getting rid of the silly polysphere. A wedged chamber (like the Chevy) have some advantages… you can build in a lot of what we call squish, where the chamber is just part of the cylinder head surface and the piston has a flat area that matches up with it. Squish is why you can run 12:1 on a wedge head because without squish you would have to run 9:1. It gets the charge moving and mixed, moving through the chamber at high velocity, which means the flame travel is fast and there isn’t anything left to burn by the time it gets to top dead center where you expect the detonation. Anything that reduces detonation also helps reduce pre-ignitionm which is catastrophic.
And Chrysler’s legendary J.C. Zeder, Director of Engineering (also from Allpar):
“We are not seeking to develop higher speeds and greater power than anyone else. The increased speeds and torque of the 1955 Plymouth, when combined with the PowerFlite transmission, results in improved performance in low and middle ranges, plus greater economy.” In other words, Plymouth’s new V8 was considered to be no more than a higher-powered extension of the traditional and reliable Plymouth flathead six.
The horsepower race, at the time, was considered by Chrysler to be exclusive to luxury cars. Chevrolet’s new V8 brought that concept to an end, and brought the horsepower race to the low-priced field.
I am including these other engines and these quotes because they reflect on the state of the low-priced field and the state-of-the-art in engine design prior to the Chevy’s revolutionary appearance. All of them were offered in four barrel variants that produced reasonably competitive outputs, including 177 hp for the 260 Plymouth, 198 hp for the top 292 Ford, and even the Studebaker 259 managed 185 hp in the late ’55 year top version, although only available on the Speedster and President. The difference was that there wasn’t that much more in them, not without resorting to more extreme cams and carburation, whereas the Chevy was just barely getting started.
Ed Cole insisted that the new Chevy V8 be truly new and groundbreaking, and no doubt he was likely already being influenced at the time by Zora Arkus-Duntov.
Duntov already had a legendary career in various facets of engineering, including the famous Ardun hemi head for the Ford fatthead V8. In January 1953, Duntov saw the Chevrolet prototype Corvette at Motorama. He wrote an ambitious letter asking for a job, outlining his ideas to make the Corvette an even better car. GM hired him to work with Maurice Olley in Chevrolet Research and Development as an assistant staff engineer, focusing on suspension and chassis development. He quickly established a reputation as a brash and outspoken but innovative engineer.
1953 Chevrolet
This was just what Chevrolet needed at that time. Despite Harley Earl’s styling, the Chevrolet division offered lackluster products with even more lackluster six cylinder engines. In mid-December 1953, Duntov wrote a memo destined to wake up the Chevrolet division. He argued that Chevrolet should manufacture and sell high-performance parts itself, rather than leave outsiders to direct the market and reap the profits. Olley would have none of that, and banished him to the truck department.
But Ed Cole “got it”, and soon had him fulfilling his dream of making the Corvette into a true sports car, starting with adapting the new V8 into the six-Cylinder Corvette, which became available in mid-1955. It was the beginning of a long legend.
The Chevy V8’s potential, thanks to its intrinsic qualities, was instantly recognized as the second coming of the engine-messiah, as this article from 1955 details. It was easy to increase its power very substantially with cheap over-the counter parts from Chevrolet or by aftermarket suppliers who quickly saw a gold mine.
But let’s first look at how the stock ’55 Chevy performed, and not just in a straight line. The 265 cubic inch V8 initially came in two power levels, a base 162 hp two-barrel single exhaust version and the 180 hp with a four barrel Carter WCFB carb and dual exhausts. The heads were the same, with a mild 8.0:1 compression ratio and an equally mild camshaft. Nevertheless, the 180 (gross) hp ’55 Chevy was quickly acknowledged to be about the fastest accelerating sedan that year, thanks to its relatively light weight. Road and Track managed a very decent (for the times) 0-60 of 9.7 seconds and a 17.4 second 1/4 mile.
It’s important to put that 180 hp rating in perspective. Back then, Chevrolet made both gross and net hp ratings available, and this little engine made 160 net hp, which is just ten less than the 170 net hp of the 350 4 barrel V8 of the 70s, an engine in a roughly comparable state of tune, meaning mild cam and modest-sized four barrel cam. Of course torque wasn’t nearly as much as the 350, but for these relatively light cars, that was not an issue. They simply revved higher and created more power.
Duntov’s adaptation of the 265 V8 for the Corvette included a new camshaft, the first of at least four famous cams grinds by him and his staff for the small block Chevy. This first iteration raised rated gross hp to 195, at a lofty 5,000 rpm, which was an unheard of speed at the time for a mass-produced large engine. The actual redline on the Corvette’s minuscule tach was set at Ferrari-esque 6500 rpm.
But look at the net hp number: 180. Not only is that remarkably high, but given that it’s only 15 hp less than the gross, one wonders if the gross number was being sandbagged already. And this is still with the same low 8.0:1 CR heads. Quite remarkable, but just the first step in an almost infinite number of progressive steps that would see the stock small block make a genuine 400 hp from a blueprinted but stock-legal ’67-’69 Z28 302 with open headers, despite being rated at a ridiculous 290 hp. The 302 made its peak power at around 7000-7200 rpm.
The impact on the Corvette was dramatic; it now scooted to 60 in 8.5 seconds, did the 1/4 mile in 16.5 @ 83 mph, and hit 118 mph. Ironically, those results were with the Powerglide, as curiously the V8 ’55 Corvette kept its standard PG except for a very small number of three-speed manuals that were built at the very end of the year. the Corvette had originally never been planned to have anything but the PG, so it took a bit of doing to adapt the manual. But it’s important to note that this first Duntov cam, as well as the second one, the famous “097” cam, were tame enough to be teamed with the automatic. We ran a 1957 Motor Trend vintage review comparison a while back, and the Chevy had the 270 hp dual quad 283 teamed with the PG.
As to just how fast the 195 hp Chevy sedan was, I don’t have ready info. But with the right transmission and gears, I’m going to guess it was as good or more likely better than the PG Corvette’s stats (60 in 8.5 secs, 1/4 mile in 16.5 @ 83 mph). May not seem like much from today’s perspective, but in 1955, these were superb for a highly affordable car. BTW, the Corvette only weighed about 300 lbs less than the ’55 sedan, not as much as one might imagine.
So let’s get into the details of my ’55 Chevy. I really love the Nomad, with its distinctive sports-wagon body and those big rear wheel openings. But it is some 130 lbs heavier than the Bel Air coupe (3295 lbs), and I want the best-handling, best-going ’55, so unless I change my mind (we are MM’ing, don’t forget), it will be the coupe.
And no frilly two-tone paint for me, thank you. This gold looks nice; I’m also a sucker for white. But no stripper two door sedan even though it does weigh 85 lbs less. It’s not worth it; I’m not exactly planning a career at the drag strip.
The next step is the transmission. No thanks, Powerglide. I’ll take the 6-speed manual. What, you say? Yes, Chevy also introduced a new overdrive three-speed Saginaw in 1955, and teamed it with a mighty aggressive 4.11:1 rear axle ratio to take full advantage of all those six gears (the regular three-speed got a 3.70:1 axle).
Of course to really take advantage of all of them, I’d convert it to manual operation as I did on my ’66 F100, which gives me five very nicely spaced gears, clutchless shifting, and a 1900 rpm cruise at 60. On my transmission, first OD and second direct are too close to make it worthwhile using both.
