How long did people keep their cars in the 30's 40's 50's?

[caddyshack]

Growing up in the 50's and 60's I can only relate to stories and pictures from the 30's and 40's. There was no definite time line to replace a vehicle, it had more to do with the economic ability of the family. Sure they wanted the nice, new, flashy, models, but we were quite poor at the time. My dad's first new car was a 1950 Chev. Reliable, yes, and it lasted until 1958. In '58 the family dynamics changed for the better. Dad's job improved, new brother, new house, new Buick, life was good. From that time on we had new autos about every 4 yrs. and never drove one over 100,000 miles. Just a rule of thumb I guess. I, on the other hand, never kept a new car over 3 years no matter what the mileage was. Once I retired, I threw that policy out the window and now drive them until the repair bills are more than the car is worth.

[John S.]

I remember my Uncles would usually keep a car for Five to Six years. My one Uncle would only buy a car with cash. He didn't believe buying on time. So when he saved up enough money, he would spring for a new Chevy or Pontiac.

[John S.]

6 hours ago, marcapra said:

I remember seeing 40s DeSoto ads that said "7 out of 10 DeSotos"  are still on the road.  DeSoto was first made in 1928.   Also when I look at my 4 and 5 year old self on my street in about 1955 in San Diego, there are cars as old as the late 30s parked on our street.  

That is a great ad for the 1942 DeSoto.. Marcapra , you are right about pre -war cars being around during the 50's. In my neighborhood, Queens, New York,  people were driving cars from the late 30's early 40's into  the late 50's, early 60's. Seems like they all disappeared by the mid to late 60's.

[plymouthcranbrook]

23 hours ago, padgett said:

Of all the people in my family, my mother was the most car-savvy & had two-door sport coupes. Remember a '58 T'bird then a 61 (I dropped 2nd gear out of the Cruise-o-matic), '64 Grand Prix (dropped the rear end), '69 Cutlass 350, and then a '75 Buick Electra (won a National Fuel Economy Rally in it).

 

My cars were mostly Brits until my first new car, a 67 Camaro (V-8, 4-speed, AC).

 

Back then I was considered strange to be into cars (but then had already been through model trains (Lionel) and model airplanes (with .049 motors) while most felt they were more appliances or accessories. Did feel that until the early '70s, every year the cars got better (except for 1968 when the E-type lost headlight covers) but from 1974 until 1988 it was not politically correct to like cars. Then starting about 1998 the horsepower wars started again and freaks could come out of the closet.

Sounds like young you were the driver of car replacements in your family.  😀

[TexRiv_63]

As always economics had a lot to do with it. In the 50s my Dad worked in the wholesale grocery business as a salesman calling on stores. He did quite well early on and was able to buy new Fords in 1949, 52, and 55. They were always simple two door coupes and he put a lot of miles on. Things got tougher later in the decade, he kept the 55 for 5 years and bought his last new Ford in 1960. We kept those last two cars for at least 10 years, did engine overhauls on both and patched up rust on the bodies. I bought loads of cars to either flip or part out in the 70s and 80s and almost never saw any with mileage over 100,000, in Illinois it was the bodies and frames that went first.

[Pfeil]

2 hours ago, John S. said:

I remember my Uncles would usually keep a car for Five to Six years. My one Uncle would only buy a car with cash. He didn't believe buying on time. So when he saved up enough money, he would spring for a new Chevy or Pontiac.

That is what my Dad did ( except it was every ten years) and passed it on to me. He said never put the cart before the horse, meaning you save for a new car first. When you buy a new car you start saving for the next. That way there is no interest payment to the bank. Some people end up paying twice as much money.

Just another lesson from a depression era kid to his kid.

[Pfeil]

7 minutes ago, TexRiv_63 said:

As always economics had a lot to do with it. In the 50s my Dad worked in the wholesale grocery business as a salesman calling on stores. He did quite well early on and was able to buy new Fords in 1949, 52, and 55. They were always simple two door coupes and he put a lot of miles on. Things got tougher later in the decade, he kept the 55 for 5 years and bought his last new Ford in 1960. We kept those last two cars for at least 10 years, did engine overhauls on both and patched up rust on the bodies. I bought loads of cars to either flip or part out in the 70s and 80s and almost never saw any with mileage over 100,000, in Illinois it was the bodies and frames that went first.

Looking at your dads cars there and not being top of the line Customline, Fairlane, or Galaxie it's nice to just see the body style without all the bling. To some less is more. They sure made good looking cars.

Edited March 25, 2020 by Pfeil (see edit history)

[padgett]

Central Florida is also a "no-rust" area but the sun must be brighter (cleaner air ?) here than in California because interiors are the first thing to go. Of course since am into more interesting cars they were often garaged.

 

Only reason we do not have many cars of the 50s- back like So Cal is that nothing was here BD (before Disney). Was just long stretches of straight TLBs (two lane blacktops) between the coasts where you could find out what the top speed was without bothering anyone.

