Cadillac Fan
-
Posts
416 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Gallery
Events
Posts posted by Cadillac Fan
-
-
I am only saying that 49-54 Chevrolets were dogs. 1955 Chevys changed that and made Chevrolet desirable.
What occurred before 49 and after 55 is immaterial. Chevy made some good looking cars (before 49 and after 55) though I don’t see much Cadillac in that 72. -
42 minutes ago, Pfeil said:
I think you need to read the G.M. Art and Color book. The book also explains this trend which started in the very early 30's where the 1932 Chevrolet was styled from the 1931 Cadillac. It was called the baby Cadillac.
Yes. I agree re 1932. But by the early 1950s they had lost their way with regard to Chevrolet styling.
-
21 minutes ago, Pfeil said:
Where else could you get Cadillac styling at the price of a Chevrolet? That Chevrolet is a great car for the money and image. Like Harley Earl said; There is a bit of Cadillac in everything.
That was not the view of GM styling department at the time. I would check out “Fins, by William Knoedelseder, and specifically chapter 15.
https://www.amazon.com/Fins-Harley-General-Motors-Detroit/dp/0062289071
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, Pfeil said:
The hit was the economy and something really new since 1949. I count the 53-54 a warm over.
Ford outsold Chevrolets in 1949. And 1950-54 are just warm over versions. Before 1955, no one really wanted a Chevrolet, they’re settled for them due to price. The economy was booming during this time. Average wages doubled since the war. (1946-53). It was the design of the car that was the hit.
-
51 minutes ago, Paul Dobbin said:
Gramham Man
Grahman,
If you could add a picture of a Red 57 Chevy Belair to the trio of Chevies, I think we could agree that
57 was a HIT, 58 was a Miss and 59 was a Hit again. Like the 40 Ford Coupe was a Hit and the 41
was a Miss. Same is true for Fords, 34 and 35. Seems auto manufacturers have trouble following
up after a real good style. Name one that hits a home run in succesive years.
GM sold less 1957 Chevrolets then 1956 Chevrolets. GM sold less 1956 Chevrolets than 1955 Chevrolets.
The hit was 1955.
Before the 1955 Chevy, Chevrolets were considered “grandma’s cars.”
While the public seems to like 1957 Chevrolets, the designers believe 1955 is the purest form, and did not like the ornamentation added to it.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, James-Wahl Motors said:
Getting back to the original topic, a few of you are denying GM changed course on the ‘59 styling because of Chrysler. I had always heard that story. I’m looking at the book Designing America’s Cars: The 50s by the Auto Editors of Consumer Guide with Jeffrey Godshall. It is quite specific, naming names and has a few photos of full-size GM clay models from early 1956 intended for 1959 production that were a continuation of the 1958 style.
Some quotes from the book: “the younger designers, led by future design vice-president Chuck Jordan, revolted after spying Virgil Exner’s clean-lined radically finned ‘57 Plymouths through a factory shipping yard fence. They scrapped what GM had been planning for 1959 and started over.” They also refer to it as a “crash program,” “frantic efforts,” “late -‘56 frenzy to outfin future Chrysler products,” that they “threw out the ‘58-based designs on which they started,” and it was a “hurried corporate scramble to change design directions.”
There’s a lot of detail and I’ve found these guys generally do their research.
This general understanding is also detailed in the book “Fins” by William Knoedelseder.
Harley Earl had directly the styling department what he wanted for the 59 model year, and left for his annual European vacation.
While he was away bill Mitchell saw the 57 Chrysler products and had the design staff work on two tracks. The first, the continuation from the 58 models as directed by Harley Earl, before he left. The second track was a new design in view of the 57 Chrysler products. This second design is what they decided to make.
-
I have always understood it to be a derogatory term. The thought being that a car manufacturer who does not make its own engine is not really a car manufacturer but an assembler of other’s products. Exactly what locomobile/winton is implying / stating.
-
I believe a gentleman named Kenworthy was part of the Romer/Barley company of Streeter IL and Kalamazoo MI. Is this the same person?
-
I understood an “assembled car” to mean that the parts were designed by the supplier and not exclusive to the car manufacturer. As opposed to the engineering department of the car manufacturer directing the supplier how/what to make, and the part being exclusive to the car manufacturer.
it indirectly refers to who designed/ engineered the parts of the car.
-
2
-
-
8 minutes ago, John Bloom said:
I’m pretty sure that car has changed hands 3 or 4 times in the last 24 months. And each time discussed here.
