1931 Chrysler Imperial roadster

[Guest SuperNovaSS]

[Guest SuperNovaSS]

[Guest SuperNovaSS]

[Guest SuperNovaSS]

[Guest SuperNovaSS]

[Guest SuperNovaSS]

[Guest SuperNovaSS]

[Guest SuperNovaSS]

[Guest SuperNovaSS]

[Guest SuperNovaSS]

[Guest SuperNovaSS]

[Guest SuperNovaSS]

[Guest SuperNovaSS]

[Guest SuperNovaSS]

[Guest SuperNovaSS]

[keiser31]

I looked those pictures over real well. The owner won't give up the vin until the auction is over? That seems real suspicious to me. This car looks like it has Chrysler parts but I would really quaetsion how much of that body is an original one. Lots of things don't seem to jive. And that's not taking into account any of the obvious sins. Looks more like a nightmare than a classic to me. A Neoclassic refugee from the 1970's or early 80's more likely.

Sounds about right. There is not much on there that is original Chrysler and I hope the guy does not get sued when the winning bidder finds out what it isn't.

[Steve Braverman]

Save the crank hole cover and the radiator cap and toss the rest away.

[auburnseeker]

Boy comparing the difference in Quality between a 1932 (if this was a 1932) and my 1936 Chrysler roadster, Chrysler really refined their build, Quality, design, and engineering by 1936 Pretty good for 4 years. I doubt it's originality even more more now. I'll keep my 36 even if this was, is or had dreams of being an Imperial!

[alsancle]

I apologize as I'm reading this on my phone. Do any of of the pictures indicate that the body is more or less intact and original? Like I said before - this is where all the value is.

[Guest SuperNovaSS]

That is what I am curious about. There seems to be a lot of criticism with no supporting facts to back it up. As I said before, I would be happy to take more pictures if you can tell me what to take pictures of.

I am quite ignorant when it comes to pre-1950's cars and am trying to learn. From what I understand the roadster bodies were made by 2 differenct coach builders, is this correct? Also, I was told some of the bodies were one off custom type jobs that were completely hand build which was reflected in the cost of the car.

As I said, I am just trying to gather info on the car. Unfortunately, criticisms are not information. Feel free to post your opinions on the car but please try to back up statements with fact or reason.

Thanks,

Jason

[eric_b_1937]

You should try and contact the original builder to clear things up. There are some pretty good clues like the Oklahoma and NHRA stickers on the windshield. There may be photo's and contact information in 1980's hotrod and NHRA magazines. You might also post this on the HAMB message board they are real good at tracking old street rods.

It's a shame that a finished show car of the 80's was allowed to deteriorate to a level that requires a re-hotrod or used as spare parts for a restoration. If you look thru the imperfections it could still be a good resto rod. Probably take a lot more work to become original again.

[Guest SuperNovaSS]

I agree, I sent a PM to the member here who mentioned he knew which "hoard" this car came out of. I hope to hear back. Maybe he knows more history.

Thanks,

Jason

[keiser31]

That is what I am curious about. There seems to be a lot of criticism with no supporting facts to back it up. As I said before, I would be happy to take more pictures if you can tell me what to take pictures of.

I am quite ignorant when it comes to pre-1950's cars and am trying to learn. From what I understand the roadster bodies were made by 2 differenct coach builders, is this correct? Also, I was told some of the bodies were one off custom type jobs that were completely hand build which was reflected in the cost of the car.

As I said, I am just trying to gather info on the car. Unfortunately, criticisms are not information. Feel free to post your opinions on the car but please try to back up statements with fact or reason.

Thanks,

Jason

Not to put the vehicle down, but there are so many things non-original to the car that it would take the same amount of photos that you posted to show what the correct parts should look like. That golf bag door and the rumble seat side door are so poorly done, there is no way that they are original. You may want to take our words for it that the car is so poorly represented that it would be a nightmare to put it back to whatever it was before it deteriorated. The only way to "prove" what we say is to put the car next to a real one and compare. There are so many things stated incorrectly in the auction description that I found myself getting mad at the poster. The auction description has a lot of speculation and false statements. For instance, the part about the paint being mostly original...WHAT?? No way! I am very sorry for being blunt, but the car is not worth anywhere near the so-called $38,000.00 bid. You asked...we answered. Take it for what it's worth.