[JamesR]

My daily driver is a 2006 Chrysler town and country minivan with 167,000 miles on it. We bought it new, but the engine was replaced with a used engine at 136,000 miles, and that replacement engine had 100k on it at the time. It's my understanding that these engines typically last much longer than our original did, so we opted to keep the vehicle, replace the engine and get what use we can out of it. (So far so good.)  I could see us keeping the van for another three or four years, which would get us close to 20 years. My wife's daily driver is a 2002 Subaru, also purchased new, so she'll likely go beyond the 20 year mark.

 

The cars we had growing up were kept nowhere near this long. Durability and rust were big factors, but not the only issues. About the time I was born in 1958, my parents got rid of their '47 Hudson (which they bought used, so it was well under 10 years old when they sold it.) They replaced it with a '55 Chevy 2 door sedan, which they traded for a Dodge wagon around 1962 or 3. The wagon was used til 1970 when they bought a one year old Chevy Impala. So 5 to 7 years was the ownership norm for this era of cars in our family. Despite the WW2 generation's frugality, they went through a lot of cars.

 

It's my impression that throughout the '30's '40's an '50's, most obsolescence wasn't planned (as the old auto industry sales strategy goes.) Surely, some styling and features were intended to become dated - and quickly did - but legitimate advancements in automotive technology did more to make old cars undesirable, IMO. Only seven years separates my '54 Ford and my '61 Mercury, but the difference in ride and power is astounding, though they both have a similar number of miles on them (66k vs. 55k.) If you were blindfolded and given a ride in both, there would be no mistaking that the '54 is an old car - it's stiff ride, leaning suspension when taking corners, rattles and winding transmission sounds give it away. The '61, OTOH, would feel like you're riding around in a decently maintained 15 or 20 year old car. In 1950, Plymouth had one engine option, and it made 97 hp. Ten years later that same company offered several engine options, one of them making close to four times the hp of their 1950 model.

 

Youtube is full of these guys starting old cars that haven't been run in decades. The abuse these old engines sometimes receive in getting them going is painful to watch, but it does illustrate a great point: many old cars weren't discarded because they were seriously broken. They were discarded because they needed a minor repair or were somewhat worn or conspicuously dated or used too much gas or didn't have enough power. In other words, they were replaced because a new or newer car was perceived as a better option, at least in the eyes of the owner.

Edited March 25, 2020 by JamesR (see edit history)

[padgett]

A lot has always been the perception, is the old car worth bothering. Used to be a joke that could cut your grass and find a car.

One major change in the 50's was the number of people willing to accept a car with a clutch or without AC (Florida).

 

Now that everything is masked and sterilized I am wondering if convertibles will become undesirable.

[TexRiv_63]

23 hours ago, Pfeil said:

Looking at your dads cars there and not being top of the line Customline, Fairlane, or Galaxie it's nice to just see the body style without all the bling. To some less is more. They sure made good looking cars.

The 55 was a Customline, not sure what the 60 model name was. He didn't go fully stripped, the 55 and 60 had base V-8's and Fordomatic but no power equipment.

[Pfeil]

1 hour ago, TexRiv_63 said:

The 55 was a Customline, not sure what the 60 model name was. He didn't go fully stripped, the 55 and 60 had base V-8's and Fordomatic but no power equipment.

For 1960 the Fairlane is the base model Ford and the 60 model in the photo of your dads car is the base model. The middle Ford was the Fairlane 500, then the Galaxie.

The middle car ( Fairlane 500  has these ornaments on it's rear quarter;  see a  Fairlane 500 below to see the rear quarter ornaments.

 

 

Edited March 26, 2020 by Pfeil (see edit history)

[8E45E]

From what one can see in the photo, it is a 1960 Ford Fairlane two door Club Sedan, or it could be a Business Sedan, if it doesn't have a rear seat.

 

Craig

[TexRiv_63]

22 hours ago, 8E45E said:

From what one can see in the photo, it is a 1960 Ford Fairlane two door Club Sedan, or it could be a Business Sedan, if it doesn't have a rear seat.

 

Craig

It had a rear seat, my sister and I spent a lot of time there on driving vacations.

[padgett]

Does almost seem strange to see a car without headrests.

[8E45E]

1 hour ago, TexRiv_63 said:

It had a rear seat, my sister and I spent a lot of time there on driving vacations.

Then that clearly tells us its a Club Sedan. 

 

Previous to your reply, it was 50/50 with you stating what it was originally intended for.

 

Craig

[BucketofBolts]

My father kept his 1933 Buick until his death in the early 2000s. He also kept his 1954 Ford Ranch Wagon aka "old shaky" which he purchased new back in 1954 also until his death.  I and my three siblings had plenty of rides in those vehicles. The good ole days when kids and adults did not wear seatbelts. 

[keithb7]

Car ownership...I think back to when I was a teenager. I was buying early to mid-70's used cars. This was in about 1987. Those cars were only 12-15 or so years old. But man, they were wore out! All I could afford to do was work as many hours as possible to buy parts, to get under the cars, in all weather to fix them and keep them usable. It was a real steep learning curve for me. I learned a ton about looking after cars. Back then it was painful. Today it seems easier.  My daily drivers are not clapped out 70's cars. Today I have a couple options on what I can choose to drive. I work on cars because I enjoy it. I own 4 cars between the wife and I. Plus a company vehicle. So one car can always be down and out while I do major repairs. Yes, I do feel fortunate. Until I add up all the expenses! I'm a fool for cars.

