CDL required?

[ocnblu]

She ain't skeered. But I am.

[hyperv6]

I thought this web site was about new products and future products?

We need to start a nostalgia section. I like the old cars too but.

[ocnblu]

Well once in a while it's good to remember where you've been, as a guide for the future, and that goes for good or bad. For example, 3,428 shiny steel chicklets would not look good on the front of a 2013 Encore.

[Camino LS6]

Yep, always good to take a look at where things were at a given point in history.

And... the new stuff is pretty boring right now.

[balthazar]

Modern stuff is pretty unilaterally acknowledged to be relatively soulless, so any inspiration to help address that problem is goodness.

[hyperv6]

I have to agree there is good and bad to all era's. The problem is too many selectively only remember what they want to remember and carry a distorted image in their mind of how it really was.

Case in point the add pictured above. They all were much better than real life and that is how too many remember it.

I have a large collection of these GM ads from the 50's and 60's as I love the art and color. I used to cut them out of old life magazines and put them in a book.

Edited September 23, 2012 by hyperv6

[ocnblu]

So you're saying every bit of soul is being refined out of 4-wheeled automotive transportation?

[ocnblu]

Seems like some things are not being learned from. A problem is engineered out in one generation, only to resurface in a future iteration. If all knowledge were passed down and built upon, where would GM be now?

[Robert Hall]

So you're saying every bit of soul is being refined out of 4-wheeled automotive transportation?

Most vehicles today are just disposable appliances...functional transportation to get from point a to point b with minimum fuss for a few years to trade on another appliance. Very few vehicles today are interesting enough to get passionate about. That's just the way it is...

[ocnblu]

Will there be any cars built today in a classic car show, circa 2050?

[BigPontiac]

So you're saying every bit of soul is being refined out of 4-wheeled automotive transportation?

Toyota coined a term for it in their advertising: The Camry Effect.

[Robert Hall]

Will there be any cars built today in a classic car show, circa 2050?

Yes, some...Cadillac CTS-v, Camaro, Corvettes, Mustangs, Challengers, Chargers, 300s...the good stuff. Very little of the FWD generics are worth remembering even 5 years from now, IMO. Seriously, who is going to care about a 1.4L 4cyl generic after a few years?

Edited September 23, 2012 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[hyperv6]

It seems that many remember the Bel Airs, 300's, Eldorado's and Sunliners but many forget the dowdy basic trasportation cars of the 50's and 60's. They had many generic cars back then that were baisc trasportation. They were the many inline 6 models with no chome and few restored today. Some there are none restored today as many have been forgotten.

The fact is every generation has models that are forgotten and vanished as they were just not cars that stood out but did make up the majority of what was sold back then.

I went to the Glenmoore Gathering of Significant Automobiles last week and field was filled with many great cars but most were cars the average person owned even back in the day.

Today the collectors and the markets only restore and collect the special cars that seldom is made up of cars that the average Joe owned or drove. Seldom do you see a 53 Buick 4 door restored. or a 55 Cadlillac sedan. Seldom were these cars even seen in advertising as all we see are the top of the line models that often were cars that were the least sold because of price. Because of the over the top trim and the limited volume these are what collectors look for today,

Even later the same is true on cars like the Superbirds. Back in the day few people bought them as the price was high and styling was over the top but today limited volume and the styling have taken them too collector status.

I can remember many older people talking about the times back then where the 59 Cadillac was as loved as it is today. Many of the folks back then had little love for the 59 models where as the over the top stlyling today is prized. The 60's models were toned done for a reason.

The fact is there is not one single year of cars where they are all classics. Generally a small portions and the top or over the top models are the few that remain in the hearts of collectors.

[ocnblu]

I do believe that more base models should be saved, restored and shown. What an unexpected and pleasant surprise it is sometimes to open a hood of massive acreage and see a tiny little inline six down in there, purring quietly in faded blue or red or green, doing the moving when called on, decade after decade, while asking only for a meager pittance of oil and gas and water and maybe a simple, kind word in comparison to a Singer sewing machine... smoooth.

