A lot has been written about the unlucky crop that were Detroit’s 1958 offerings. To begin, the unfortunate lot came out at a really lousy time (the 1958 recession). Then, the cars certainly carried an air of excess, the result of a brief period where Detroit’s planners tried to outdo and out-gimmick each other. For once, stylists’ ideas reached the showroom with little restraint, and several fads seem to have reached an inflection point in that decisive 1958; the love for glitzy chrome, the postwar fascination with a positivist future, and the blind faith in the mantra “more is more”.
Still, something was going awry even before the ’58s reached the streets, and Detroit’s decision-makers somehow caught wind of it. Taking into account production times, styling studios were already toning down their ideas by the late ’50s. As such, a new and more restrained vision of design began to appear in showrooms as early as 1960. And that makes the late ’50s and the crop of ’58-’59 a rather unique and peculiar one. A curious dreamland for those fascinated with a nostalgic future that never was.
Keeping that in mind, here’s a non-comprehensive gallery of 1958 offerings, in photos more or less from the period. Some of these, like Chrysler’s products, were dreaming of the future and still mostly carried their novel-for-’57 looks. Others, like Lincoln, were aiming to impress and shock the marketplace. Meanwhile, GM was reaching the end of Harley Earl’s jukebox-loving period.
Talking about which, our lede photo is an Olds Super 88 hardtop.
The Edsel. 1958’s most famous model?
Buick Limited, 4-door hardtop.
Dodge Custom Royal.
Ford Fairlane.
Chevrolet Impala.
Lincoln Continental.
Cadillac coupe hardtop.
Chrysler Saratoga.
Pontiac Chieftain.
Mercury Monterey.
Ambassador.
Ford Thunderbird.
Comparing the cars with the backgrounds, it’s clear that architects didn’t fall into the same style trap. Some houses in the late ’50s were overdecorated with Colonial kitsch like the Olds, but very few were as badly proportioned as the ’58 cars. Only an owner-built shack might be as clumsy as the Olds and Edsel.
It helps that so many 1950s tract-house subdivisions are still with us, the cars parked by them are dramatically taller but shorter in length but otherwise the main difference is house colors and mature trees apart from the occasional addition.
Ford (the division) and – this surprises me – Chrysler (the division) had the cleanest designs. Some of the lower-end Chevys weren’t bad.
No Studebaker pictured, though the ’58 Scotsman was featured a couple of days ago here. That was a relatively clean design, though the higher-end ’58 Studebakers (and Packards) were a disaster.
58 Chevy Impala
My oldest brother’s first car was an abused ’58 two door Impala from the north. The floorboard in the rear seat was completely rotted out. First time I rode in it I could see the road beneath and water splashed up going over a puddle. No wonder the interior smelled moldy. Dad helped him install sheetmetal to fill in the holes. He didn’t keep it long.
As A Co Founder of the GREAT AMERICAN LAND YACHT SOCIETY 😉, Too much is NEVER enough! Perhaps 58 was the epitome of OTT excessively chromed upscale Luxury vehicles. The 58 Buicks and Cadillacs (especially. Sixty Special) were my favorites, with the gargantuan Lincolns a close second, even surpassing Exners fabulous finned fantasies for Chrysler. Although sales were slow, survivors should be celebrated as MONUMENTS to an era unfortunately NEVER to be seen again! Today’s PEASANT SUVS, crossovers and melted jelly beans are truly REVOLTING! So I am On to VERSAILLES! The so-called Malaise Era thankfully revived that grand idea of TOO MUCH is NEVER ENOUGH!
I have always known 1958 as the “annus horribilis” of American car design but looking today at all these together I can firmly state that the Ford Thunderbird is the least bad of the bunch.
The Thunderbird was a standout that year. One of the few, maybe the only, that saw a sales increase. While the Thunderbird could have been a little cleaner in design, the concept of the 4-seat ‘bird was over-the-top cool.