Here’s the Chevy gear ratios. There might just be enough of a gap between 1st OD (2.058:1) and second direct (1.68:1) to make it worthwhile.
And here’s the engine speeds at various speeds and gears. That 36.1 rpm at one mph equals a lazy 2160 rpm @ 60 mph in 3rd OD. What a relaxed way to cruise! And even 100 mph only equals 3600 rpm. And with that 4.11 rear axle, acceleration in first and through the gears is going to be wicked.
I just calculated the maximum speeds in each gear, assuming a 6500 rpm redline (shift point): 1st : 52mph; 1st OD: 61.3mph; 2nd: 75mph; 2nd OD: 107mph; 3rd: 126mph. So maybe the optional 4.56:1 rear axle is the way to go. According to one article, it suggests just that combo, so that the 1/4 mile can be done in just second, second OD, and third gear, with a super fast shift from 2nd into 2nd OD.
Just to clarify: although I might find myself at the drag strip in my ’55 Chevy, that’s not really what I’m after. I want a world-class all-round performing car, and Chevy made it easy, thanks to their new policy of offering all the goodies as options or over-the counter parts. The 195 hp 265 already has those engine parts, but check out the chassis parts. Actually, that’s just a few; I also found an option list that includes factory installed HD springs front and rear (in various ratings), 6.70×15 6 ply tires with 30lbs pressure (instead of the softie 24lb standard tires), a front stabilizer bar, and some other goodies. A set of premium aftermarket oversize shocks will be added. And the longer Pittman arm from the power steering unit can be easily swapped in to create a faster 23:1 steering ratio.
I’m sure these parts all found their way into Smokey Yunick’s ’55 Chevy, the first of many for him.
Chevrolet published a very detailed guide that showed exactly what parts to buy and how to prep a competitive NASCAR stock car. The 1957 version is online here at oldcarbrochures. It makes fascinating reading, if you’re crazy like me.
And since I was a thrifty lad and didn’t go for a Chrysler 300, which was more powerful but not necessarily quicker, and weighed well over 4,000 lbs, I have plenty of money left over to improve my ’55 Chevy. In 1956, the dual-quad engine had 225 hp. And there was a late year version with 240 hp, thanks to 9.5:1 compression and the next iteration of Duntov’s cam. All easy to swap in.
And in 1957, I’ll sell my hot but tired 265 to some kid with a Ford roadster to replace his flathead, and buy myself a new 283 hp fuel injected 283 over the counter at the Chevy dealer. This exact same engine was rated at 290 hp in ’59, and it’s widely acknowledged to actually make right about 300. Instant starts, instant throttle response, and no surge or leaning out in hard cornering. It ran cleanly to 7000 rpm. And made wicked sounds doing it. Yes, my kind of engine. And I moved to Nevada, which had no speed limits.
In a ’57 Corvette, this mill yanked it to 60 in 5.7 seconds and the 1/4 mile in 14.3 seconds. These were startling in 1957, and simply the fastest times for any production street car in the world.
I’m still mulling over as to whether to add the Fuel Injection badges or not.
And there’s plenty of future upgrades to make to my ’55 as the years go on. Maybe I’ll just keep it forever, as I could argue that Detroit never built a full-sized car as all-round good and capable as these. Peak Detroit, peak Chevrolet, peak Paul’s MM’ing.
Well, I need to wrap this up, so I can spend some time driving my ’55 Chevy in my mind some more. And we never got to its styling. Oh well.
I don’t know what you’re going to be driving in the 1950s, but if you happen to see me in my ’55, beware…
Related reading:
CC 1955 Chevrolet Bel Air: The iCar – GM’s All-Time Greatest Hit PN
Automotive History: 1957 Chevrolet 283 Fuel Injection – Ahead of its Time and the Competition PN
For daily driver, ’54 Belvedere with Hy-Drive. Prettiest car of the decade to my eyes.
For road trips, ’56 Hornet. Nash quality, open wheel wells, Packard power, Hudson fail-safe brakes. Best combination of the decade.
Interesting reasoning for the Hornet. I saw one around town a few years back.
1955 De Soto Fireflite. This variant of Exners 100 million dollar look I like most.
And with it´s 291 cui 200 hp engine I don´t think it´s all to slow.
+1.
Paid $50 for a 55 Fireflite Sportsman 2dr HT in 1971. Drove it for 2 trouble free years. Everything worked including the top of dash clock. Only thing I didn’t like was the pink & white 2 tone. When I could take the color no more, I sold it for $75. Big mistake. The $95 Olds that replaced the DeS wasn’t 1/2 the car.
Many fun road trip memories. All windows down. Pop up the cowl vent. Wrap around sun glasses to minimize red eye (wind induced of course). Heeding the call of the open road.
WI>Key West, WI>LA. Just waiting for the tube radio to play “I’ve Been Everywhere:. . Pit stop. Old guy saunters over to admire the car. Says he drove a DeS taxi when younger. Offers his opinion. Best damn car Chrysler ever made. Lasted forever as taxis.
Tired. Pull off US 50 and sleep somewhere in the Nevada desert looking up at more stars than a midwestern boy ever saw. Limited cash. Unlimited freedom.
In reality, the DeS was just another $50 car. Better than some. Worse than others. But at a certain time of life, oh what sweet memories. . . .
You making me jealous, he he. Thanks for sharing this memories
You’re really making me think here- because this really is a super clean look and I love the hardtop roof on that one. But I will have to give my nod to the very similar 1955 Chrysler 300. To me it looks like a hundred million and one dollars!
1957 Plymouth business coupe with a V8 and Powerflite, I don’t know about the poor quality yet.
If it’s a 50s car I want a 59 Mercury station wagon with that sporty 2 door hardtop styling.
1958 DeSoto hardtop with fuel injection and a stick.
Honestly, even though I know of the poor quality, I’ve always had an appreciation for the 57-58 Chrysler Forward look cars, simply because I’ve always liked the styling. It was very much in the overly optimistic art-deco inspired future of the 50s without going overboard like the latter attempts to copy it did. If I had to pick one though, probably the 58 Imperial. I’ve always had a soft spot for that model year of Imperial and I don’t really care if it isn’t as popular as its contemporaries, it does it for me in a way that Cadillac and Lincoln of a similar vintage year never has.
I would also have a hard time going past one of them.
The 1950s?
There is no other choice.
The 1957 Cadillac Eldorado Brougham.
+1
My second choice would be a forward look Chrysler based on style alone. Probably a ’57 DeSoto.
+1. Fantastic car!
1956 Dodge Coronet Lancer. With Red Ram Hemi.
+1 for 1956. Nice colour!
Thanks! When I was a kid in the 1970’s, a widow up the street from us had a 4 door Lancer in a similar color scheme, but yellow instead of the red. It had (IIRC) the Red Ram and dual exhausts, it was absolutely glorious to hear her fire it up and drive it down the street. At 15 mph. Everywhere…
Sometime during my early high school years, she moved away or was put in a home. The house was sold and the car was gone, I never saw it again. I would have loved to try to buy it, but no luck.
Make mine my old ’56 Chevy, model 150, 2 door sedan with a 275hp ’66 327; oh….my old “EGG”. Named for her black and gold CA plates. Had her for 20 years almost to the day and put 85,000+ miles on her.
