Trying to map out the restoration 'families' of cars

March 23, 2011

Not sure if this is a dumb question or not. Why are cars of the same make grouped into different years? Ex: 53-54 Chevy's, 55-57 Chevy's, etc. Is this because no major modifications were made during those years? Beside the obvious ones (monte carlo, nova, chevelle), what are other common make/year 'families' for restoration cars? Are there any new groups gaining popularity?

D Yaros · March 23, 2011

The "no major modifications," especially in terms of body design, is the key. Many folk would be hard-pressed to tell the difference between a '53 & '54 Chevy. Likewise, with respect to the '55 & 56' Chevy. Now, why the '57 is grouped with the 55 and 56 is a question in search of an answer.

LINC400 · March 23, 2011

Cars are grouped into "families" based on their design cycle. Most pre 1970 cars had a 3 year cycle. After 1970, those cycles get longer with each decade. This is useful because if you need a part for a 1979 Continental Mark V, a part from 1977 or 1978 will probably work since the cars are pretty unchanged during those 3 years. A 1972-76 Mark IV might have the part that you might need, but is less likely because there were more changes from 1976 to 1977 than from 1977 to 79. And pretty much nothing from a 1980 Mark VI with fit on your 1979 even though there is only one year difference. So you could use a 1972 part on your 1979, but not a 1980 part. That is because the car was completely redesigned in 1980 and shares nothing with earlier models.

It works with repairs too. You would follow the same instructions repairing something on a 1977 as a 1979 for the most part. Repairing it on a 1980 would be entirely different.

Same deal with Chevy, Chrysler etc.

Edited March 23, 2011 by LINC400 (see edit history)

March 24, 2011

The "no major modifications," especially in terms of body design, is the key. Many folk would be hard-pressed to tell the difference between a '53 & '54 Chevy. Likewise, with respect to the '55 & 56' Chevy. Now, why the '57 is grouped with the 55 and 56 is a question in search of an answer.

The 57 is a mild faceleft/evolution of the 55 and 56. They are very much a "family" of closely related designs

Larry Schramm · March 24, 2011

I think I would put the 58 Chevy in the same family. It was '59 that had a major update/ change.

Rusty_OToole · March 24, 2011

58 Chev was a totally different body from 1955-57 and 1959-60.

This was part of GM's long range plan to change from a 3 year styling cycle to a 2 year. In 1959 they wanted to make every car from Chev to Cadillac use the same body shell, suitably modified. This would allow them to amortize the tooling in 2 years and have an all new car every 2 years, with a major face lift in between.

To bring the A body (Chev and Pontiac) into line with the B and C body models, they had to either stretch the old body out for one more year or make a one year only 1958 A body.

Ironically the new plan only lasted one year. In 1959, indeed, every GM car was built using a version of the same body. But in 1960 they brought out the Corvair meaning they now had 2 bodies. Within a few years they had a whole variety of bodies in various sizes, some of them used for more than one make of car, others exclusive to Chev.

Rusty_OToole · March 24, 2011

By the way the 55 chev was all new, the 56 and 57 represented major face lifts of the 55 body.

The 53 and 54 Chev also shared the same body with each other. 54 representing a minor face lift. The difference between a major and minor is one has only trim differences while the other has new sheet metal such as fenders and hood.

poci1957 · March 24, 2011

Why are cars of the same make grouped into different years? Ex: 53-54 Chevy's, 55-57 Chevy's, etc. Is this because no major modifications were made during those years?

As you have been reading that is indeed why cars are grouped together. We all remember that in the 1950s and 1960s the automakers wanted the car to look different and new every year, but even then it was too expensive to do a complete redesign every time. So a given body architecture would be designed to serve one or two car lines for a few years; sometimes the body was recognizeable as being the same, sometimes it was more heavily disguised. Sometimes the body would be retained for several years with heavier changes in mid-cycle, and by the 1970s the timelines ran longer and longer. For example, Chevy models are divided as follows:

1949-52

1953-54 (heavily changed but still based on 1949-52)

1955-57

1958

1959-60

1961-64

1965-70 (with heavy changes in 1969)

1971-77

If you look closely at these you can often identify the roofline and windshields as similar and this is often the way to tell. Hope this helps, Todd

Edited March 24, 2011 by poci1957 (see edit history)

March 24, 2011

We all remember that in the 1950s and 1960s the automakers wanted the car to look different and new every year, but even then it was too expensive to do a complete redesign every time.

I often wondered what it cost GM in 55/56 and probably further for Buicks to have different series 40/60 50/70 in the same year. Most chrome and body panels were not interchangeable. More tooling, more cost..........

Rusty_OToole · March 24, 2011

I often wondered what it cost GM in 55/56 and probably further for Buicks to have different series 40/60 50/70 in the same year. Most chrome and body panels were not interchangeable. More tooling, more cost..........

Possibly not as much as you might think. Considering they shared the B body with Olds and the C body with Cadillac, and Buick was a perennial best seller to boot.