[Camino LS6]

It seems that many remember the Bel Airs, 300's, Eldorado's and Sunliners but many forget the dowdy basic trasportation cars of the 50's and 60's. They had many generic cars back then that were baisc trasportation. They were the many inline 6 models with no chome and few restored today. Some there are none restored today as many have been forgotten.

The fact is every generation has models that are forgotten and vanished as they were just not cars that stood out but did make up the majority of what was sold back then.

I went to the Glenmoore Gathering of Significant Automobiles last week and field was filled with many great cars but most were cars the average person owned even back in the day.

Today the collectors and the markets only restore and collect the special cars that seldom is made up of cars that the average Joe owned or drove. Seldom do you see a 53 Buick 4 door restored. or a 55 Cadlillac sedan. Seldom were these cars even seen in advertising as all we see are the top of the line models that often were cars that were the least sold because of price. Because of the over the top trim and the limited volume these are what collectors look for today,

Even later the same is true on cars like the Superbirds. Back in the day few people bought them as the price was high and styling was over the top but today limited volume and the styling have taken them too collector status.

I can remember many older people talking about the times back then where the 59 Cadillac was as loved as it is today. Many of the folks back then had little love for the 59 models where as the over the top stlyling today is prized. The 60's models were toned done for a reason.

The fact is there is not one single year of cars where they are all classics. Generally a small portions and the top or over the top models are the few that remain in the hearts of collectors.

Yeah, not so much anymore. The high end stuff is too pricey these days, and consequently the more run of the mill cars are being preserved more and more every year. The values are steadily increasing as well. Even everyday cars from those days are pretty high on style as compared to modern cars. Unlike today's appliances, even base cars from the 50s,60s, and 70s are something people can love. Also, those cars are only an engine swap and option upgrade or two away from their legendary siblings. If you can't buy it, you can build it. That just isn't the case with new cars.

[hyperv6]

My dad owned a 1968 Chevelle Concouse. This was the top of the line luxury model and had all the bells and whistles on it including some rare options today. But because it was a 4 door hard top it is not worth today of the cost to restore it.

The only reason some are attracted to cars like a 5 door 57 Chevy is they can no longer afford a coupe.

Sorry but precieved reality is much different vs what people really drove back then.

Take for example the 57 Ford was the Camry of the day and today even the coupes are cheap as no one really wants one and they were not all that flashy of a car. Back in the day it out sold the Chevy. Same for the 58 Ford as it was not what I would call attractive but it sold well but few people will touch them today.

I see it too often guys like to cherry pick their memories or their ideas [if they were not around] for the reality that really took place.

Watching old TV and movies show you how many of the cars back then were more than not the base model cars and a 4 door not much different vs the plain old drab Impalas and Camrys that dominate the market today.

The cars you see at car shows and museums today far from represent what was the average car back then. If i go by that I would think every large Chrysler has a 45 player under dash and every Tri Five Chevy had a V8 two doors and a tissue dispenser.

The fact is every generation had their top of the line Bel Air Coupe/convert and CTSv coupe but most of what was purchased was the Delray/Biscayne and the CTS sedans.

What we see restored today is seldom a good representation of what the reality of what the majority drove.

As for todays cars there is a lot you still can do but in many cases why would you as you can buy more HP and hanling in many cars than you ever could in the past.

I just read a story on how easy an upgrade on a HHR or most other midsize GM car to larger brakes. Change the rotor and the caliper carrier and you can increse the size of your rotors easily. Change the pads and it is a major improvment. All of it was done in his case for less than $150.

[hyperv6]

I do believe that more base models should be saved, restored and shown. What an unexpected and pleasant surprise it is sometimes to open a hood of massive acreage and see a tiny little inline six down in there, purring quietly in faded blue or red or green, doing the moving when called on, decade after decade, while asking only for a meager pittance of oil and gas and water and maybe a simple, kind word in comparison to a Singer sewing machine... smoooth.

I would love to see more base models saved but it is just not a sound investment. Too many people forget how many of these car their really were. Even the small V8 like a 307 is lost to history in many cars as they seldom are saveds.