Not fuel efficient, not a handler and what brakes? Still…my “EGG” was a grand old car!!! 🙂 DFO
’58 Belvedere and hope that it was 1) not possessed and 2) built on a Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday
What’s the fun of owning a non-possessed car? Gosh! Some people…
🙂
My wife and I saw a nearly identical Belvedere at a car show in Kissimmee, Florida a few years ago. Sweet!
actully had it, still working on it’s reolacemet
Great article and QOTD – I like the forward look Chrysler’s, and also the 57 Ford. But nothing beats a 56 Lincoln Premiere – the best looking Lincoln of the decade.
Make mine Wisteria.
Yes. This. It may be that the 53 Studebaker is the most beautiful car of the era that was mass produced in the US, but the 56 Lincoln is the most beautiful American car from the 1950s. It manages to take so many of the decade’s styling trends – that almost immediately became overwrought excesses – and combine them into a package that has such restrained grace.
Especially in black.
It’s hard not to agree with the argument for the 55 Chevy. But like most men, I see better than I think.
I agree wholeheartedly that the 56 was the most beautiful of all 50s Lincolns, and one of Ford’s best designs of the decade, along with the Baby Birds and the 55-56 Fairlanes.
Ahaaa, so you’ve wisely narrowed it down to American cars. Hehehe…
Tough choice, though. So many great designs and variety… Instinctively, I think I’d go for an independent – it was kind of their final decade.
56 Packard sedan, then, if you please. In black or dark blue.
+1 on the 56 Packard. That was quite a car.
Having owned a ’55 Chevrolet 210 sedan with a six (which mostly fit Paul’s description of one) I will opt out to try a new water source. And having once driven a ’58 Impala, it was nice but didn’t seem so well connected to the road at times.
So let’s go with a ’56 DeSoto. Something a little different but not way out in left field either. Let’s go with a four-door and stick with the red/black paint scheme. I’ll tell the dealer Groucho sent me.
been enjoyed since age 7, prefer pushbuttons
Everyone would acknowledge it as a bad idea at the time in terms of depreciation, but a 56′ Packard Executive – the model in between the plebian Clippers but lighter and more tasteful than the excessive 400/Patrician/Caribbeans.
There were in fact a number of special ordered models with odd equipment towards the end of production, including a few Executives selected how I would want:
-the 310hp 374 cid dual 4-bbl V8 from the Caribbean
-3 speed manual on the column
-automatic leveling 4 wheel torsion bar suspension
-limited slip differential
-seek/scan AM radio
I like it.
Kind of a hot-rod Packard!
Good enough for Norma Jean; good enough for me.
Perhaps a Studebaker Commander (“Loewy Coupe”)?
Although if we open it up to The Imports, I’m somewhat smitten with a certain Bentley R-Type. And if in a sporting mood, perhaps the R-Type Continental, what-what?
Love the Stude! Definitely my father’s dream car, one he finally achieved when discharged from the Air Force in 1956. It was a used 1953 model in two-tone white and gold and was apparently good enough for Mom, the eternal princess, whom he met a few months later.
The automotive “Venus Di Milo” of the 1950’s.
+1.
Mmm, yes, that one.
It’ll be a little late to the party, but it’s still the 1950’s! I’ll take a 1959 Plymouth Sport Fury hardtop in dark red with the Golden Commando 360. I’ll be ahead for keeps in my new Plymouth! ^^
Oh boy, you’d be driving Christine !
Oooh, very nice. I thought about this but decided to go big or go home.
BTW, it was the “Golden Commando 395” which was in reality a 361 that put out 395 ft lbs of torque. Enjoy those swivel seats! 🙂
The “Golden Commando” 361 was one potent, powerful and under-rated engine! It hung around for many years in various Mopars.
After two years in a slant six Valiant, my Father said that, after “stomping the skinny pedal” in his ’62 Plymouth Golden Commando, he immediately realized that he could never go back to a slant six.
(He called a 348 Chevy a “truck engine based ice wagon dog”.)
The 361 seems to have been nothing but an afterthought after maybe 1962, when it became a 2 bbl torquer for those too cheap to pop for a 383. I think it was gone after 66?
Well, I have to show off my ’59 Plymouth…I’m the original owner (wearing footed pajamas) but someone got it for me….technically I don’t think you could consider it a full-sized car since I eventually outgrew it…and I don’t think it weighed much more than 50 lbs. And instead of a flathead or a V8, it had peddle power…don’t think I would have been good for .01 horsepower even on my best day back then.
But….I was the Fire Chief…..complete with bell on the front of my hood (sirens were too showy)…
This was in our house in Covina Ca….we just moved there from Beverly Massachusetts. My Dad got a job working on solar cells for a defense contractor in El Monte. We didn’t stay there long, as my sister and I took to eating some poisonous plants on the property (renting at the time) and my parents bought their first home in Glendora. We didn’t stay there long either as we did a reverse migration back up to the snowbelt to Monroeville, PA..by 1961..where my Dad worked for Westinghouse Semiconductor (we moved around a lot in their younger years).
He brought his first new car, a ’56 Plymouth Plaza stripper (flathead, column shift) out to California but by the time we left for the east coast he’d gotten the first of many station wagons a ’61 Rambler, but with automatic, 6 cylinder…which we drove back (along route 66 as far as Chicago) to Pennsylvania. Perhaps if we’re talking full sized that’s what I should choose, my Dad’s Plymouth (rather than Oldsmobile). This may be what got me interested in cars in the first place.
Don’t know how to attach more than one jpg file to a post…
Here’s my Dad’s ’56 Plymouth…in this picture before my time, parent’s honeymoon trip to Quebec province, Sept 1957.
Whoops..don’t know how to cancel posting…
Here’s my Dad’s Plymouth:
Thanks for the opportunity Paul! Please make mine a 1958 Impala coupe, A real baby Cadillac. Onyx Black over Inca Silver with a dual quad 348 and the red interior. I know the TurboGlide is a bit rough, but the darn column 3 speed shift on my 57 sedan was prone to jamming in 1st on takeoff. Maybe after the Glide gets on my nerves, I’ll cut the darn hole in the floor and convert it (with overdrive of course). Power windows, locks and factory a/c. A push button radio with the rear seat speaker insert would be nice too!
I’ve always been partial to 1950s Packards, and would gladly drive one for a decade. And I don’t mind frilly two-tone paint… or three-tone for that matter!
Since my parents had a 57 Plymouth in the early 60’s that’s what I’ll go for. I assume that since I’m actually in the 50’s I don’t know how bad a car it actually will be (much like my Dad 🙂 )
Theirs was a stripper Plaza with flathead 6, but I’ll go for a Belvedere two door hardtop with a 318 Poly and TorqueFlite.
The bubble burster here – the only way into a 318 would be a full-on Fury. Your Plaza would offer you either a 277 or a 301. Sorry. 🙁
Generally, I am really amazed by all the Mopar Love I am seeing here today. Poor Paul may have the only 55 Chevy in town.
FWIW, I did consider either a 59 Chevy (I love me some batwing) or a 59 Pontiac. But those cars were getting pretty huge by then; I still prefer a slightly smaller car for my everyday travels. I could have just stuck to any pre-1957 car for that matter, but I’m largely over the whole Tri-Five thing and the mid 50’s Fords as well as the Studebakers, Hudsons and Nashes are rather uninspiring to me.
Well, maybe not the Golden Hawks. Or the Rebel with the 327. But that Lancer still sticks out in my mind as a neat old car.
Ah well, 301 it is then. The Fury exceeds my glitz threshold and I don’t like the vertical bladed bumper ends.