It does puzzle some people that a Buick Special's body parts will not interchange with a Buick Roadmaster of the same year.

This may be one of the reasons they wanted to go to one body for all full size cars after 1959.

Edited March 25, 2011 by Rusty_OToole (see edit history)

poci1957 · March 24, 2011

Exactly right on both counts, that the cost was spread among Buick/Olds/Cadillac AND that having two different Buick series must have been costly. But given how hugely popular Buicks (and Olds & Caddy) were in 1954-56 the profits seem to have taken care of themselves. At least until 1957-58 and the decline of the medium priced market.

March 25, 2011

The "no major modifications," especially in terms of body design, is the key. Many folk would be hard-pressed to tell the difference between a '53 & '54 Chevy. Likewise, with respect to the '55 & 56' Chevy. Now, why the '57 is grouped with the 55 and 56 is a question in search of an answer.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

The 57 Chevy uses the same basic body plus the canopy is the same. I can put a 57 Chevy windshield in a 55 Chevy, I can also put that 55 Chevy windshield in any 55-57 Pontiac too. Other platform interchange would be 1975-1979 X body ( Nova, Ventura-Phoenix, Omega, Skylark bodies. and 1975 1980 F body (Camaro-Firebird). Those cars are semi-uni-body cars and all their sub frames interchange. BTW 1975-79 Cadillac uses the afore mentioned sub frame too plus a 11" stretch on the X body. A great swap is rear disc brakes from a Trans Am into a X car ( which the factory did on police Novas) or with a little work a Seville rear disc. into a X car for 5 on five wheels lug pattern. Or a Seville tall Ft. spindle on a X car with 5 on five and 12" rotors instead of 11".

I agree with Todds facts with the exception of the 61-64 especially Pontiac. The 61 and 62 are close and they use the same windshields, I would group them together and the 63-64 in a separate series because of different "A" pillars and chassis changes. This type of grouping is not uncommon but rather the norm in mass produced cars 1952-54 Ford, 1955-56 Ford, 1957- 58 Ford and 1955-57 T-Bird, 1958-1960 T-Bird.

The winner of them all.........? VW's Beetle. body groups such as 1938-1952 split window, 1953-1957 oval window, 1958-1964 larger window, 1965-1966, larger + window ect. Even though all the above groups have different bodies all the fenders and body platform (pan & backbone) for those years interchange.

Don

poci1957 · March 25, 2011

As Don points out this identifying of groups is an inexact science and some relationships are more obvious than others, with the 1961-64 GM cars being a good example of this. They are related and share parts, BUT a new roof in 1962 then a new windshield in 1963 do fly against my ID method mentioned earlier. Sometimes GM elevated body and parts sharing to an art form, but by the 1970s and 1980s the sharing was thinly disguised and often criticized. Todd

March 25, 2011

------------------------------------------------------------------------
The winner of them all.........? VW's Beetle. body groups such as 1938-1952 split window, 1953-1957 oval window, 1958-1964 larger window, 1965-1966, larger + window ect. Even though all the above groups have different bodies all the fenders and body platform (pan & backbone) for those years interchange.
Don

This would also include Metropolitans from 1954 to 1962. The only difference in body parts include hood, front valance and rear deck when they added the trunk. In all the years Metropolitans were made, the door skins were produced for either side of the car. One stamping for all those years and it took care of both sides................

MarkV · March 25, 2011

most of the cars from 1940-1948 could be considered a grouping, as little change took place in the models because of WWII (see 1940-1948 Lincoln, 1940-1948 Dodge)

March 25, 2011

40 - 48 a group? Not for the independents

Consider 40 vs 48 offerings from Studebaker, Hudson, Packard, Nash

Rusty_OToole · March 26, 2011

Studebaker should get some kind of prize too. The last all new body they had was in 1953. It was restyled over and over, then turned into the Lark in 1958, after that it got a new front one year and a new rear the next year until the end of US production in 63, then went on in Canada with minor changes until 1966.

They were still using the front suspension they introduced in 1951.

john2dameron · March 26, 2011

I was once told by someone restoring a '53 Chevrolet that the hardtop and convertible used a different windshield to the rest of the line in '53-'54. Does anybody know if there is any truth to that. To my way of thinking the biggest difference in '55, '56, and '57 Chevrolets was the '55 and '56 were rather good looking cars. Yeah, I know, a lot of people don't agree with that but I think any thing Chevy produced in the '50's looked better than the '57's. It looks like it was designed by a committee and the members couldn't agree on what they wanted the car to look like.

March 26, 2011

I was once told by someone restoring a '53 Chevrolet that the hardtop and convertible used a different windshield to the rest of the line in '53-'54. Does anybody know if there is any truth to that.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well yes I can answer that. Chevy did not offer a hardtop for a 53-54 Corvette.
Don

March 26, 2011

I was once told by someone restoring a '53 Chevrolet that the hardtop and convertible used a different windshield to the rest of the line in '53-'54. Does anybody know if there is any truth to that. To my way of thinking the biggest difference in '55, '56, and '57 Chevrolets was the '55 and '56 were rather good looking cars. Yeah, I know, a lot of people don't agree with that but I think any thing Chevy produced in the '50's looked better than the '57's. It looks like it was designed by a committee and the members couldn't agree on what they wanted the car to look like.