[Guest SuperNovaSS]

Keiser31,

Please explain what you mean by the golf door and rumble seat side door are poorly done. Yes, they are deteriorated but I don't know what a real door were look like. The hinges are junk as stated earlier. However, the the golf bag door and rumble seat side door look to have the same construction as the cab doors. Yes, stating the car was original paint was a mistake by the seller. I was taking the pictures of the car yesterday and he truely believed much of the paint was original.

Would putting this car next to another roadster really prove anything? As I asked earlier, weren't these hand made with different options, etc. added to each car?

Jason

[keiser31]

O.K....let me see if I can explain further. When I said the doors are done poorly (and I see now that the front doors are the same poor construction), I mean that if they were original, there would be a smooth transition between the doors and body. There would not be a ridge or bead all around the door edges. A custom body company would never have allowed that "bump" to be there. The rumble seat side door was only on the Locke bodied cars, I believe and would have had more foot room to get in at the base. The top rests on the rear deck would have been slightly off of the body with feet attached. There are about five or six original "styled" pieces that I see on this car. The radiator emblem, crankhole cover, radiator cap (maybe), a couple of small lights may be original and I am still not certain about the luggage rack. Here is an example of a custom bodied Chrysler to show the quality they would have given the car. That's a start without more detail. John

[Restorer32]

In a word, NO. This thing seems to have some original parts and a whole lot of non-original and homemade stuff. You do know that the "Chrysler Imperial" name is off a much later car? I did notice that the Chrysler badges are held in place with phillips screws.

[keiser31]

In a word, NO. This thing seems to have some original parts and a whole lot of non-original and homemade stuff. You do know that the "Chrysler Imperial" name is off a much later car? I did notice that the Chrysler badges are held in place with phillips screws.

Yes....there is so much non-original stuff that you would be best to say what actually is original and not go into what is not. The only other thing that I will mention as far as what may be original is SOME part of the body. I do see metal under there in some photos, but without seeing it close up and personal, it is hard to tell if that metal is original, too.

[eric_b_1937]

This Street rods appears to have some water damage, rusting around the splash aprons, which would explain the sagging doors and miss alignment. The rear door is interesting. It has some complex curves, the wood work is complex as well and it has vintage hardware. This door was not made by a unskilled street rodder or custom body builder. I have seen other makes of roadster with this style rumble seat access door. Was it a vintage mod? I don't see any bear claw latches.

Interesting that Street rods are now the subject of automotive archeology and people are confused between the real thing and a estimated 30 year old street rod. Imagine what it will be like in another 80 years.

[trimacar]

In my numerous years of collecting and restoring antique and Classic cars (and I'm talking 45+ years and almost 200 cars owned), there's always been a simple test to authenticity of a car. If it looks right, then it's probably correct. If it looks "off", then it's probably not original.

Original cars had a feel and a line to them that just feels right, particularly the big Classics of the 30's. Look at the previous posts of original Chryslers, then look at this car. One feels right and looks right. One doesn't.

You have a car that may be interesting to some, but it's maybe 5% original and 95% a cobbled together hot rod. As also mentioned before, you don't have to believe us.

It's interesting to watch shows like Pawn Star, and a guy brings in a saddle, for example, supposedly used by a famous actor. No proof, just a saddle. When he's told it's not what he thinks it is, he calls them liars. In other words, the person with the saddle is willing to hear an experts opinion, as long as that expert agrees with them. Nothing else, in his mind, is acceptable.

That's the case here. You don't want to hear the truth, you want to hear what you want to hear.............

I do appreciate all the photos, very interesting.

Not "proof" of any kind, but it works. There is no

[Guest SuperNovaSS]

No, I do want to hear the truth. I also want to hear why it is the truth. I do understand that the seller has the burden of proof. Just to be clear, I am not the seller of this car. I just took the pictures and posted them here as a favor to him since he is not computer savvy. I have not called anyone a liar. There are many obvious things that are are not correct for the car such as the drivertrain, wiring, etc. The seller and I are curious about the body and trim.

Jason

[Guest my3buicks]

how much of the car is metal, how much is fiberglass? Fenders, metal or fiberglass, etc.

[trimacar]

OK, I spent some time studying the pictures, and here are observations based on that, all pointing to this being a non-original body, but rather someone's attempt to copy Chrysler styling:

-Louvers on hood incorrect for time period, these are "hot rod" louvers, not period correct

-Crude hinges, and hinge base plates set far back in wood, period cars had hinge plates flush with body wood.

-Wheel wells, original wells had some indentations for strength, and a drain hole at bottom, none of which is evident in these

-windshield, crudely fit together

-windshield, three posts sticking up from header to attach top, period cars never had this arrangement, earlier open cars had a post at each end, by the thirties top had posts and windshield header had holes

-no splash apron under radiator

-front fenders and splash aprons (piece under body to running board) appear to be all one piece (fiberglas?)