I like this picture. Looks like your dad had that canoe tied down tight.
your wish, hqas ’59 Fury 318 w T-Flite
I would go with the 1958 Chevrolet Delray Two Door Sedan I wrote about a few years ago.
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/uncategorized/curbside-classic-1958-chevrolet-delray-two-dor-sedan/
No contest for me, demonstrating sensibility and economy, I will have a 1955 Dodge Crusader. Three on the tree, flathead 6. None of that tri colour paint for me either, just a nice solid colour and I’m good. At the time, I won’t know how difficult it will be to start in the rain, but hey, I can always take the subway to work!
This could be the hardest question I answer all day. There is a much faster progression here than from 1940-49 that we discussed last time.
Big cars – I think this disqualifies the Studebaker coupes. And the sedans just don’t get me there if it is going to be my only car of the decade. Although a 57 Packard sedan might work for me.
I think I have to go back to Mother Mopar here. It will be a 1959 Chrysler 300 E. The 59s were the best of the Forward Look cars in terms of stiffness and quality. Also, the 413 would be a much more street-friendly engine than the pre-59 Hemi, if only because of better low end performance. A black convertible with a/c and all the options will serve nicely. If I can get the 42 Studebaker I chose for the prior decade to hold out that long. 🙂
The Loewy coupes are on Studebaker’s long standard chassis, like the Land Cruiser.
Yeah, the 120 inch wheelbase frame. But the proportions on those C & K body coupes (and the Hawks that came after them) always had proportions that reminded me of the long, narrow speedsters of the 30s. Remember these things had a width that could have made them a pony car if the length had been cut down.
But then again a 56 Golden Hawk with a 3 speed/OD could be a fun choice. A Hawk packing that big block Packard 352 (that weighed no more than the Stude 289 btw) falls in line with my preference for cubic inches > forced induction as the way to torque heaven. Acceleration tests back in the day put these right up there in the neighborhood with the fuelie Corvettes and Chrysler 300B. Mr. Niedermeyer might beat me at a drag race, but only after spending a boatload of money on aftermarket modifications. 🙂
The narrow width would disqualify all 50’s Studes and Packardbakers if it DQ’s the coupes.
The close coupled coupe is very similar to the special 58 Impala roof and body, which is different from the standard 58 Chevy. The Loewy coupes are the same height as the Impala. Lower, less capacious coupes on standard chassis were already a long tradition in standard American cars; manufacturers built a dozen body styles on one chassis, instead of a dozen sizes with one body per size.
Overall length is over 200 inches, so it clears our host’s guideline.
It hardly seems fair to Mr Loewy and Mr Bourke to disqualify their car because they made it so damn beautiful and exciting. 🙂
Excellent choice, J P Cavanaugh!
Also one of my all time favorites of this time period.
Lt. Mike (“Crime Story”) had fine choice in carsl.
At the risk of being labeled a “sexist pig”: This was a “Man’s Car” of this time period. I recall seeing many a stylish housewife driving the lovely Chrysler 4 door hardtop station wagons; but never did I see a gal driving the 300 model.
I agree, the 59 300 is a great choice.
I won’t call you a sexist pig, because there is nothing wrong with having a “man’s car” (other the things outlined in Paul’s big car article about all the auto business downside to ignoring women’s tastes and needs, leading to lost opportunities and eventually lost market share). I’m realizing perhaps my long attraction to full size cars is a masculine thing. I’ve never had a desire for big, overcompensating pick ups, but man do I dig unnecessarily huge big cars!
Yup!
“It’s a Guy Thing”.
Jon: Pick up trucks, of any vintage, bore me also. I recognize the need for one; just not a vehicle that I want to drive or be seen driving.
I’m just barely old enough to remember when a pick up truck was a “downscale” mode of transportation, owned by farmers, tradesmen or hillbillies.
In some of the more upscale suburban housing subdivisions of the 1950’s and 1960’s, a covenant was included in the purchase agreement that no truck could be parked in the home’s driveway.
There are a lot of great choices especially from the 1956 year. Particularly from Chrysler Corp. and Packard. However, your choice of the 59 300 is just well…. shazam!
Yes, me too. I was going to choose the 1958 300D as seen in the movie “Quiz Show”, but it sounds like the ’59 is the better car. Plus in ’59 we get power swivel seats!
These Chryslers are my favorite Forward Look cars, because of that powerful front end combined with the simple, elegant sweep to the fins.
Bring on the Studebakers; they’re big enough for me.
Despite your incredibly detailed explanation, I’m still unsure on what the limits of this exercise are. Are we discussing cars in the American full size class? Or are we just discussing American cars that are huge? In the case of the former, I go to my old standby 50’s car, the 1958 Mercury with the “Super Marauder” 430. However, if I have the option of simply something American and also huge, I would pick the 1956 Lincoln Continental Mark II.
The Continental was beautiful, hand-built, and drove on par with European GTs of the time. It’s a driver-oriented luxury GT. I feel as though there is little I have to say to defend this car.
Same Car I was going to go with. Mom had one when I was a kid. The exact opposite of what Paul’s 55. A Large, Heavy, powerful, wallowing, inefficient beast!
I will take a 1955 oldsmobile star fire 98 convertible with air conditioning please.
I’m going to go with a 1954 Lincoln Capri. It was the third year of the Lincoln that won the stock car class in the Carrera Panamericana three years running. It wouldn’t have the raw performance of Paul’s hot rod Chevy, but the Lincoln’s combination of power, comfort, handling, and toughness sounds just right for me. (And a 205 horsepower Y-block V8 attached to a four speed GM Hydramatic sounds like a good tough powertrain that should last until my 1960s selection becomes available.)
Below, a photo of the race-prepped car that won the Carrera Panamericana in 1954.
Last time I was in one of these, Dad was carting me around on his Sat. AM errands.
So, what would it be like, to be behind the wheel?
* S T A R F I R E *
Certainly, the 55 Chevy, with the V8 and overdrive. I wouldn’t really need a Bel Air, but I love those little bow ties on the dash so that would be the one. We will be keeping this car, so a sedan would be better for window sealing and body integrity over time. White over turquoise would be nice. Yes, that will do.
You would find me behind the wheel of a 1957 Chrysler New Yorker 4-door hardtop with all the power options, in white with a blue interior. Of course, it will have the 392 V-8 and Torqueflite.
God h.elp me, I want Torqueflite. A Forward Look convertible, please. I’ll pack a carton of Loctite before I go back.
You hit the nail right on the head!!! The 1955 Chevy is the most beautiful car ever produced!! It is my favorite car bar none. It is absolutely perfect in every way. It ticks all the check marks. My 2nd choice? The 1957 Cadillac Eldorado Brougham!! If you have to ask why……………..you don’t know cars.
I will have to pick the 1957-59 Ford Skyliner. As cool and magical 60 years on, as ever.
I wanted one since I was 10 yrs old. I now have a 1957.
However, as far as looks alone, it might be a tie between the 1956 Lincoln, 1957-59 Imperial, 1956 Ford Crown Victoria, 1957 DeSoto, 1957 Dodge, 1958 Impala.
If I would have been old enough and been rich, I would have bought all of these and more – thereby becoming poor, although happy!
1955 Chrysler 300, by a mile. Barely a hint of tailfins and arguably its the first muscle car.
A distant but solid #2 is the ‘55 Chevy either as a 2-dr hardtop or as a Nomad. While I’m on board with pretty much everything you said on these, I probably AM gonna be at the dragstrip. That said I still want the extra style points if it’s my driver and race car. Pure dragster, then 2-dr sedan it is.