That's pretty much why Ford outsold Chevy in 1957. I've personally never understood the infatuation with the '57 Chevy. It really represented a "Stale" design carryover considering that both Ford and Plymouth introduced completely new styling that year. Back in the day, I considered the '56 Chevy to be overall a more attractive styling wise. I know there are those that will disagree, but there are significant styling relationships among all GM cars from 1953 through 1958. So basically in '57 Chevy was selling a progressively upgraded '53 body design.

Yes it is correct that the '53-'54 Convertible and 2 door Hardtop windshields were the same and not interchangeable with other models of the same years. Chevy actually used three different windshields in those years, not including any Corvette windshield.

Jim

Edited March 26, 2011 by Jim_Edwards (see edit history)

Rusty_OToole · March 26, 2011

The 57 Chev was so popular so long for a couple of reasons. The55-57 series was the first with a V8, making them easy to hop up. The 58 and newer models were larger and heavier making them less desirable for performance. Of the most desirable for hop ups, the 57 was the newest. So it was a combination of things that made them desirable, and once they got the name for being "cool" it stuck, even among people who know little about cars and hot rods.

LINC400 · March 26, 2011

Besides the above mentioned reasons, people fondly remember fins. Aside from the bat wing 1959-60 which did not impress many people, the 1957 Chevy is the only one that has fins. I always that was a big part of its collectible status.

As far as grouping, I think Checker should definitely be mentioned. 1956-82.

March 26, 2011

The 57 Chev was so popular so long for a couple of reasons. The55-57 series was the first with a V8, making them easy to hop up. The 58 and newer models were larger and heavier making them less desirable for performance. Of the most desirable for hop ups, the 57 was the newest. So it was a combination of things that made them desirable, and once they got the name for being "cool" it stuck, even among people who know little about cars and hot rods.

The typical '58 Chevy was some 200 to 400 pounds lighter than the '57s believe it or not. More than likely in the difference in weight of the frames and materials used inside the cars. I would tend to question that a '58 with a 348 in it would have been lighter than a '57, but then few non Impala '58s would have ever seen a 348. If anything the popularity of the '57 might rest on Vince Edelbrocks shoulders so to speak and given Chevy and Pontiac were the last of the Big 3 produced cars to have a V8 as an option, so I'm not sure that entered into the equation. We were sticking Olds 303 and 324 V8s into '32 Fords before the first V8 was seen in a Chevy.

Jim

March 26, 2011

The typical '58 Chevy was some 200 to 400 pounds lighter than the '57s believe it or not. More than likely in the difference in weight of the frames and materials used inside the cars. I would tend to question that a '58 with a 348 in it would have been lighter than a '57, but then few non Impala '58s would have ever seen a 348. If anything the popularity of the '57 might rest on Vince Edelbrocks shoulders so to speak and given Chevy and Pontiac were the last of the Big 3 produced cars to have a V8 as an option, so I'm not sure that entered into the equation. We were sticking Olds 303 and 324 V8s into '32 Fords before the first V8 was seen in a Chevy.
Jim

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

There was no V-8 option in a Pontiac except for Canada past 1955, and most Pontiac guys consider Canadian Pontiac's not real Pontiac's, just Pontiac styled Chevy's.

Don

TG57Roadmaster · March 26, 2011

On a model for model comparison, these are the factory weights of '57 & '58 Chevy V-8 cars...

Bel Air sedan...'57= 3,272; '58= 3,440

Convertible......'57= 3,405; '58= 3.508

6-P wagon.......'57= 3,456; '58= 3,741

The '58's are 100-300 lbs heavier out of the box with base 6 & 8 engines.

I found no example of a '58 being lighter than its '57 counterpart.

The numbers also show a weight-savings with V-8 versus I-6 power for '57 only.

'57 Bel Air 2drht....I-6= 3,283; V-8= 3,274

'58 Impala 2drht...I-6= 3,419; V-8= 3,442

It's America's Cheese!

TG

March 26, 2011

On a model for model comparison, these are the factory weights of '57 & '58 Chevy V-8 cars...
Bel Air sedan...'57= 3,272; '58= 3,440
Convertible......'57= 3,405; '58= 3.508
6-P wagon.......'57= 3,456; '58= 3,741
The '58's are 100-300 lbs heavier out of the box with base 6 & 8 engines.
I found no example of a '58 being lighter than its '57 counterpart.
The numbers also show a weight-savings with V-8 versus I-6 power for '57 only.
'57 Bel Air 2drht....I-6= 3,283; V-8= 3,274
'58 Impala 2drht...I-6= 3,419; V-8= 3,442
TG

We all get into trouble with generalized statements and this is has been a good example given the differences in engine weights, accessories, and interiors that caused actual curb weights to vary all over the place.

1957 Weight range Price Range Produced

Bel Air