“–not at a car show!” Yes, in fact I spotted this charming 1955 Chevrolet Bel Air in a funeral home parking lot on North Main Street in Boonton New Jersey, surrounded by modern cars. I immediately noticed that robin’s egg color with just a little patina. Could this paint be original?
Judging from the 1955 Chevrolet paint chart, the buyer selected India Ivory over Sea-Mist Green. With 14 solid colors and 23 two-tones, you could have ordered your new ’55 Chevy painted 37 different ways!
Everyone seems to think that American cars of the ’50s are “big”, but this ’55 seems dwarfed by its modern counterparts.
Compare the ’55 Chevy front end with the modern “Jeep”: Who would have predicted that auto styling would evolve in such a direction?
Recently I did a post about a 1955 Pontiac I spotted, which had a jet plane hood ornament with a light-up Indian Chief’s head morphed onto the front of the jet. Chevrolet’s jet has a eagle’s head, and it’s solid chrome (doesn’t light up).
Here’s the Pontiac version. If you want this kind of elaborate ornamentation, you have to trade up from Chevrolet to Pontiac. (An eagle and an Indian Chief–how American can you get?)
Here’s part of what makes cars from the ’50s so magical–the sweeping “aerodynamic” trim suggesting effortless flight; the elegantly wrought, streamlined script (“Bel Air”); the little gold Chevrolet shield. All suggestive of the fine craftsmanship throughout this car–yes, even in the “low-priced field” you got yourself a gem!
Interior shot. (Not a great picture, but it was the best I could do.)
Apparently the drivetrain and some other features are not original. But it’s for sale–for $28,000 “maybe”. (I like the “maybe”!)
I keep hearing that younger adults as a group have little interest in cars of this era, and older folks who do are either selling them off, not buying more of them, or the cars are being sold off by estates to a dwindling pool of buyers. You would think that would make prices come down, but I haven’t seen evidence of that. I see lots of ’50s cars on eBay and Craigslist with what I consider to be very high asking prices. The cars don’t sell, and they keep getting re-listed over and over. Eventually, the laws of economics must prevail, amirite?
So that’s what I saw on the way to the grocery store this morning. A bright robin’s egg classic to brighten your day, weeks before the start of Spring!
This car had me in its clutches until we got to the powertrain swap. A lovely old Bel Air sedan like this simply demands a diminutive 265 V8 and either a PG or a 3 speed/OD. Once people start modernizing them, I find the charm sucked out. Like the vintage old house where flippers update it to appeal to HGTV fans.
I still remember these as one of the first “old” cars I could reliably identify. I still consider those taillights to be near perfection.
We have equal feelings toward this car: A beautiful antique ruined. Having grown up in the antique car hobby back in the days when the AACA standard was the only acceptable on, I credit the resto-rod movement on two factors:
1. Laziness – Anyone can get an old car back on the road by shoving anything under the bodywork. In the end, you don’t have an antique car anymore. Conversely, it takes a fair bit of work and dedication to restore a vintage car correctly, to factory specifications, getting all the fine details right, knowing that errors were going to be hurting your final score in the day’s judging.
2. America Graffiti – Don’t laugh. After the success of that movie, I started noticing Forties and Fifties cars started showing up at shows with wheels swapped out, and seemingly invariably a cassette play blasting out Danny and the Juniors as they pulled in to that weekend’s show. And it only went from there.
Yeah, I’m a humorless curmudgeon. I also like some twelve year old kid seeing a decent approximation of what we actually drove back then.
I love and appreciate original 100% correctly restore cars, but this is very narrow minded and judgemental. What I love about the old car hobby is that there is something for everyone. Some restore 100% stock, some add extra conveniences, options and safety features, some lightly modify for improved performance, some customize the looks and some modify with entirely modern mechanicals. At the end of the day, why do people get so worked up about what someone else does to their car.
There are lots of other reasons why many don’t have the original drivetrains in the car. 1955 265 engines are a one year only engine block. They don’t exactly grow on trees and aren’t cheap if you can find one. The original engine may have long ago been removed and lost, or had a catastrophic failure. A good example is a gentleman I met who has a ’56 Chevy. The original 265 was long gone and being limited in funds and resources, he swapped in a stockish ’80s era 305 Chev with a TH350, bought for little money. To most enthusiasts, it looks just like the original 265, but performs better than the 265. Ultimately he enjoys his car, and it keeps another classic on he road. So, who cares that it has a 305 instead of a 265?