1957-1958 Mercury Turnpike Cruiser
The car had a retractable rear window and looked as long as a turnpike.
A 1956 Packard Four Hundred with all the trimmings. And, if imports were allowed, a 1959 Bentley S1 Continental with a body by HJ Mulliner.
1956 Packard Caribbean hardtop. Not the most practical or reliable choice, but I’m following my heart.
So much to like here. The smooth, level ride from the brilliant torsion ride suspension that mechanically prepares the rear wheels for a bump or pothole that the front wheels just rolled over. The Twin Traction limited slip differential, back when these were rarely available. The elegant “cathedral” taillamps. Dual-sided seat cushions so I can choose leather or cloth depending on my mood, or the weather. The electrically-controlled pushbutton automatic transmission (when it worked). Neat little puddle lamps built into the outside rear fenders. The surprisingly tasteful three-color paint scheme with its stacked colors – it’s like a neapolitan ice cream slice you can drive.
“The Twin Traction limited slip differential, back when these were rarely available.”
First, I love your choice. Second, in 1956 there was nowhere else in the world to get that limited slip diff than at your Packard dealer (and maybe at your Studebaker dealer – I could probably get one in my runner-up 56 Golden Hawk). I believe that the rest of the industry followed in 1957 – under an S-P license, if I am not mistaken.
I thought that might be the case – I did some Googling around trying to figure out when Ford and Chrysler introduced their LSDs – I knew GM’s Positraction came later – but couldn’t find a year. Wikipedia wasn’t any help either. I thought though that maybe one of the imports got there first.
Although he’d done some time at GM, this car was the Dick Teague’s first major styling effort, actually just a facelift of the 1951 model but he somehow managed to work in every modern ’55 styling element (as defined by GM) and somehow make it look like it had been meant to be that way all along. Most automotive stylists had a distinct look with recognizable motifs (think Earl, Exner, or Giugiaro), but somehow Teague dreamt up the ’55-’56 Packard, the XJ Jeep Cherokee, and the AMC Pacer….
My 2nd choice btw would be one of the ’59 GM four door hardtops with the cantilever roof, probably a Bonneville or 98. But I’ll get another chance at GM in the ’60s and ’70s; for the ’50s I’d rather have Packard’s elegant sendoff.
Yup, that Twin Traction LSD was one of the products of the final burst of glory out of Packard engineering (a unit that included a young John DeLorean who hired on at Pontiac in 1956 rather than move to South Bend when Packard’s Detroit operation was shut down.)
And I agree, Teague did a marvelous job on the 55-56 Packard.
this was nice too
I am truly enjoying all the varied replies on this thread!
Keep ’em coming!
It may be a fifties cliche now, but I’ve always liked the ’57 Chevy. A Bel Air Coupe, or if money is no object within this exercise, a ’57 Nomad would be the one.
Now since I’ve been coming here, I totally understand the all of the love that the ’55 gets for its simplicity and non-overwrought styling of the later tri-fives. But that being said, the ’55 would’ve been the new-fangled machine, and I being practical, would likely have waited until they worked out the bugs and got myself a ’56. I’ve always found these to be the more attractive of the two between the ’55 and ’56. But then I would’ve been kicking myself for not waiting until the ’57(s) came out upon seeing them.
And for my ’57, I’d have gone for the 283, and likely a 2-barrel version for better economy than the 4-barrel. I would’ve skipped the fuel-injected one citing the aforementioned new-fangledness. And hindsight would’ve proven me wise with my choice. I love fuel-injection now, but back in ’57, I don’t think it was quite ready for prime-time.
Having said all of this however about “waiting for the bugs to be worked out” and not picking the first year of a clean sheet design, I have defied this mantra in the past on two occasions. First with an ’83 T-Bird, and then much more recently with my current DD, a turbocharged 2016 Honda Civic with direct-injection.
Great Post, BTW Paul! – I am enjoying this series.
The 1958 Mercury Park Lane four door hardtop with the new Marauder engine!
This magnificent car leds the way in straight clean modern styling, the look of today in every line! Only the Mercury matched the spirit of the Space Age with Space Age design in every line! Performance, and how! The triple carburetors under the gleaming chrome air cover, specifically designed for the brand new 1000 pound Marauder V8 engine! 360 horses thrilling you with spectacular performance! The new Keyboard electric transmission control panel puts all that power at your gloved fingertips! Touch and Go!
And look at that interior!
It is a new world of auto fashion! The latest gayest Parisian colors with the softest fabrics ever created for any car at any price! Wide, sofa-comfort gives the 1958 Mercury Park Lane living room styling, while this new line of Mercury fine automobiles envelopes you in total silence as it swiftly commands every road! You won’t believe the peace and comfort the 1958 Mercury Park Lane brings to America’s new Turnpikes!
This car gives you finger-tip control through even the tightest curves with supple power steering. Even the daintiest lady will discover a new level of confidence behind the wheel of the 1958 Mercury Park Avenue, as this amazing new car glides effortlessly through her daily trips to the market, church socials, or meet her friends for that lively weekly bridge game! The 1958 Mercury Park Avenue is prettier than a new Easter bonnet!
Command view wraparound windshield gives the driver of the 1958 Mercury Park Avenue, picture-window visibility, while the new jewel-like Marauder medallion gleams through the electrically controlled rear window, permitting flow through ventilation powerful enough for six unfiltered Lucky Strike chain smokers to enjoy and relax in total comfort. Extra large ash receptacles in every door!
See for yourself today, how the 1958 Mercury Park Avenue is the car of tomorrow today! Trade in those little 1955 Chevrolets rusting away in your driveway, and drive away in the most luxurious, powerful and beautiful auto buy in America!
The 1958 Mercury Park Avenue!
VanillaDude,
Sign me up, I’m sold!
We’re talking PRACTICALITY here, right? A car for day-to-day, reliable commuting, shopping, etc. Best “balance of features”. How about a ’58 Ford Custom 300, but instead of a 6 like the one I have, the Interceptor V-8, with power steering and brakes, and Cruise-O-Matic. Handy 202″ length, sharp looks, solid build quality, and you’re not sitting on the floor. Ford’s roadability was good at this time, “Magic Circle” steering is smooth, ride is probably better than the tri-5s. 12 volt ignition and ball joints, unlike early ’50s cars. No buttons–transmission has a PARK position. For a little more luxury, a 57-58 Olds 88.
If practicality is not the main concern, there are MANY wonderful choices in this decade. (Some are listed above; others not mentioned yet).
If I hadn’t had the idea that I wanted a hardtop, the Custom 300 would have had quite a chance. My Dad had one (6 with Ford-o-matic, 0 to 10 would take all day long), in black over black over black over black…you get it. No fancy chrome but the standard one. I guess that was what a standard taxi looked like in the US at the time. Here in Uruguay it was a nice car with power steering, almost unheard of. The V8 and 3 speed auto would be a necessity, and it should have PS, PB and AC. Nice color selection in the brochure.
There are so many great cars in that decade, that I’ll begin instead with the options:
Automatic – PG or Ford-o-matic should be enough with a nice engine behind it.
Power steering
Power brakes
Air conditioning
Power windows.
Hardtop sedan
I believe AC was a little better by ’58. By that time, prestigious brands(Olds, Buick, Mercury) carried too much weight in chrome. So, it will be a Bel Air 4 door hardtop, PG, 348 4 barrel, with all those options and any additional others that may arise at the dealer’s. The radio can be a standard unit. As for color, it should be as close to a metallic turquoise as possible, probably in a two tone with ivory. Same for the interior. Standard suspension. No airbags for me….