-raised moulding on fenders appears crude, and seems to vary in width (fiberglas?)

-underbody shots of fenders show yellow tinted areas, looks like fiberglas

-crude fit of doors and the rumble seat access

-front fenders have incorrect profile for period Chrysler, not sufficiently sloped

-firewall is flat, all period firewalls had stamped indentations for strength

-inside shots (under cowl possibly) clearly show where sheet metal panels have been joined together to fabricate body

-cowl vents very crude, and no means to channel away rainwater, as period cars had

-Phillips screws everywhere, including holding nameplate, could have been added of course but points towards later construction (Phillips screws not widely available until after 1937 I believe)

All of this indicates this is a "tribute" to a Chrysler roadster. It was built by someone with some talent, but it was not built by Chrysler.................

[alsancle]

I just had a chance to examine the photos full size. I don't think anyone can complain about a lack of pictures (which we frequently need to do around here). The negative feedback is due to the perception that someone taking an original CG roadster and rodding it is committing a crime against humanity. That was compounded by a rather poor eBay ad.

It would be interesting to hear a chyrsler guy like Joe Morgan' opinion on this. Personally, the chassis, engine, fenders, hood dash, and interior could be removed and it would not change the value in my eyes. As I looked through the pictures I was looking for some original wood in the body. I don't believe I saw any. Perhaps if you removed a door panel and took a picture of what was behind it. Like I said in 3 other posts, if you can show that the body is more or less complete and an original CG Lebaron roadster then it's worth the 35k or maybe more. If not, then it's a 1980s rod that needs a lot of work is worth much less.

Btw, if we discussed the CG number on the firewall at all?

A.J.

[Guest my3buicks]

I like the Impala between the Chrysler Imperial name on the rear deck

[keiser31]

As far as the "CG" plate....anyone can stamp numbers on a piece of aluminum and call it a data plate. That does not make it correct...and it's NOT.

[Guest SuperNovaSS]

OK, I had the owner go over the car with a magnet. We did it the other day but I wanted him to go over it again to be sure. A magnet sticks to every part of the body except the rumble seat lid. I am talking about the rumble seat lid/back itself not the access door, a magnet sticks to the access door.

I'm not surprised by the phillips heads screws as it looks like the car was unfortunately "gone over" in the 70's or early 80's as many have said.

I will see about getting a door panel pulled to get a shot of the internals. Under the cowl area did not look like any hacking was done to me. That said, I am used to looking at 60's muscle cars so this is a whole different universe. If there are any more specific pictures anyone wants to see that may help please feel free to ask for them. It may take a few days to get them but the truth is the goal here.

Finally, I would like to thank everyone for all the input thus far. Please understand that I, not the current owner are responsible for any of the modifications(read: Hacking) up to this point so please do not hold any ill will for past tampering. The car "is what it is", now we just have to figure out what "it" is.

Thanks again,

Jason

[Guest SuperNovaSS]

As far as the ID plate goes, it certainly looks like someone made it to me but I had no idea what the original would look like. I am just showing what is there. The widow of the past owner did state that the ID tag used to be on the passenger door post but had fallen off so it was reattached to the firewall.

Jason

[alsancle]

Jason,

I believe this is a picture of the cowl behind the dash. This is not factory or Lebaron framing. If this was put together from an original LeBaron body they did a lot of reworking. The problem is that the value is diminished by the extent of the modifications. Also, you can see from the responses that many posters do not see this as even having started from an original LeBaron body. I think it might have it's just that it has been really reworked.

For a forum that bends over backwards to welcome guys selling their grand mother's 87 crown vic, I do find the depth of negativity on this interesting. My advice would be to re-list it on eBay and include all the pictures you have here with higher resolution. Also, any and all history you can find for it. As is I don't see the seller getting 35k but with a little work (and skinnier wheels) it could be a neat resto-rod sort of deal for someone.

good luck, A.J.

[keiser31]

I believe that the Imperial body should have these double belt lines on the lower rear below the rumble seat lid...the car in question does not.

[trimacar]

I believe the negativity stems from the seller (not the picture taker) attempting to claim, or try so hard to say, that it's an original body, and as such it's worth a large sum of money.

If it has any original body parts, they've been modified to the extent that the value is gone. The evidence of this has been pointed out in many posts on this thread.

It would make an semi-interesting hot rod, and that's about it.