I don’t really like to see very original and rare cars modified, but this is definitely not the case here. There are certainly no shortage of ’55 Chevys and I hardly think swapping in a 350, which is the same basic engine it originally had, and itself an very old engine, and a 30-40 year old OD transmission is “Resto-mod.” If done properly, a Gen 1 350 sbc could be swapped in place and still look nearly 100% original. While I like 100% correctly restore cars, many old car owners want to drive their cars frequently. These perfectly restored cars are often precious artifacts that see little to no use. The mods this owner did were only to make the car more driveable and if he swapped the wheels back to stock, most wouldn’t be the wiser.
People get in such a huff over draconian government regulations in automobiles, but they don’t seem to hold a candle to hobby groups like the AACA!
If cars were meant to be meticulously preserved to factory standards there would be little to no following for cars like the tri-fives and there’d be fewer remaining examples as a result. And I hate to be the bearer of bad news but American Grafitti is a 50 year old movie, and whether or not you like the cars represented they were what was available to the filmmakers to best mimic an early 60s street scape, and hot rods were part of that. And guess what? 12 year olds tend to like hot rods, at least I did, those were my initial gateway into the classic car world
Geez; these were getting bigger and hotter Chevy V8s swapped in them as soon as the 283 came out in ’57 and the 327 in ’62. That’s the whole beauty of them; plug and play.
It’s only another small block backed up by much better transmission with an O/D. Who’s going to tune up your 265 or fix your ancient PG? Yes, in theory it’s possible, but if folks want a reliable comfortable cruiser, why not?
After all these years, you finally get me to a place where I can express a desire for the original Chevrolet V8 and a Powerglide transmission and still I am met with abuse? I can’t win. 🙂
But JPC, surely not drum brakes all around. Even a true purist wants to stop when one needs to stop. 🙂
So Jim, would you feel the same disdain for a ’53 Loewy coupe with a four-barrel 289 swapped in to replace the wimpy 232 V8?
I would. Needs an R2! 🙂
R3 make that, since an R2 is still a 4bbl 289 i guess
A 53-54 Commander Starliner with more power? That’s why there are Hawks. 🙂
JP, you didn’t answer the question. But then you’re an attorney, so I guess I’m not surprised. 🙂
Seriously, I personally would leave it alone and enjoy it for the charming artifact that it is. With more power I would notice that the brakes suck, and the steering, and I wouldn’t drive it enough in the summer, and the added a/c would probably make a 12v conversion a good idea. I would not know where to stop, so the best antidote is to just appreciate it for what it is (and isnt).
One color not listed as a legitimate color is Anniversary Gold for 1955!!
I know because I have one, 265 V-8, PS, PB, with automatic transmission (PG).
Hot rodders say “If it’s stock,fix it!”
Sadly this is so and most Hot Rodded vehicles wind up being sold shortly after being modified beyond restoration .
-Nate
Nice find Stephen.
Not sure of the price, but if you are looking for a viable (maybe not a DD) vehicle that has a modern drive train and front disks and [vintage] A/C that also catches the attention of most everyone everywhere, even from non-car people, this might just be the one.
I’d be curious about unseen rust and other structural (age related) issues, and tri-fives are not exactly rare, but what a great grocery-getter this would be if you liked to attract attention.
So this was at a funeral home? Maybe, though sadly, the owner – or a mourning contemporary? If the former, perhaps an attempt of relatives to start the estate sale ASAP?
As mentioned here before, the ’55s had such a clean uncluttered design; GM gilded the lily after this.
In 1955, Bel Air was top of the line for Chevrolet and first year for new styling. Difference in hood ornament is somewhat indicative of Alfred P. Sloane philosophy of GM hierarchy, although the Pontiac light-up was a carry over mush like the chrome bands on hood. Believe only DeSoto also had light-up last used in 54. In late 50s parents bought black DeSoto fresh out of service from a local funeral home, but doubt this Bel Air ever did service for that funeral home. Never have understood the big deal about 55-57 Chevys. Loved 58s, but wish Bel Air had continued as top of line. Model names like President, AMBASSADOR, Patrician, etc. Indicated something that letter nameplates lack. OLD 🐕, not a fan of new tricks 🙄 Shades
55-57 Chevrolets got a long-term reputation for reliability well beyond the competition back in the day, still selling well as used cars in the early Sixties. The 58, although probably the prettiest 58 out there (ok, in my eyes), got the reputation of a flashier and cheaper automobile, especially in terms of long-term usage.
The 55 is justifiably noteworthy due to the small block engine and the styling, which was a bit of a milestone among the 55’s. The 56 was, well, the mandatory restyling, even though it wasn’t necessary. The main story I’d always heard is that the dealers didn’t like the grille on the 55, it wasn’t full width and flashy enough, like what everyone else was selling. Ok, give them the damn grille. Credit given to Chevy’s styling department to keeping the changes minimal and not ruining a great design.