Yes. With asking prices up to $50k
-
I would have been tempted at this for $33k:
https://www.mecum.com/lots/FL0122-485826/1931-lincoln-model-k-touring/
even with the awful interior.
-
My guess is that it is a $35-45k car and that it will be for sale shortly at that price.
Mecum is a good place to purchase pre war cars of this caliber. 95 percent of the bidders have no interest and most dealers with some interest will be vary cautious (ie low bidding).
To be honest, I’m not sure there is a good auction venue for pre war cars of this caliber.
-
2
-
-
Is there a year / model pierce arrow (years 1930-38) to avoid?
is there one that is particularly good/ reliable year / model. Or, said another way, is there a year /model in which parts are readily available over other years/ models.
-
My guess hammer of $120k.
the other one is with Wayne at F40.
fast forward to 38:30 :
-
1
-
1
-
-
37 minutes ago, alsancle said:
These are posted in the "Annual Meeting" thread, but Ed brought the Brunn to the show.
looks like Nucky Thompson’s Rolls is leaking pretty badly. -
Pretty sad. I generally don’t buy the “slippery slope” argument but it clearly applies in this case. The original sin was the Cadillac series 62. Presumably because people want an easy tour car. Once that opened the door, it allowed others to lobby for similar cars, each farther and farther from the original intention of the founders.
I have said this before, Classic Era Car Club of America.
Mecum just sold a 1940 60 special for $14k. If you want to join the activities of the club, you can do so with a sub $20k car already. I don’t believe this will add to the membership, but will alienate the membership that has the “real” classics.
https://www.mecum.com/lots/FL0122-485956/1940-cadillac-series-60/
-
3
-
-
Could that be your car?
-
24 minutes ago, B Jake Moran said:
I appreciate your insight. I usually run as fast as I can from sellers I see that say or imply something like they don't have to sell, just testing the waters, that sort of thing. This car is way over priced but it is his car and will stay that way. The issue I have is when sellers truly don't want to sell unless they make a boatload of cash. There are a few stupid people out there, guys recently retired with 401k money to spend before they die.
I am not a fan of the 59's. They are iconic, I get that. Just like the 57 Chevy, they are popular because they are popular. But, I did look closely, I am NOT a 59 Eldorado or Eldorado era expert - so what is it that makes it an Eldorado? The glob of chrome running the length? The 2 x 4 motor?
I don't see enough seperation - in 1959 - to justify paying an extra $$$ for a Seville.
The exterior trim along the side. The interior is a different pattern and usually full leather. These are the two main differences, visually, as compared to the series 62 and Coupe Deville. Plus 3 two barrel carburetors vs a four barrel carburetor on the lesser cars.
Also, they made under 1000 compared to 20,000 series 62s and another 20,000 Coupe Devilles.
My guess is a true #1 car is $150k.
-
1
-
-
-
-
5 hours ago, 8E45E said:
Seen on Packard:
I have no problem with the idea of accessory lights, but I believe that the glass should match. Ie, if the headlights have flat glass, the accessory lights should have flat glass. If the headlights have curved glass, the accessory lights should be curved.
For me, this Packard is an example of what not to do. The headlights are of a more modern style than the accessory lights.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, alsancle said:
Well that sort of ruins things doesn't it?
For me it would. My cars have to match the trim tag. Even if I don’t like the colors. Most others aren’t that crazy.
-
1
-
-
26 minutes ago, edinmass said:
Christmas is coming early I have a truck in the yard………🤔
What is that sweet machine in front of that old British tractor?
kidding. Amazing rolls
-
8 minutes ago, B Jake Moran said:
I am looking at an as advertised 1938 series 75 V8 with a very similar grille. Did they not change the 75 series front ends like they did the lesser Cadillac line up for 1939?
1938-1940 Cadillac 75 (v8) and 90 (v16) are on the same chassis. And the same bodies. The 1939-40 75 (v8) got an updated front end.
Let’s start conversation about a huge style change in GM cars between 1958 and 1959.
in General Discussion
Posted
The top car is an executive car. The bottom car is a grandma’s car, or at best a secretary’s car.
I see one car with style and the other as a six cylinder entry level. Sorry you don’t share my opinion and I don’t share your option. Are we in a safe space, were I am unable to give my opinion?
Chuck Jordan and Dave Holls share my point of view. Go read the quote I provided. No self respecting man would buy a Chevrolet in 53-54.
Good news: you can own cars other people don’t like or think have much style. Own what you like.
FYI, that is the wrong tail fin. Search p38 lighting.