The Thunderbird in question. A little dirty, but in great shape for being 70.
During one of my weekend motorcycle rides, I came across a trailer containing a first-generation Ford Thunderbird. It was located in a more industrial area of town, possibly to be restored/worked on, but in pretty good condition. Not knowing much about the vehicle and nobody around to lend me some knowledge, I took pictures and was on my way. When I got home, I was left to seek more information on this old curbside classic.
An old bird it was. They produced the first-generation two-seater “personal car” for three years, from 1955 to 1957. This particular car is a 1955, as noted by a couple of key elements; the most prominent being the exhausts located in the bumper as opposed to underneath. I find that to be such a satisfying element missing from other models.
1955 Thunderbird bumper pass-through exhaust.
While at a glance they may all appear similar, they do have their differences. 1956 added a rear bumper mounted spare tire; this makes for an immediate signal of that model year. The 1957 models have a revised front with larger grill, a significantly longer tail, which made room for the spare, and bigger taillights. All Thunderbirds came with the Y Block V8 engine, with 292 cubic inches in ’55 while ’56 and ’57 offered an upgraded 312 ci. The ’57 had the most options with its exclusive but very rare supercharged engine added to its catalog (only some 195 were made).
1956 Thunderbird with its bumper-mounted spare tire. Perhaps that’s why it was the poorest selling year of the first gens?
Refreshed ’57 bird.
All Thunderbirds had 3 forward gears, but you chose to row or not. While the 3-speed manual was standard, there was also a 3-speed/OD option, but most were of the automatic variety, like today’s find, a Fordomatic to be exact. Selecting the automatic transmission also gave the engine a slight bump in power. While 8 horsepower isn’t a lot, it raised the number to 198. That number is important, as with the additional power it gave the Thunderbird the competitive edge over the V8 Corvette; numbers-wise. The new for ’55 Corvette 265 cubic inch V8 was rated at 195 horsepower, but due to its much lighter weight and the reality that the Chevy engine likely made more power than the Ford regardless of their respective ratings, the ’55 Corvette was significantly faster.
This ’55 features the 292 ci V8 with a 3-speed transmission. Putting power to the ground, this Thunderbird wasn’t a rubber burner but still provided performance. Motor Trend managed a 0-60 time of 11 seconds with estimates of a 120 mph top speed. A ’55 Corvette with the 2-speed Powerglide managed that in only 8.3 seconds in another M/T test.
This very significant difference in performance explains in part why Ford maintained that the Thunderbird was a “personal car” rather than a sports car.
At nearly $3000 when the car launched, it was one of the earlier cars that put the Ford badge in the realm of Mercury/Lincoln. When properly equipped, as most were, that placed their prices to around $4000. For reference, a Lincoln Capri was starting at $3750, and the Mercury Monterey started at $2400. Adjusted for inflation, the Thunderbird would roughly be between $35,550 and $48,000. Top dollar, especially at a time when car loans ranged from 1 to 3 years at interest rates around 11.5 percent.
The Thunderbird we’re looking at featured options such as the Fordomatic transmission ($178.20), Heater ($71.43), Radio ($99.50), 4 way power seats ($64.50), Windshield Washers ($10), Wide Whitewalls ($30), and Wire wheel hub caps ($12.75). This totals an additional $466.38 on top of the $2944 base price. These are the options that can be seen curbside, but that doesn’t mean that’s all it is limited to. It’s also worth noting that the radio appears to be aftermarket, but I would assume it replaced a factory unit. The windshield wipers were torn off, but the washer unit can be seen more central to the vehicle.
Many of the car’s features can be seen from this view. From the automatic transmission to the power seats (switch can be seen forward on door panel)
Sales for the cars ranged from a low in 1956 at 15,631 units to a high of 21,380 in 1957. The 1955 model found 16,155 homes in its time. If I were to guess, the spare tire didn’t do the ’56 any favors in its market. The ’57 saw a more thorough refreshing that seemed to stimulate sales some.