The 57, I just do not get. THE car of the rock and roll Fifties? Try, the most overrated car of the Fifties. I always felt the styling was second rate in the front, tacked on (ok, not as bad as Studebaker the following year) in the rear, and in looks was a definite second to Ford. Which outsold it that year (trust me, I knew that one at a young age, as the Ford dealer’s kid went to the same school as me). Unfortunately for Ford, they built a rustbucket which nowhere near the reliability of the Tri-Fives.
I adore the 58 Chevy, more so than the Tri-Fives. Still vividly remember dad’s silver blue Impala Sport Coupe, 348/Turboglide (unfortunately, next year it was back to the small block and Powerglide). The best looking car of Harley Earl’s Final Flop. And, unfortunately, no better than anything else being built at the time.
I enjoy, sir, every time you post your love for the 58 and disdain for the 57, a point of view I completely share. My grandfather’s 58 Bel Air was a very attractive and good car. The 56 was a decent (and quite popular) restyle of the 55. The 57 – never cared for it, then or now.
And you’re quite right about the 57 Ford – we had one. Much better styled than the Chevy but the quality was atrocious. Those headlight bezels rusted out quickly, the seat material on our Fairline 500 was pulling apart early on, the doors notorious for not latching properly. The 57 Chevy 210 next door – excellent quality.
Ruined by the resto-rod treatment. The original 265/Powerglide would be just fine for the amount of driving this car is going to get.
Doesn’t anyone restore cars to factory original anymore?
It’s obviously not a “resto-mod”. Swapping in a more recent vintage of the same basic engine (and a more modern transmission) is something folks have been doing since forever, right? Especially in old Chevys. Plug-and-play.
Yes, some folks do restore cars. And others don’t. To each their own.
Boonton, New Jersey is the home of Kanter Auto Parts, a large supplier of parts for 1950’s and earlier classi cars. I wonder if the owner is an employee? In any case, the owner, if a local, wouldn’t have far to go for those parts which remain original. A nice car. So many cars today are subject to the “LS Swap”, because mechanics cannot/would rather not deal with the old stuff.
And it’s going to be the “Godzilla Swap” on the Ford side. That being said, it is a vastly superior engine compared to the LS
I’m not really against swapping in modern components. The front-disc-brake conversion (and a conversion to dual master cylinders when possible) can be a great improvement. A Chevy 350 and a 700r4 will provide a nice overdrive for modern conditions. The one thing I would mention is that things like the “LS swap” are the default when a more nuanced approach may provide a nicer end result, IMHO. It is nice to have a car that can be driven.
I’m with you, JP, I was almost ready to unzip my pants until it came to the powertrain swap. That being said, I did a THM 350 swap in a bone stock 1957 Bel-Air that my customer’s grandma bought new. And what a difference it made. It was a bolt in with all Danchuk parts, except the drive shaft. Not wanting to modify the original one, went to the wrecking yard and pulled one from a later GM product and had it modified. Customer went home with a ear to ear grin, a trunk load of parts, and knowing the car could be returned to stock at any time.
Please…. This car is not ruined. We don’t know what the owner/builder had to start with, and what parts and finances they had access to. But they got it on the road without molesting it. Everything done that is listed on the for-sale sign can be replaced with factory original parts. But doing that on top of the listed sales price would be cost prohibitive. It’s a beautiful car. I would drive it and enjoy it as is.
We really shouldn’t be dismissing a classic car with a modern engine set up.
There is a place for a classic car with modern drivetrain. There are many who appreciate the look of a classic car, but do not have the ability, nor the interest, in restoring what goes underneath it. Replacing a doddering old engine with a modern one, giving the car a newer set of disc brakes, giving it modern dependability isn’t a bad thing. It may not be for you, because you want to have an authentic ride from 70 years ago, but unless you want all these beautiful machines sitting in museums and not out on the open road, you need to recognize that some classic car lovers do not have the ability nor the interest in experiencing a completely classic vehicle.
I want to see owners under the age of 40 with these cars too. Expecting that they learn how a car from 1955 operated mechanically in order to have that car – isn’t going to happen.
We don’t live in log cabins. We don’t live in Victorian age houses without modern conveniences within them. We shouldn’t expect classic cars to remain intact either.
I tend to agree. I appreciate purists – and can be one myself at times.
But, taking the word of my neighbor that has several classic cars, including two 1950 Oldsmobiles, the original car is a crude truck by today’s standards, and the car with the updated drivetrain is a pleasant mode of transportation.