I own my original Fiero yet and I have made some changes to it and most were done with parts that have not been available since the early 90's. I at one time was rare because I was modified but today I am average as most Fiero's have seen changes. It is becoming a rare thing to find a stock and I mean all stock 84 in good condition. When you do often someone buys it for a low price and slaps a LS engine in it. One day a fully stock Fiero may be a rare thing outside some GT's and pace cars as the value of a stock base coupe is nothing.

Also all original cars are taken for granted by many anymore. Paint was never as good on many of the restored cars we see today. Also the fit of the parts were never as good. Most of these older cars were flawed in many areas but it did not seem bad as they all were that way. It is like when I took the 81 Camaro to the Camaro show you could see the stark changes from 100% factory showroom original to a restored model. There is no way I could compete in the show even in stock class unless they considered the originality of the car. The paint was factory like new but would have killed me along in scoring.

This is why so many clubs are looking for survivor cars and treat them with respect. I would love to see more people restore cars back to original flaws and all as a reminder of how things really were.

[balthazar]

Bel-Airs were a few chrome bits away from a 150; they were the generic dowdy transportation, no where NEAR the level of a 300 or Eldorado.

Yet their values are thru the roof; thru the roof on the entire line of C-57s (AND C-55 ~ C-56).

Different makes/models fare differently in the collector world, for EX Buick- the Buick restorer crowd doesn't care if it has 4-drs or not, in fact many seem to prefer them. Loads of LeSabres & Specials vs. Electras & GSs out there. Values are not as far spread as one would think, either. Just saw a 4-dr Special, circa '64 at a show representing a body shop- the paint job looked like it cost $10K.

Now Pontiac has a completely different collector model demographic.

As far as ads go, I can tell you after amassing over 6000 that many basic models were advertised; '50s Eldorado ads are near non-existant whereas 4-drs were the norm. Again highly depends on the source- I went thru a stack of Barron's from the early '60s this year- all low-level volume sedan models.

But this is the nature of advertising- association. If everyone could afford a Bonneville, most would buy one, you are selling the perception, the basic structure/features & styling, models & options are 4 & 5 down on the list, so you show a little sparkle to draw the eye. Not that complicated.

Consumer Guide years ago put out a series of books covering the decades: 1930s, 1940s thru 1960s (at least, thats what's on my shelf- not sure if they went farther), but of note is they put out a single 1-year book; 1957. One could make a pretty good argument for across the board winners for 1957.

[GMTruckGuy74]

Consumer Guide years ago put out a series of books covering the decades: 1930s, 1940s thru 1960s (at least, thats what's on my shelf- not sure if they went farther), but of note is they put out a single 1-year book; 1957. One could make a pretty good argument for across the board winners for 1957.

I have the '50s and '60s versions, along with that wonderful '57-only issue. I do know they have the '70s out now for a couple of years... just waiting for the '80s to come out

I attended a local NAPA-sponsored car show in the next town at the beginning of this month. One of the trophy winners was a restored 1957 Chevrolet 150 or 210 four-door sedan in all black with the inline 6-cylinder engine with the most basic of features. I'll download the pictures off my camera and post it here. They're out there, but rarely will you see them at the larger, well-known shows (I see basic models mostly at these small town-type of shows).

[hyperv6]

I have always felt the 55 Chevy was one of the best designs of the 50's. it has sculped corners and did not need a lot of funny cartoon like fins and odd bits of chome to pull it off. 56-57-58-59-60 just were cases to me where adding a little bit more each year just made it worse. Not saying they were bad cars but just not as clean and pure design as the 55.

To me some of the cars of the late 50's became like Tammy Faye Baker and just did not know when to stop. To day it makes them specail but but it does not make them a great design.

Good design came back with the more restrained Pontiac line 60 and later as it did with the 63 Riv. The the body line do the talking not the bling.

[hyperv6]

Consumer Guide years ago put out a series of books covering the decades: 1930s, 1940s thru 1960s (at least, thats what's on my shelf- not sure if they went farther), but of note is they put out a single 1-year book; 1957. One could make a pretty good argument for across the board winners for 1957.