The 58 to 60 T-Birds grow on you. However, I was never a fan of the reverse angle vent front window. This design trope of the late 50’s created a dogleg making ingress and egress that much harder. However, the 59 GMs with their reverse angle vent windows look kitschy. The small window reminds me of a duck’s head. For those who cherish their 1958 land yachts enjoy them and thank you for keeping a chapter in car history alive.
I must say IMOP the 58-60 Lincolns are butt fugly. And the full size 58 Buicks Olds and Caddies look like a cross between a hippo and would you believe a tuba!
As a 19-year-old fanatic fan of custom Mercs and the like, I looked at the GM 58s in particular and decided that if you tried to clean them up by removing the chrome, you mostly had nothing left but a boring box. That said, the Impala had some style but not many did. Your Olds Super 88 hardtop was a great example of the boring box. Even with a radical chop, they left all the chrome on!
I remain of the opinion that the 1958 Chrysler-built cars were the best looking things offered that year, particularly the Chrysler and DeSoto brands. They were clean and, with the exception of Dodge, their trim details were quite restrained. That white 58 Saratoga is a beauty!
GM suffered from bulky and bloated shapes, combined with over-ornamentation.
FoMoCo’s sin was in over-sculpting the bodies, and over-doing the trim (something the Thunderbird somehow escaped). I keep forgetting how that base-level Fairlane suffered from the worst-looking side trim of the entire 58 Ford line. It’s worse without the two-tone it was intended for.
Rambler? They sold well in spite of their looks. They were clean only in comparison to almost everything else that year.
The Ambassador’s extra wheelbase and hood length defeated the purpose of buying a Rambler, which was to get decent space utilization and a less elephant-on-roller-skates stance.
As excessive as the ‘58 cars were, I still love the ‘58 Impala. Somehow, it seemed more toned down than the rest, even in its flamboyance.
With all the other cars, I’m reminded of the fake “Bulgemobile” ad of the times that has been featured here before. Although that “ad” (I think it may’ve been a magazine cover for one of the car rags) was poking fun at the 1958 cars in general, it seemed to be aimed mostly at the Chrysler (DeSoto) products, with names like “Fireblast” and “Firewood” if memory serves…
1958 Bulgemobiles was the work of artist and writer Bruce McCall. It first appeared in National Lampoon.
Here you go:
An uncle, a grizzled WWII vet who drove basic Chevys, inexplicably bought a new 1958 Cadillac Sixty Special. Perhaps the most garish of the ‘58’s, rivaling the very similar Buick Limited. Baby blue with every option, including A/C. Even more inexplicably he traded it in 1962 for a 6 cylinder Chevy Biscayne wagon, 3 on the tree with no options except an AM radio. Never did find out the reason, but may have had something do with my aunt’s complaining about the Caddy.
This is a good survey of the offerings, with the Ambassador going its own way (YouTube has their nice 1958-59 promotional film about their engineering decision to go to unit bodies.). The Detroit designers, of course, had made the design decisions a good while ahead of 1958 (whatever effects the recession had on sales choices).
Here’s Popular Mechanics as the ’59s are appearing (Nov. 1958), tell readers that, as car buyers, *they* get to tell Detroit whether the fancied-up ’58s were headed in the right direction or not:
The “58 Hate” is, I have found, mostly limited to automotive writers and older adults who didn’t like them when they were new. I have always loved them (as well as the equally fascinating 57-61s) and so does the general public! NO ONE has ever called my ’58 Cadillac, ’58 Ford, ’59 Chevy, etc. ugly. Instead, people who see my cars are drawn to them and are transfixed by the out-of-this-world styling, unique details, and solid craftsmanship. They think my cars are “beautiful”.
The free market agrees. The Europeans understand this. A ’58 Buick or Olds is more interesting, worth more and will be easier to sell than say, 62-66 standard models, which are boxy and plain. A ’58 Buick Limited will appear on an album cover or coffee mug; a ’64–probably not.