The mighty Chrysler 300C for me; as others have said, go big or go home. My only other request would be my own personal oil well to keep the hemi well supplied with premium gasoline. In a pinch I would take a 300D but I definitely want the hemi. Who do I see about picking mine up?
“Who do I see about picking mine up?”
Wouldn’t it be funny if PN looked out his front window tomorrow morning and saw dozens and dozens of us lined up waiting for our cars. 🙂
The line forms BEHIND me.
(Pounding on Paul’s front door. “WHERE’S MY CAUR?”
🙂
Continental Mark II or a ’55 Chrysler Town & Country or maybe a ’56 Buick Special two-door Riviera.
Generally I abhor fifties cars as overwrought monstrosities! There are still a few diamonds in the rough if you look hard enough.
As I prefer luxury cars, I think my choice would come down to two from ’56, either an Imperial or a Lincoln Premiere.
I agree on the grotesque over wrought thing. Tailfins, whitewalls, tri-tone pastel paint jobs chrome everything…it’s all lost on me. All of the tri-5 Chevies are pretty nice looking even if the ‘57 is about to jump the shark. The ‘55 Mopars are as nice as anything from that decade and any corvette is a classic. The 2-seat T birds are sharp. Outside of that…nothing much that interests me if it’s not a truck or Jeep.
Now that Paul has clarified the rules, I feel like the ’41 Pontiac I choose last time was a good choice.
I think the ’53 Studebaker coupes are some of beautiful American cars of the 1950s, but like JPC already stated they probably don’t qualify as “big”. And choosing a car based on looks alone might not be a smart decision.
A ’55 Chevy would be the safe choice; I was considering one of those for my ’50s car even before I saw Paul’s article, but by then my ’41 Pontiac would be 14 years old. Practically ancient by the standards of the time! I think I’d like a new car sooner than that.
So I think I’ll head to one of the independents and get one of those fabulous 1951 Hudson Hornets. Since we’re allowed to use hindsight, maybe I’ll upgrade to Twin H-Power when that becomes available.
If Your Honor will allow for a slight variance, I’d like to order a ’59 Chevrolet Sedan Delivery. Technically, it’s a truck, because both the Sedan Delivery and El Camino were listed in the Chevrolet Truck catalog… but c’mon, it was pretty much a 2-door wagon with the side windows blanked out, so I’m choosing to count it as a car!
I’d like the 230-hp Super-Turbo-Fire V-8, along with the 3+OD manual, and turquoise and white two-tone paint.
I normally favor vehicles built from the mid 60’s to the early 70’s but I always liked the 1958 Mercury Parklane/Turnpike Cruiser’s along with the 1958 Lincoln’s a lot
honorable mention goes to
1957-58 Imperial Lebaron
1957-58 Chrysler New Yorker
1958 Chevrolet Impala
’55 Bel Air 2dr. hardtop, 180 h.p. 265 and a ‘Glide. Just like mom had. Those other cars were nice, but that Chevy was epic.
Very true the Small Block’s cylinder heads were the secret. Best flow, very good combustion chamber design, light and very easy to manufacture. They required significantly less machining than the heads of competing engines. The block was simple, light and strong as well. Not extending the block skirts below the center of the main bearings saved weight and didn’t compromise durability. The lubrication system was very good as well, though early ’55 265’s didn’t have integral full-flow oil filters on them. Innovative valve train (stolen from Pontiac), intake manifold doubling as the block valley cover, it was all there. Until the Ford Modular OHC V-8’s, every American V-8 designed after 1955 had features first seen on the Small Block Chevy.
Early production 1955 Chevy V8 engines were often notorious oil burners.
A Chevy TSB (Technical Service Bulletin) was issued to address this undesirable problem. The TSB advised dealership mechanics to slowly pour a container of Bon Ami granulated kitchen & bathroom cleanser down the carburetor to help roughen up the cylinder walls and slow down the excessive oil consumption.
True, they couldn’t get their new chrome-plated piston rings to seat within a reasonable time. There were also problems with the pressed-in rocker arm studs pulling out of the heads. That was solved by increasing the interference fit of the studs. All and all, relatively few problems for an all-new engine.
Oil consumption problems seem to be a long term Chevy V8 problem: http://www.gmcproblems.com/vortec-oil-consumption/
All motors of the era burned some oil, or the ones with which I have experience. This is especially so with Chevy small blocks, since the tolerances were not that tight. They improved markedly by about 1975. The first motor I ever experienced zero oil use was a Toyota 2-TC.
I can still see the look of bemusement on my Father’s face when the factory rep calmly assured him that burning a quart of oil every 600 miles in our FE 390 Ford was “normal and acceptable”.
A 1957 Lincoln Premiere convertible, simply elegant, yet big and bold, tastefully luxurious, the epitome of late 50’s space age styling, and I still love those soaring fins.
still miss my coral/white top convert after 43 years
Paul,
This was an excellent article, I really enjoyed it. I would usually pick a ’56 Chevy, but I love the look of that gold, two door hardtop ’55 in your first pic.
After reading all the responses here and viewing the accompanying pictures and looking at new car ads and pictures; this meme keeps popping into my head:
I’m sold on the 1955 Chevrolet – I’ll take a gray & coral Nomad.
The cost is no object choice would be a 1957-58 Cadillac Eldorado Brougham, but would be impractical for trips to the Hardware Store & Safeway.
Honorable mention goes to 1950-51 4dr Lincoln Cosmo, 1956 Lincoln Premier, 1953 Kaiser Dragon, 1954 Kaiser Manhattan, 1957-58 Chrysler 300, and 1957-58 DeSoto Adventurer.
The best daily driver would be a 1954 Willys Aero Ace Deluxe, but it’s a Compact.
So many choices! The 1954 Studebaker Commander Starliner would be my first choice, but it isn’t a “big” car, even by the standards of its day. If the choice is limited to big cars, then a 1954 Hudson Hornet Hollywood hardtop.
It’s the last of the true Stepdowns, but with a moderate restyle that included a one-piece windshield and a less rounded back end. Given the production figures, I wouldn’t see myself coming and going too often.
Daily driver, here in the northeast? With our moist climate and heavily salted winter roads, something cheap and expendable. Any six cylinder-stick shift Studebaker, Rambler, Ford, Plymouth, etc will do.
The good Sunday go-to-meeting car? A 1953 Packard Patrician Formal Sedan by Derham in an appropriately understated dark blue with black padded top and black-wall tires.
Growing up in the fifties, I saw a lot of American cars in my part of town. two in particular stand out in my memory.
First is the ’59 Chevy, for those wild batwing fins. In Australia we got little ‘bats’ hanging upside down from them – the amber indicators required by law. But that’s not my choice.
It’s a car I first saw when it was some twenty years old. It just looked so wild, so different from anything else on the road, with its wrap-around multi-pane coupe roofline, and the rocket-like grille intake. A circular grille, aided by horizontal slits and subsidiary intakes underneath – of course it’s the bullet-nose Studebaker. Okay, nowadays I know it’s a rework of a Forties design, and I hope Paul doesn’t disqualify it for that, but in 1970 I’d never seen anything like it. I must’ve spent at least ten minutes walking around that car, marvelling at that shape, and the detailing. Just beautiful. And yes, I like it even more than the famed ’53 coupe.