Although these sales numbers can be considered a success, especially for a two seater, and the T-Bird certainly was a successful “halo car” for Ford, there was little or no profit in them. That’s precisely why Ford decided to turn the Thunderbird into a four-seater for 1958, with the expectation of increased volumes and profits.
Despite taking the Corvette’s lunch right out of the gates in the sales department, they soon split their separate ways. The Thunderbird continued to evolve into a proper PLC and gained two additional seats. The Corvette’s new V8 engine in 1955 and focus on making it a genuine sports car suitable for racing made it a winner on the tracks and with a very different clientele than the Thunderbird.
The last Thunderbird we were left with.
The Thunderbird didn’t shed those extra seats until decades later with the latest generation 2002-2005 redesign. By then it was just a sidebar on the Ford lineup to attract retro buyers. Perhaps someday we’ll see the name resurrected. The thoughts of the final generation are out of the minds of many, and that name would make for a mighty good electric convertible. Cadillac Sollei competitor anyone?
Additional CC Reading:
1955 Ford Thunderbird – To Be A Sports Car Or Not To Be A Sports Car, That Is The Question
Automotive History: The Short Life And Personal Times Of The 1955-1957 Thunderbird
Garageside Classics: 1955, 1956, 1957 Ford Thunderbird – Maintaining and Driving Harold’s T-Birds
Curbside Classic: 1957 Ford Thunderbird – The Most Perfectly Styled American Car Of The 1950s?
On the sales numbers,, 1955 had been a record year, and the entire industry was a bit down in 1956. Also, the 1957 numbers got juiced by a long production year because of delays on getting the new 58 models out to the public.
These looked really good in black! Great find!
The ’55 looks best to me .
The speedo binnacle appears to be the same as used in passenger cars .
In the 1970’s theft of the hard tops was a serious problem for the many daily driver Thunderbirds in So. Cal. .
One of my workmates bought a V6 T-Bird in the 1990’s, it was a fine car in every way , trouble free too .
I expected the 2002 retro Bird to be a sales success, they even offered them in lovely pastels but I am told they were a sales flop .
I doubt I’d ever buy one but I think Halo cars are important .
-Nate
The 2002-05 showed that ‘expensive and impractical’ was as much a sales impediment in the 2000s as it was in the 1950s, no matter how sweet it looked.
The TBird is a nice find. But the link to the Cadillac Sollei, oh my! Not something I knew about. Pleasant if subtle (for a Cadillac concept car) styling. But mushroom-based interior items, crystal drinking vessels, unfinished open-pore wood trim, and an integrated leather-bound birding journal and acrylic bird calls? A very interesting blend of features and materials.
The ’56 and ’57 did have bumper exhausts, on the bumper side on the ’56, see above, and as shown here for ’57.
I’m a Ford guy who’s long been fascinated by these, and if I ran into some $$$ I might well buy a nicely-restored one as a toy. It’s always nice to see them in the CC spotlight.
The data about auto-loan interest was a surprise (sounds like the higher-inflation late-1970s), so I went looking in the 1955-57 newspapers. There are ads by banks, insurance firms, loan/finance companies, etc.—–is this before Detroit got into the financing themselves?——-at rates were typically 4-1/2 or 5%, always 30 or 36 months as the longest term. Very interesting!
I strongly suspect that these advertised loans must have some hook or hidden costs or something, because I Googled “auto loan rates in 1955” and came across a very scholarly book that examined auto loan rates in detail. For 1955, the average rate was 11.42%. And these loans typically required a very large (like 33.3%) down payment and were of quite short duration (16-24 months).
https://www.nber.org/system/files/chapters/c1884/c1884.pdf
I can’t explain these ads, but I suspect they were come-ons with hidden costs or such.
Update: reading that book chapter further shows that AAA corporate bonds were yielding about 4.5%, so there’s no way auto loans could have been anywhere near that without substantial additional (or hidden) costs). Car loans were quite a bit higher back then due to government regulations on credit (to keep inflation down) as well as higher losses by lenders due to inconsistent/inadequate insurance coverage as well as just defaults/repossession. The spread on auto loans has come way down, due to a number of changes including deregulation.