People are free to like or dislike whatever they want. But I’ve always disliked having my automotive tastes de-legitimized by the experts (“schmexperts”) who write hobby books and articles. I believe that most people (particularly non-hobby people) agree with me.
Your ‘60 Dodge is definitely a favorite of mine. 🙂
I think you’re conflating several issues. The gaudy late ’50s cars have had a distinct following since way back; the ’59 Cadillac became a thing already by the mid-late ’60s. Why? Because people realized that this era represented a point in automotive design that would never happen again. Now that could be for more than one reason: kitsch has always been a thing, and that’s clearly part of it here, but others were clearly more openly in love with what these cars represented: a heady optimism that came to a peak, before coming back to earth.
Of course folks love your cars, and we here do too, for obvious reasons: they are survivors, and increasingly rare ones. It doesn’t matter what we think of them objectively in terms of their design, or what the market thought of them in 1958. Most folks nowadays don’t really know the history or have the perspective or knowledge of design to comment on them in those regards. They are reacting (rightfully so) emotionally, just like they likely would to other out-there artifacts from that era.
It’s not a love-hate situation. We can love these cars today for what they are, but we can also use our knowledge to critique them for what they were at the time. Both are valid and can exist at the same time.
Your tastes are not being de-legitimized. And I would encourage you to not be so defensive. These cars are time capsules, and quite delightful ones at that. You’re preserving historical artifacts, and giving folks the pleasure of seeing them as well as an insight into the tastes of the time.
What really bothered me was, when I was in my teens and getting into old cars, Richard Langworth and “The Auto Editors of Consumer Guide” wrote in a book that the ’58 Buicks “were the ugliest Buicks in history”, “The Limited was hideous . . . gross”. Now I LIKED ’58 Buicks, and here the “highly respected experts” were telling me I was wrong! Then in 1983, LIFE magazine listed “The 10 Worst Cars of All Time”. And of course they included the ’58 Buick, the Edsel, 57-58 Packards, the ’59 Chevy (” ‘All new’ ” said the ads– ‘All bad, says our panel.’ “) ’59 Cadillac, and a few other pet favorites of mine like the ’38 Graham, and lumped them all in with the universally scorned Chevy Vega!
Of course my father hated all these cars too, so I felt very alone. I welcomed CC because it celebrated the overlooked, the “beauty in the fast-disappearing ordinary”. The writers and commenters have varied and diverse tastes. They’re not slaves to “mainstream, establishment” thought. And then there are guys like Charles Phoenix who “sees what I see” and makes it a lot of fun! So things are different now than when I was growing up, and I feel in some ways, “justified”.
I know!
I was about to bring up Charles Phoenix. He finds and highlights the Easter eggs in wacky cars and somehow makes them untacky.
If it makes you feel any better I too like the 58 Buick Limited. It is so over the top and has so much factory chrome what is there not to like.
It’s a “Riviera”; all those “chrome slashes” , give it away. Sprawls about “19 feet”, long.
Bigger I believe then my crummy apt..lol
’58s were hard to sell as used cars through the 60’s & 70’s, that’s a fact .
Some looked okay, others not so much .
In matters of taste, everyone else is wrong .
The market spoke .
-Nate
My best friend’s dad bought a ’58 Chev, my dad bought a ’58 Rambler. Both were 6 cyl., 3 on the tree. My friend and I raced the two cars on date nights: I would beat him in the quarter mile, while he would eventually pass and had a higher top.
Somehow we both survived driving those speeds on those Illinois farm roads. And I still have a fondness for those two cars.
The ’58 Chryslers in my opinion had the cleanest styling although I have read they lasted about eighteen months before falling apart. The ’58 GM cars were terrible being the product of Harley Earl’s “dynamic obsolescence” and all the gingerbread slathered on their vehicles. Every time I see one I’m reminded of Bruce McCall’s great parody “The 58 Bulgemobiles.”