If electrification wins out over the long term, some classics are likely to join their modern counterparts at the charging station.
I guess I’m just old enough to remember cars from decades ago and remember all the problems I had with them daily as rides. I cruise along in my 20 year old ride and delight at the ease of use, comfort and convenience. I remember when cars were not fun to drive. They floated without road feel, they guzzled gas, they didn’t always start, they slide around during rains or snows – they needed a lot of distance to stop.
I love those old rides and appreciate those of us who keep them running. But spend a day in a Beetle and then tell yourself that it will be your only ride for the next few years and see if you won’t miss modern rides.
I like indoor plumbing too.
Close enough to 40 years to the day, I learned thanks to this post that I was somewhat regularly in the presence of a Shadow Grey over Coral ’55 Bel-Air sedan. I thought it an unusual combo for a ’50s car.
It wore a deeper patina – who knew what decade it had last been polished? I was a carry-out clerk for a large grocer at a big store on the edge of the city. We had a significant clientele from surrounding small towns, and several employees from those towns.
Our elderly customer had been a school teacher in one of those towns, and was well known for driving her ’55 decade after decade. A combination of low miles, and living just outside our city salt belt had created a true survivor car with a practical owner that found no reason to make a change when none was apparently needed!
Great find, Stephen. Of the tri-fives, I like the clean looks of the ’55 best, although the ’56 had some worthy under-the-skin improvements without ruining the look too much.
Forgive my pedantry, but wouldn’t this be WEST Main St. (at C&M or DL&C funeral homes)?
As others have commented, I’m fine with unseen improvements like front disc brakes with dual master cylinder, a modern fuel-injected engine, etc., as long as the car looks stock. I enjoy reading about the details of how the car was originally built, but why suffer the shortcomings of 60-something-year-old technology? (My body is beginning to feel the shortcomings of 60-something-year-old parts, so I’m talking from first-hand experience here!)
You’re right–312 West Main Street (Dangler Funeral Home).
At “62”, I’m all in for “newer” parts.
Nice find! This is rather timely because I have been recently looking at Tri-fives for sale in my area. I have noticed the prices in Ontario have seemed to come down on these Tri-five Chevys and 2-seater T-birds as well, another one of my 50s favourites. However, the big difference is that the 4-doors are no longer bargains, despite the 2-doors dropping in price. I think the stigma of a 4-door being not cool has reduced with time.
The Tri-five Chevy were the cars that sucked my into my life long love of cars. When I was a young child of about 3 years old, the ’57 Chevy was the car that I fell in love with. I loved all three years, but as a kid the ’57 was my favourite. With time, my love for the very clean ’55 has grown to be probably close to equal to the ’57. The only reason the ’57 edges it out is my nostalgia for it. While I am not in the demographic that typically owns these cars, I would gladly buy one in a heartbeat. I recently found a ’57 Bel Air 2-door hardtop that was selling for a reasonable price. It looked bone stock, except under the hood, where it had a ’60s era 327 and a TH350. For the savings over a 100% correct car, I’d glady take the 327 powered Chevy. I also would be interested in something like this ’55, although it is somewhat overpriced. It would be great cruiser that I could regularly enjoy with my family. And wouldn’t that be a great way to pass on the love of these cars to the next generation.
Regarding size … our current house has a 25 year old rebuilt detached garage that is quite modestly sized, as befits our 100 year old home in an old neighborhood. But our previous house was mid-fifties ranch house, completely original when we bought it. On 1/4 acre lots, these 2000 square foot homes were definitely in the upper part of the suburban market at the time … probably targeted about Buick or Chrysler owners, not Ford or Chevy, though perhaps if a buyer had to extend themselves to afford our home new in 1955, they might have had to settle for a Chevy like this one. Ours was very similar to its neighbors, perhaps a mirrored layout and different trim and siding. The attached two car garage had sliding barn style doors with a post in the middle. I could barely squeeze our 1993 Land Cruiser in; a quick check shows its dimensions to be almost exactly the same as this Chevy. A modern Sequoia is a foot longer and 4” wider, about the same as ‘59 Chevy. So the garage in this upscale home was unusable for housing a domestic car within just a few years. Fortunately it had a huge driveway … which is where we parked everything except my bikes and occasionally my wife’s New Beetle. But even that was a tight squeeze past the mirrors.
A stock 55 Chev down here was a six cylinder 3 speed above the knee there were no other mechanical options, I doubt many survive in that condition mist have had a V8 implant sometime in their career even if it was done in 56 when an V8 first landed here `thank gawd the awful powerslide didnt appear untill 1960 at least smaller GM products got the hydramatic though it wasnt popular.