But which one? The ’50 Commander wins for me. Although it lacks the first V8 from an independent, it has the longer front end which really makes the design work. Also I like its front end detailing better.
With this kind of question, I try to place myself in say, 1957. There are loads of finned, bechromed behemoths on the road and everyone knew in what direction cars were going-longer, lower and wider. There are some compelling buys. The 1957 Plymouth was a very attractive car, especially with torsion bar suspension. They really did handle better than anything else at the time. However, even showroom cars had huge quality problems. My dad had one and the block cracked at four years of driving.
The Chevrolet is also a very good buy and after three model years, reliable. Yes, this really mattered in 1957 and first year cars, like the Plymouth were best avoided. But I have always been different from the crowd, so I don’t want a Chevy that everybody and his dog in Canada already had.
Thus, my choice would be a 1957 VW Beetle. I live in a congested urban area even for them. The roads to the mountains were so atrocious that travelling them was a rarity for most folks. The Beetle is cheap to run, easy to park and can take bad roads better than any big car. It can maintain and fix it myself. The climate here is mild so the fresh air heater would be just fine.
Really, I can’t think of a better car for rural roads in BC in 1957, with mud, ruts and potholes everywhere.
I really wanted to come up with something that hasn’t already been said, but I can’t think of anything that comes in the ballpark of the 55 Chevy, the engineering the packaging styling all were perfection. I’d pick the 2-door sedan however, the longer roof looks better with the radiused fenders for the slicks 🙂
I’m quite sure that this will be the only vote for the 1954 Chrysler New Yorker. I’ve always had a soft spot for them. The 54 Imperial was also pretty sweet. Dare to be different!
model of the ’54 DeSoty had 54 yrs ago
Given my background, it’s Chevrolet or nothing. And it’ll be one of dad’s dealership cars. No contest. 1958 Impala two door hardtop in silver blue.
Chrysler 300 C, D or E. Failing that, ’59 Impala. All convertibles. At that time, black exterior, red interior and white top was pretty much the best color combination.
A 1957 Buick Caballero says “I’ve arrived.” The longroof. The sweepspear. The full rear wheel cut-out.
What a great ode to the ’55 Chevrolet and the SBC Paul. While I do agree with much of what you wrote, I think it’s also critical to mention that SBC valvetrain as being one of the keep aspects to it’s free revving nature. The stud mounted stamped rockers were light and simple, although it was Pontiac engineers who designed that valvetrain.
Now, for the question of the day, I’d really want a ’57 Fuelie Vette if I were a young guy looking for a daily driver that was fun, but that is far from a big car. Since this is an exercise in MM, I guess I have to go back to my first true love, a ’57 Bel Air 2-door hardtop hard top fuelie (283 hp version). I’d order a Corvette 4-speed OTC from the dealer and swap it in with a floor shift conversion. It’d also have to be a clean version; no skirts or kits, no bumper guards, or cheesy accessories.
From my earliest memories as a child I was enamored with the ’57 Bel Air. It was just the right blend of 1950’s styling cues without going over the top. And of course liking fast cars, once I learned of that 283 fuelie, that made it even more appealing. I was probably the only 6 year old kid who could rhyme off detailed specs on the car at a moment’s notice. I have to admit, that in adulthood I have gown much more fond of the ’55 Chevy too, so it’d be a close second – I just don’t have the same history with a ’55!
One point that I would like to add though is in relation to the hp ratings. While GM did rate these engines in net power, no one can say how close they are to the SAE net rating used from 1972. SAE set out a very specific guideline under SAE J1349 and I doubt GM was following that in 1955. Even with SAE J1349, there was still some descrepencies, which were supposedly addressed under SAE J2723 for Certified power that came in 2005 (several engines ratings were dropped under this new rating).
I bet if that engine would have been tested under SAE net ratings it would have been lower than 160 hp. Regardless of the hp rating, performance is always a true indicator. This is supported by the performance numbers form the R/T test. I have that test, and it ran 17.4 secs and it looks like (from the graph) with a trap speed of 76 mph. C/D tested an 170 hp LM1 Caprice, which was significantly heavier than the ’55 (test weight of 3952 lbs) and hampered with steeper gears (2.56:1), and it ran 16.8 secs @ 79.3 mph. Just looking at the trap speeds alone suggest the lighter Chevy makes quite a bit less power. I’d put this 265 more on par with the 145-hp 305-2bbl Chevrolet. A ’77 Caprice ran 17.9 secs @ 76.8 mph with 2.56 gears, which is much more comparable with the ’55 265.
Here’s one I saw at a show that was pretty close to what I’d pick.
Looks nice in black, Vince, but I’d probably want mine in that 50’s turquoise.
My neighbor when he was much younger had one in some sort of metallic rose color that was similar to that 1965 Caprice color, Evening Orchid. To remember the car of his youth, he has a die cast model of his ‘57 Belair 2-door Hardtop in the same color as his old car. It’s beautiful.
I can’t believe in 129 comments, that you and I are the only ones to speak up for the ‘57 Chevy, but then this is CC, and here we tend to stay away from the ubiquitous cars. 😉
This was also my Dad’s favorite from the 50’s. He had a ‘56 4-door 210 Sedan in India Ivory over Sherwood Green. He couldn’t afford a new ‘57 as a young man, and bought a slightly used ‘56. Like my neighbor, he has a diecast model of each of these years ‘56 & ‘57, but no original ‘55. But when we go to car shows together, he swoons over any Tri-Five.
For me, the ’57 has to red or black and all one colour, no two tone. I am back and forth on the colour, but I’d take either. There is a beautiful top quality (over)restored turquoise ’57 convertible locally. It was restored by Legendary Motor Car, of TV fame.
It’s not too surprising about the lack of love for the ’57 Chev here. CCers tend to be non conformist and I guess everybody and their uncle likes the ’57 Chev. For me though, I was literally barely old enough to talk when I became fascinated with the car. My dad showed me one and I was smitten – love at first sight. While in adulthood there are other cars I like more, I can’t forget how my love of cars started with the ’57 Chev.
My dad actually always preferred the ’55, as he said he like the Ferrari style grille. He also owned a ’55 Bel Air before I was born. I have to say the ’55 is an awesome car too, but the ’57 still edges it out for me.
Is your friends model car a Highway 61 die cast in dusk pearl? I have that car and it is a beautiful model, very well detailed and an amazing colour. I attached a photo of it.
I will try again with the photo shrunk down. It seems it didn’t like the large photo.
Yep! That’s the model… and he said his actual car looked like that, although I believe he said his was a non-pillared hard-top.
As to large photos, I’ve noticed that lately too, Vince. I believe Paul is trying to save server space, and I gotta say I can’t blame him. Today’s high pixel cameras (even on your iPhone) make pictures with file sizes that are way too big to be practical.
Like you, we’ve got an over restored ’57 in our area that I occasionally see at my mechanic’s shop. It’s a Bel Air 4 door sedan in that very light green color with a white top. Looks brand new.
I agree that the ’57 needs to be a single color. I even argue that the ’55 should also be a single color, but I like my ’56 Chevys in two-tone….
The above picture was from a post a while back when someone posted pictures of a ’56 Chevy Two-Ten that was repainted like a Bel Air… a pet peeve of mine. Thus the text on the screen shot. I am sure YOU know how these were painted. ;o)
My Dad’s Two-Ten looked like this one form the brochure….