Of the 1958 cars pictured, I actually like the Dodge and the Chrysler the Ford Fairlane and the Thunderbird are pretty good as well. They have in common a more streamlined taught look that points to the toward the future where the GM models tend to look bloated and outdated. I have a soft spot in my heart for the 58 Impala and the Pontiac isn’t too bad, but the old and the Buick are positively bloated and overchromed. The Cadillac, however, looks the part of a impressively sized, but relatively tastefully trimmed car. Regardless of make several of the models suffer from front bumpers that are way oversized in comparison to the grill. The Mercury would be a good example of this. The only one of the cars I positively don’t like is the Lincoln. It is just way oversized and over-styled. To coin a phrase “Lincoln, what were you thinkin’?”
There’s a story about a Ford executive who drove a ’58 Olds in the early ’60s to the office with musical notes placed in the bars on the rear quarters and the letters of the name rearranged to spell SLOBMODEL.
Always liked the ’58 Chrysler lineup (except Dodge, and I’m a little questioning on the Imperial), which could only be improved by not having changed a couple of ’57 design touches (Plymouth tail lights and the DeSoto grille immediately comes to mine – the curse of ‘having to change something’).
I loved the ’58 Chevy when dad brought his silver blue Impala hardtop home, and I still love them today. Loved it way more than the ’57 BelAir (which I consider the most overrated vintage car of my lifetime) no matter how much better the ’57’s mechanical reputation. The rest of the GM line sucked. Period. Except for Chevrolet, I’ll always prefer a ’57 over a ’58. And the ’56’s put them both to shame.
Ford was incredibly ugly in it’s entire lineup that year, to the point that I prefer the Lincoln over Ford and Mercury.
’58 was Studebaker/Packard’s “final nail in the coffin”, No matter what short term success of the Lark, ’58 was the year Studebaker died. Rambler? Meh. Best thing I could say about them was “not quite as overbearing”. And still prefer the ’56’s.
In general, I’ll take every manufacturer’s ’56 models over their ’58’s, Chrysler being the closest to an improvement..
I am kind of ambivalent about the 1958 cars. First of all, my Dad hated the GM offerings of the year. He saw them as overdone with chrome and other doodads. He thought the Plymouth was the least garish edition and bought a lightly used one in 1958. He replaced it with a new 1961 Chevrolet Biscayne, with six cylinder, three on the tree, heater and not a single option. Kind of the opposite of the in your face Plymouth.
I now see the 1958 GM stuff as cultural artifacts. The Buick featured is the perfect example of a car reflecting the times, when North America had a large, youthful population. It was a brash car for a brash era. I think it looks great!
I was just old enough to become fully aware of the 1958 new car arrival and still recall all of the hoopla surrounding the Edsel.
I agree with so many others here that in hindsight, the Chrysler and DeSoto of that year are the best looking. (Too bad though about the build quality.) I also like the ’58 Chevy, but prefer the lower line models (Bel Air and Biscayne), because the Impala has way too much ornamentation.
About 30 or so years ago, there was a rent-a-wreck franchise near me that had a ’58 Buick Special 4-door sedan for sale. It was battleship gray and looked very presentable, both inside and out. The asking price was about $8200 as I recall. It would have been an interesting purchase, but I didn’t have the money at the time.
My father owned a ’58 Buick Estate Wagon- two tone with silver gray bottom and white top. The color scheme somewhat hid the chrome inserts on the rear quarter panel. Bill Mitchell had a personal version of this model called the “Round Up”- painted all white. It was a companion to the Dale Robertson Limited convertible built for him. Buick sponsored the Wells Fargo TV show. Mitchell’s wagon had bucket seats (cowhide and leather) and wood inserts in place of chrome. Quite handsome.
Chromed zinc die castings peaked in 1958, if that tells us anything about US auto excess trim that year. This is a tidbit of information I got taking a metallurgy class.
The Ford looked much better with two tone and 500 side trim.