I like this 55 just fine It would make a good daily drive among the Japanese SUVs and other exJDM cast offs we have.
I’ve always felt that the ’55 and ’56 Chevys were just about the perfect size for a family car. We had a ’56 210 4 dr sedan as a kid and it fit 2 adults and 4 kids just fine. It also had clean lines, good visibility, and was a truly functional family car. If full-sized US cars had kept these kind of dimensions with appropriate modernization over the decades I believe they could have lived on as the most popular car size far longer than they did, being replaced in popularity by the A body GM and B body Mopar sized cars starting in the mid-’60s. I’d still love to own a ’55 or ’56 Chevy today but as noted even nice 4 dr sedans have gotten quite expensive. Time may correct that problem, but too late for me!
The Chevy PowerGlide was a durable and perfectly acceptable automatic to the average family GM car buyer for almost 20 years, and I’d wager that the vast majority of drivers neither knew, nor cared, that it, or the similar BOP versions of the Super Turbine 300, were “only” a 2 speed automatic transmission. They worked just fine alongside our big torquey engines.
My first thought on seeing the first picture was that the car was priced a little high as it isn’t a grade 1 professionally restored car. So grade 2 and around 18K for your less than desirable 4 door sedan. Then I saw the driveline updates and marked the car down to 2- as originality always has more value. I don’t begrudge the owner making those upgrades but he needs to realize values are based on originality first, as originality costs more to achieve, and therefore his car doesn’t warrant such a price. He will not agree, they never do, but my value that I would assign would be about 15K. Fifty’s era cars may not have come down much in price but they also take a lot longer to sell now.
Next question, though, what constitutes a 55 Bel Air? If I see someone who looks like Paul, and am told it is Paul, but there has been a brain transplant, then is it Paul? If a 65 F-100 gets put on a Crown Vic suspension along with a V-10 Triton engine then is it a 65 F-100. Nope, both are now Frankensteins. When I get into my 65 F-100 I want to experience the truck as it was made back in the day as it is much more fun. If I wanted a nice smooth ride then I’d get a new F-150 and since they ride like a car then I would get the car instead. If you are ever in the area, and want to see how a new 65 F-100 rode, then I can show you exactly. It handles quite well.
Wow, does this bring back the memories! My mom lucked into a brand-new ’55 Chevy — it was simply happenstance as she couldn’t fully depress the clutch pedal in the ’53 Chevy my father had purchased. As a young widow, she needed a different car.
Ours was a 210 Delray club coupe, in Skyline Blue with an India Ivory roof. it had the Stovebolt Six and 3-on-the-tree (still!). The all-vinyl interior was decked out in a “waffle weave” pattern in blue and white, and full carpeting was standard. The grille, hood ornament, taillights, and dashboard (sans the chromed trim of little bowties) were identical to those of the Bel Air. Only the side trim was less flashy, but it still included that neat diagonal strip starting at the beltline dip.
She later said she liked this car better than the ’61 and ’67 full-size Chevys that followed. It had only 30,000 miles on it when she sold it to my uncle, who later passed it down to his son (my cousin). I last recall seeing it in 1964.
On the issue of old car prices not coming down. yourerite with a few exceptions such as Woodies, which perplexes me even more. I don’t know what explains it other than the march of time, the internet and professional vintage car dealers. Whatever the reason, fundamental economics will eventually cause prices to down unless Gen X, Gen Y and Millennials all of a sudden develop a yen for something other than public transportation and rice rockets.
Its a lovely Bel Air above but I’m not a resto rodder although I admit that as time passes what used to be just an inconvenience with an old car is now often a major PITA. So I get it. Nothing stays the same unfortunately.
As a geezer who prefers basic standards I love the ’55s, all of them .
I’d happily drive a two door ’55 but I also wonder how much better it would drive with a modern front suspension, and radial tires, every vehicle I buy gets a full set of HD gas charged Bilstein shocks any way and polyurethane bushings through out tent to help and crappy handling of older vehicles .
Most of the time I’m all about bone stock but I’d like to test drive this or a similarly up dated car before saying no .
Having recently managed to over heat and fail the four wheel disc brakes on my old Mercedes sedan I can dig the dual master cylinder and front discs .
-Nate
I enjoy driving my 57 Chevy 2 Dr Belair. I put in disc brakes,power steering makes for a much easier and better ride A lot more enjoyable to drive and easier. I think it us okay to modify your older cars to make drivingore enjoyable but people have their and are entitled to their own opinions .