I’d wait for the second-year ’56 on a Chevy. Mechanically your spec sounds good, but I’ll take a post sedan. Not a strippo, though – either a Bel Air or a 210 Delray Club Coupe.
While a 55 Chevy has its merit, I’d go for a supercharged Studebaker Hawk. Or if I could choose an Import, a Jaguar MK I
It would be obvious for me to take the 55 210 Delray Club Coupe. Make it light blue with a white roof like our family car back in the day.
Or I could go really big with the first Wide-Track Pontiac — a 1959 Catalina 2-door hardtop with the 389 V8 and the 4-speed Hydramatic. The Pontiac was the least radical of the GM’s wild 59s and I’ve always admired GM’s Peak Wraparound Windshield used on all of their 59-60 big cars. The Catalina is a little smaller than the Bonneville and Star Chief and has the more desirable to me small oval taillights.
Mine would not be resale red as shown in this photo; I’d choose turquoise with a white roof and definitely no fender skirts.
I concede that the Ford Y-block didn’t match Chevy’s 265/283, but I’m a Ford loyalist, and that’s that.
Tough to decide between two 1956’s. More practical is the Country Squire; I think I like how the head/taillights match up to the Thunderbird’s:
And then there’s the Continental Mark II—sober and austere as compared with the ravishing Cadillacs, we might say. As long as rich uncle can keep me in maintenance and gasoline, it’d be a great way to see and be seen, especially cruising the new Interstate System:
But Ford had a much superior THREE speed automatic transmission; compared to the sloppy “slip-n-slide” TWO speed Powerglide automatic transmission in the Chevy.
A powertrain wash-out between the two, in my opinion.
Not mentioned about the ’55 Chevy in the write-up was the beautiful Bel Air interior, with the stylish dashboard and all the little bow ties in it, repeated with all the little bow ties on the hubcaps. The feeling of size and headroom inside while the outside didn’t seem that big at all. Also the solidity of the doors, especially in the sedans. They felt sturdy, made out of thick metal hung on big hinges, and the sound and feel of that thing slamming shut was something few cars have ever matched. So many of the later GMs, even some of the Cadillacs, felt spongey on the hinges when opened, and the innards would rattle around when you slammed the big, heavy doors shut. Not so on the ’55 Bel Air. So while a step down Hudson, a Leowy coupe, or a ’57 Corvette are all attractive cars, the overall driving experience of the ’55 is likely to outshine them all.
57 Tri tone Nash Ambassador. The Ramblerized 58 Ambo would be just fine too. Along with any of the finned mopars.
So many interesting large cars of the 1950’s! The 120″ wheelbase of the Studebaker Coupes and other C/K models is a large car to me. I’ll take mine with the pillars, a V-8 and Overdrive.
Wow, for beauty it has to be the timeless ’53 Studebaker Commander V8 Starliner. For nostalgia a ’54 Chevy 210 DelRey Club Coupe like we had from ’54 to ’61. For alliteration a Hudson Hornet Hollywood Hardtop with Twin-H. Nah, forget all of them, make it a ’56 Continental – pure, unadulterated class – and I want air conditioning too.
A) CALLED IT. (See my comment from yesterday’s 40s car article.)
B) This might be the greatest piece ever written on the big Chevy and the SBC.
C) I agree with Paul’s commentary on this car. The late 50s cars might be beautiful in their way, but from an engineers standpoint they’re not much-SSDD (same shit, different day.) the 55/v8 combo was maybe not Citroen or Tatra levels of cool, but for a mainline American brand was insanely good.
I’d like one of these, please (1955 Studebaker President, preferably with a 259 and a 3-speed with OD and Hill Holder. Oh, and the Climatizer, if it was optional. Thank you.
My contenders:
1) Continental Mark II
2) Studebaker Speedster
3) If those aren’t large enough, ‘59 Catalina Convertible, v8, turbo hydramatic
4) 1955 Chrysler 300
My winner: 52-54 Cunningham C-3
My first car; a 1957 Dodge Custom Royal Lancer 2 dr HT with a 325 4bbl and torqueflight plus limited slip rear end. The build quality was better than my Father’s 1958 Plymouth Belvedere, and certainly better than his 1960 Dodge Phoenix.
Attributes; good V8, actual dependable 3 speed automatic, when many had 2 speed; and decent front suspension.
While the 1955 Chevy would be the practical choice, for all the reasons mentioned, my heart is with a 1958 DeSoto Fireflight, optioned with air conditioning and Sure-Grip differential. Torqueflight and the new 4bbl 361ci 10:1 compression B series wedge engine were standard.
The quad headlight version of the ’57-58 and stacked taillights on the soaring fins made this one of the best looking 1950’s cars, IMO. A three seat station wagon version would make this car more practical. A 300D may have been cleaner looking and a better performer, but living with a more high-strung engine in a daily driver for a decade may have been too much of a challenge.
The horrible quality of the 1957 cars was supposedly fixed by 1958.
1956 Packard Caribbean convertible (one of 276).
I’d insist that S-P equip mine with a standard 3-speed transmission (I should be up on this, but I don’t recollect if any came that way or not).
And I’d insist that mine be painted a solid color of my choice.
We saw a 56 Clipper last September in Staunton Illinois with a 3 speed. If you could get it on a Clipper I would imagine that it was a possibility on a Caribbean as well. Don’t know about OD though.
15 or so years ago I was working on a cold planing crew doing road construction somewhere in Sanford Maine. There was a house on the road that we were working on that had not one, but two, 1956 Packard Carribean convertibles. Both were mint. Lucky duck that man was.
1957 Mercury Colony Park hardtop wagon please. Maybe in Fiesta Red or Brazilian Bronze.
I can’t dispute the revolutionarity of their V8—won’t even try—but I don’t want a ’50s Chev. The ’55-’57s everyone seems to love leave me colder than cold; I just don’t like ’em from any angle.
Fords are right out of the question.
I think I’ll probably have one or another ’56 from the Chrysler Corporation. A 4-door or a wagon. Could likely be perfectly happy with a Plymouth or a Dodge with overdrive, but maybe I’d go for something higher up the line.
Or maybe I’d take the opportunity to try out a Packard or a Studebaker (“a bear in his natural habitat—a Studebaker!”, it’s been said).
I knew it would be a Mopar. But I was torn between the ’55’s and ’57’s.
In the end I went with the ’57 Imperial Crown convertible, single headlight version.
I already have it !
My 1957 Olds Super 88.
So it will be back to the 50’s again this summer.
Can’t wait.
Sorry.
Here is the picture.
»applause«
Sounds like moms “Blue Baron”. I’ll take it in the J2 version.
The 1950s–flash and fins and prosperity for all. Wish I could have lived it firsthand. My baby-boomer father only has fleeting memories of this decade, most of them from the tail-end of the decade.
Lots of tasty options that decade, and even though I’m a Ford man at heart, the only car from them that really makes me drool is the T-Bird. But for this exercise, that car is strictly off the table, per the rules. So I’m going to choose something from the GM camp, and the choice may surprise you.
1953 Oldsmobile 98. It’s a lovely car with great lines and beautifully trimmed. Oldsmobile was known as the Innovation Division within GM, so I’m going to get all sorts of cool options on my ’53 Olds that others don’t have, like a transmission I don’t have to shift. If my memory of history is correct, those came with the excellent 330 CID OHV V-8, but sadly, the horsepower figure escapes me. I know for the era it was rather high–we’d laugh at it today, but for the 50s, it was some stout stuff!