Has anyone ever counted how many little chrome squares there are in the grill of the 1958 Buick?
If memory serves, it’s 162 segments and shaped to reflect and dazzle!
Unfortunate, bad design was so widespread, domestically. Must have frustrated the quality designers. Thankfully, good design broke through, almost immediately thereafter.
1958 Buick Limited – Just exactly what part of this car was ‘Limited’? Plus, I get a particular chuckle out of the exaggerated ‘longer, lower’ advertising art!
Good point. Wonder if they considered calling it the Buick Unlimited? 😉
Having said that, I’ve always liked the ’58 Buick, though my favourite GM for ’58 would be the Pontiac.
The Mercury.
One of my favorites from those years. I like the grilles split and framed in the bumpers and like the scalloped rear fenders. The shape was getting horizontal and squred-off. It has a style without going extreme. The dash is pretty sweet too.
The “Merc” , by the covered bridge, style, garage is hollering out to me.
Car styling reflects the times, as interpreted by the auto maker’s designers. The manufacturers put it out there, the buying public decides whether or not to buy it. So the buying public’s influence always lags behind the manufacturer’s product introductions. Of course, we didn’t have a lot of choices back then!
In many ways, these ’50’s cars are a lot like Victorian era houses. Both relied heavily on ornamentation, and over time both were subject to polarizing attitudes. As the Mid Century approached, many home and property owners stripped off the gingerbread, applying stucco, vinyl siding, and modern windows in an attempt to “modernize” the designs.
Nowadays, many people think that Victorian houses are interesting and beautiful, and well deserving of being preserved. And like ’50’s cars, they like them, even if they don’t particularly want to own and drive them.
Stephen, it’s always lonely to be ahead of the curve. Like you, growing up in the ’60’s, I was always a fan of ’50’s Cadillacs and Lincolns. You just gotta keep the faith, until the world catches up!
I`m not really a fan of the `58s, especially the GM models, but I do like the `58 T Birds, and yes the`58 Lincolns. Say what you want, but at least these cars had ‘style’ even if it was garish and color. Even the interiors had color and often came in two or even three color trims. Can you say that about today` faceless, blend in the background SUVs and ‘crossovers’ in a colorless sea of gray, white,tan or silver? Even the cheap, boring looking interiors come in the same sleep inducing tans,grays or black.
I’m not generally a fan of the ’58s. To me a design that relies on applied chrome trim to give it visual interest is not good design. Don’t get me wrong, chrome has its place, just not everywhere. If you put it everywhere it loses its visual effect. The underlying shape should be cohesive and attractive, not disjointed. Strip the the trim from some of these and you’re left with a very ordinary shape. Yes the Ford has a lot of interesting sheet metal contouring (wonder what the dies for that cost?), but the ’57 trim suited it better.
Truly, as Stephen P says above the styling was out of this world, (and it was a wild time to be a kid!) but sometimes I wonder what we’d be driving if the designers had continued in this vein.
You must surely have heard the story of the development of the 1958 Buick side trim?
The one where Harley Earl’s team had been designing 2 completely different ideas for the side stainless. Then one day, the lunch bell rang, & they left for lunch with these 2 designs on the table side by side.
As Mr Earl had a habit of doing, he would peruse the studio while his men were at lunch.
Completely to their horror, he said “do this one” to the sweep spear & big bright rear quarter bar, side by side.
Being the boss as he was, they had no choice but to do as he had instructed.
This is why the ’58 Buick looks slightly odd on its side trim design. These were 2 completely unrelated designs were never actually intended to be put side by side together like they are.
The Edsel kinda looks “tame” in comparison to some of the other ’58 offerings. Guess the stylists forgot about states that required front license plates, tho.
Regardless of how garish or over chromed these cars were, these are some good looking cars compared to what’s being offered today. These cars showed individuality during this time which I could tell a Dodge from a DeSoto a mile away where today you can’t.
This is amazing! Thanks for the view down memory lane! More of these in the future, please!!!