I have the '50s and '60s versions, along with that wonderful '57-only issue. I do know they have the '70s out now for a couple of years... just waiting for the '80s to come out

I attended a local NAPA-sponsored car show in the next town at the beginning of this month. One of the trophy winners was a restored 1957 Chevrolet 150 or 210 four-door sedan in all black with the inline 6-cylinder engine with the most basic of features. I'll download the pictures off my camera and post it here. They're out there, but rarely will you see them at the larger, well-known shows (I see basic models mostly at these small town-type of shows).

The basic cars are the average car guy as he is not going to spent $50K on a car but wants to still enjoy the car. My buddy in high school has a 58 Biscayne 2 door with a inline 6 and 3 on the tree. Painted black and a set of American Racing black spoked Torque Thrust it looked sweet for a high School ride. It was a little old ladys car and a garage find like my 63 Ford. Mine did not need any work and his only needed paint and two front fenders for the rot they got around the head lights on these cars.

I admire the guys who take the time to fix the regular cars as they too often do not get the credit they deserve.

[Camino LS6]

I have always felt the 55 Chevy was one of the best designs of the 50's. it has sculped corners and did not need a lot of funny cartoon like fins and odd bits of chome to pull it off. 56-57-58-59-60 just were cases to me where adding a little bit more each year just made it worse. Not saying they were bad cars but just not as clean and pure design as the 55.

To me some of the cars of the late 50's became like Tammy Faye Baker and just did not know when to stop. To day it makes them specail but but it does not make them a great design.

Good design came back with the more restrained Pontiac line 60 and later as it did with the 63 Riv. The the body line do the talking not the bling.

I'm with you on this, and then again I'm not. The '55 Chevy was a beautiful , and clean design that far outshines the '56-'58 versions in my opinion. However , I don't see linear decline in design with each year a touch worse than the one before. I think you have to take each year as an individual case. The '56 was just a tarted-up version of the '55, and not an improvement. But the '57 really works as a design - there is a reason that it has been an icon for so long. The '58 always looked fat and overblown to me, but I've warmed to its design over the years, especially in the lower trims.

Then there is the '59.

This is the game changing year, not 1960. It's radical and brash with huge fins, and lots of chrome, but under the gingerbread it was a revolution in design. The stance, the dimensions, the underlying shapes - all of it was wholly new. Yeah it's a bit polarizing, but WOW!. I find it to be a milestone that easily equals the '55 (though in an entirely different way).

As far as the late 50s in general go, I'm with you. Many of those cars have always looked like overblown tubs slathered in chrome that didn't compliment their basic designs. But there were plenty of exceptions to that rule. 1959 changed all of that, but then Studebaker had already moved in that direction in '53, or thereabouts. And the late '50s Chryslers had already tidied-up their act. C1 Corvettes never really suffered the general design bloat of the 50s at all... And even on the worst of the fins and chrome crowd, there were thoughtful and interesting design details. Lower, longer, and wider ushered in my favorite era of design without any doubt, but there are earlier gems.

[hyperv6]

The 55 was right spot on.

The 56 fixed what was not broken. It is hard to improeve perfect.

The 57 is not bad but it is not as good as the 55 but better than the 56.

The 58 just tried to look too big. It was a case of trying too hard.

59 Was just playing to the whim of the fin market and the 60 just cleaned it up to make the transition to cleaner designs,

Pontiac is the one that broke ranks in 1960 and clean the car up a lot with the 60 models. They imporved from their up. Bunkie also was one of the few to that had the balls to pull the chrome.

I did see a 1955 Buick Century coupe last week in white and red it also was a very nice looking balanced car that degenrated to the over chromed 58 model.

I look at the 50's as years of transition where they were rather plain to start and over the top at the end. It was cool back then but to look back the later years in some cases were like seeing a picture of someone in the 70's in a leisure suit. While the later cars are not my favorite they are still what make the 50's special. There is not right or wrong as it is all just history.

[balthazar]

SOmetimes, in lower-level trims, the '55 looks really good, but to a degree it's 'raw' to my eye. Not nuts about the grille treatment. Interesting how losing the front bumper does absolutely nothing detrimental to the design.

I disagree that the '56 didn't improve things, IMO its a minor move forward.

'57s are pretty amazing from a design standpoint, but please keep in mind I am sick to death of Tri-5 Chevys. Doesn't mean they aren't nice tho.

Here, the cleanliness of the design reinforces it's purposefulness :

...but as a stocker with all the trim (Bel Air here) it does nothing for me:

Sometimes I think the '58 bodies bridged the gap neatly between the more upright, narrow pre-58s and the circa '60s... but I know the details rub many the wrong way. Then again, as a multiple owner of early-mod '60s full-sizers, the '58s also look narrow to me.

I like most all stuff '55-65 (and beyond in both directions).

Pontiac - I greatly prefer the '59, whereas the '60, sometimes held up as an 'improvement', actually temporarily abandoned the cues that the P-59 introduced, only to see them return in '61 and carry Pontiac thru the '60s. It took me some time for the P-60 to move up with the other visually-strong Pontiacs IMO, like '57-58, 59, 62-64.

[GMTruckGuy74]

Here's the '57 base model I saw at a car show earlier this month:

It's not my best work, as I snapped it pretty quickly between people checking it out and the owner returning to it with his trophy. It drew a lot of people in the short time I was at the show. I guess '57 Chevies regardless of the model always draw a crowd

Edited September 26, 2012 by GMTruckGuy74

[hyperv6]

The 60 Pontiac fixed all that was wrong with the 59 in my book and set the tone for the better styled cars in 61-62.

Same with the 55 to the 56. To me all they did is fix what was not broken. The grill to me is one of the strongest parts of the 55 Design. It looks like it could have been done by Pininfarina. Earl shows his Euro influence here.

Balth you love what I hate and I hate what you love. We are perfect bookends on this one.

[Drew Dowdell]

I thought this web site was about new products and future products?

We need to start a nostalgia section. I like the old cars too but.

This website is about cars of any year.

[hyperv6]

Here's the '57 base model I saw at a car show earlier this month:

It's not my best work, as I snapped it pretty quickly between people checking it out and the owner returning to it with his trophy. It drew a lot of people in the short time I was at the show. I guess '57 Chevies regardless of the model always draw a crowd

Looks like the kind of Chevy the KGB would order.

[balthazar]

The 60 Pontiac fixed all that was wrong with the 59 in my book and set the tone for the better styled cars in 61-62.

Same with the 55 to the 56. To me all they did is fix what was not broken. The grill to me is one of the strongest parts of the 55 Design. It looks like it could have been done by Pininfarina. Earl shows his Euro influence here.

Balth you love what I hate and I hate what you love. We are perfect bookends on this one.

Well, I dont 'hate' here, but clearly the so-called Euro influence of the C-55 and the non-split grille of the P-60 were not where each brand would go & were dropped after 1 year each. Its interesting to consider if Chevy had continued with that influence, tho. Pinninfarina is a pale shadow of GM Styling, but most Americans 'ohh & ahh' over the perception.

IMO, Pontiacs low point in this era is '61 vs 59-60 & 62, tho I'd happily take any one of them.

[NeonLX]

I'm an incurable gearhead. I eat, sleep and breathe automobiles--including cars, trucks and tractors. I've apparently been that way since I was a toddler. I came about it naturally--my dad, brother, uncles, aunts and even my mom loved vehicles so I grew up in a gearhead environment.

The point I'm going to try to make is that I really have very little interest in the new stuff. Yeah, I'm old--old enough to remember Eisenhower as President in fact. But new cars & pickups, even with all of their technology, "style" and engineering, just don't do much for me on an emotional level. Sure, I can appreciate the new Kia Optima, with its very catchy styling and engineering advances, but I don't even care enough to head over to the dealership and grab a brochure. I've collected automotive brochures since I was little and have a room in the basement devoted to this collection. Same with magazines such as Car & Driver and Road Test. But I stopped going out to the dealers to get brochures sometime in the 2000s, once they pulled the plug on Oldsmobile, Plymouth (and eventually Mercury). There just ain't much out there to interest me like a '65 Pontiac 2+2 did, or a Dodge Monaco, or a Rambler Marlin...etc.

A bit more on track: I loved the '55 and '56 Chevy, but wasn't a big fan of the '57. I also liked the '61 Pontiac better than the '62. I'd dearly love a bubbletop '61 Ventura.

[hyperv6]

I like cars from all era's as there was good and bad in all of them.

I am not old enough for Ike but I was into cars at a very young age and know cars well from the 60's on. I also got to work on many cars from the 20's on.

The one thing I note is not only was there good and bad in each era but I notice cars are like old memories of ex girlfriendsm vacations Christmas's and other big events in our lives. They all seem a little better down the line than they really were. Not saying they were bad but we always retain the good and often block out the bad.

Shirley Muldowny in the latest Hemmings Muscle Cars says this about racing too.

I loved my old cars I have owned and still like to play with these cars on the weekend. But I would not to have to drive many of them as a daily driver anymore. My 08 and 12 cars suit todays driving very well to the point I take the long and winding road home.

Their is good in all of this but we all still need to take a step back and remember it all and not cherry pick just what we want to think it was.

Go to any cruise in today and the cars are better today than they were new. The music is live vs a juke box and the events are organized vs parked in some empty plaza parking lot. But on the other hand back then you could run someone on a empty street and not have to fear getting hauled in and cars were much easier and cheaper to own and buy.

I am glad I lived throught this era as I don't see it lasting into the future, Much of the youth today have little love for cars or they just can't afford them. I already see it in my son and his friends. Just go to the Hot wheels displays in Walmart and the average buyer is 40 years old.

Edited October 1, 2012 by hyperv6

[NeonLX]

I think cars are technically far superior to anything we have ever seen (capt. Obvious reporting for duty). I mean, my boring Malibu Maxx can scoot like some of the hotter cars from the 60s, yet I can see the high side of 30 MPG easily. And I've yet to do any tuning or adjusting to the powertrain. And it starts at 20 below. Every time.

[balthazar]

But new cars & pickups, even with all of their technology, "style" and engineering, just don't do much for me on an emotional level. Sure, I can appreciate the new Kia Optima, with its very catchy styling and engineering advances, but I don't even care enough to head over to the dealership and grab a brochure. I've collected automotive brochures since I was little and have a room in the basement devoted to this collection. Same with magazines such as Car & Driver and Road Test. But I stopped going out to the dealers to get brochures sometime in the 2000s, once they pulled the plug on Oldsmobile, Plymouth (and eventually Mercury). There just ain't much out there to interest me like a '65 Pontiac 2+2 did, or a Dodge Monaco, or a Rambler Marlin...etc.

I'm not from the Ike era, but I've delved to the dawn of the industry and I know what you're saying. You can feel a degree of passion in the vintage stuff, the human element in their bones that's no longer there. ITs really not an exaggeration that I find more interest and realism in the rotted out carcass of a -say- 1955 Pontiac than a brand new Optima. And I feel absolutely no pressure whatsoever to like the optima because of things like it starts @ 20-degrees- ranking that high is what enables the appliance era we're in. Like Camino says- why should I accept what doesn't appeal to me?

[NeonLX]

Yeah. Exactly.

Same holds with late model farm tractors--they are now putting out enormous amounts of power--on the order of 2-3 times what the big ones did back in my day--and their cabs feature all the comforts of home. They come with surround-sound stereos and excellent climate control systems. They even have GPS. But I could give a rip; I lost interest in new tractors after about 1972, for the same reason--tractors used to have an emotional aspect to them (no, really, they did!). Now, they are merely very capable, vastly expensive appliances.

On edit: This tractor also dates from the Ike era, but it's still going strong. Two enormous cylinders. Maximum power is generated at about 900 RPM. Believe me, you can feel each power pulse.

Edited October 2, 2012 by NeonLX