 

Today I feel that maybe we have a little shorter attention span for vehicle ownership. My wife got a brand new Honda in 2016. I think we'll run it out to 120,000 miles or so. We'll see. It is fun driver. (1.5L turbo) but she is missing features that give her confidence in bad, snowy weather. Every winter up here in my area of Canada, we get some good dumps of snow. My wife has commented that a smaller SUV 4x4 would be nice. I get it. That'll be next. The Honda won't be worn out, but we'll have gotten our expected value from it over the years. Today it has about 55,000 miles on it.

 

Every weekend and most evenings I can be found out in the garage fixing up my 82 year old Plymouth. Definitely a labor of love. Who knew that reviving an old car would consist of so many hours of chiseling away old grease, tar and road grime? Just to gain access to so many chassis parts! Lol. If l my health and finances carry on as they are, I hope to have that Plymouth car for its 100th birthday. We shall see!

Edited March 27, 2020 by keithb7 (see edit history)

[cheezestaak2000]

i have 2 theories about length of car ownership. first is it directly relates to the term of the average auto loan. when i started in car sales, avg. loan was 36-48 months, and that was pretty close to avg. trading cycle. car business is gonna be in big trouble as the tv ads are telling me to buy now with 84 month, zero percent loan. another theory was that back in the 30's thru the 60's. it was assumed that the life of a car was under 100,000 miles. i think a reason for that was the used cars had the milege rolled back on many of them, and probably had a lot more miles on them than odometer showed when they finally quit.

[cahartley]

8 hours ago, keithb7 said:

Car ownership...I think back to when I was a teenager. I was buying early to mid-70's used cars. This was in about 1987. Those cars were only 12-15 or so years old. But man, they were wore out! All I could afford to do was work as many hours as possible to buy parts, to get under the cars, in all weather to fix them and keep them usable. It was a real steep learning curve for me. I learned a ton about looking after cars. Back then it was painful. Today it seems easier.  My daily drivers are not clapped out 70's cars. 

 

When I bought my first car, a '59 Chevy Biscayne 2 door in 1968, it was only 9 years old and had a 235 6 banger and column shift, for which I paid $200.

I don't remember how many miles it had on it but it left a smoke trail all the way home.

Even after only 9 years the back seat floor pans were already rusted through and the engine needed a ring job which I did myself.......and that's all I did to it.

It ran perfectly until I sold it or, rather, gave it away really.

 

I forgot to mention back then it wasn't uncommon to have -30º nights.

That thing never failed to start....... ❤️

 

 

[padgett]

Don't know about elsewhere but in O'town many 3 year old cars hit the market as they come off lease. Another source is all of the rental cars that also hit the used car lots after about three years.

When I was a kid, you could tell year, make , and model just from the taillights. Today it is the DRLs but often stay the same for 3-4 years.

 

Wonder if the stimulus checks will be taxable income. Are mainly for people who make less than $75k/year anyway, not for everybody..

[PONTIAC1953]

well i guess my 1953 Pontiac Chieftain Custom Catalina has had a unusual change of owners, a local pontiac dealer had ordered it as his showroom car, but his wife loved the car and wanted it for her personal use, at the end of 1953 model year, she switch to a new 1954 starchief and the 53 catalina was put on the dealer's used car lot, there it was sold to the original owners, Mr. & Mrs. Anthony Zito of Santa Monica, Calif. in december of 1953, Mrs. Zito drove the car until 1971, her eyes weren't quite as good as they had been, Mr. Zito bought her a 1971 ford pinto, a much shorter hood for her to see the end of. the 1953 Catalina sat in their backyard for two years, getting started once a month and ran for 30 minutes. in may or june of 1973, i saw the car listed for sale on a brocery store bulletin board. my father said i could buy it if i wanted it because it didn't have a V8 engine, we called about it, we went about 4-5 blocks from where we lived to see it, after seeing it and starting it up, my dad offered Mr. Zito $150.00, and i drove my 1953 catalina home, two weeks later i got paid from my job and gave dad back the $150.00. i still have my 1953 Pontiac Chieftain Custom Catalina today. so just two owners covering 67 years.

Edited March 28, 2020 by pontiac1953 (see edit history)

[Pfeil]

9 hours ago, pontiac1953 said:

well i guess my 1953 Pontiac Chieftain Custom Catalina has had a unusual change of owners, a local pontiac dealer had ordered it as his showroom car, but his wife loved the car and wanted it for her personal use, at the end of 1953 model year, she switch to a new 1954 starchief and the 53 catalina was put on the dealer's used car lot, there it was sold to the original owners, Mr. & Mrs. Anthony Zito of Santa Monica, Calif. in december of 1953, Mrs. Zito drove the car until 1971, her eyes weren't quite as good as they had been, Mr. Zito bought her a 1971 ford pinto, a much shorter hood for her to see the end of. the 1953 Catalina sat in their backyard for two years, getting started once a month and ran for 30 minutes. in may or june of 1973, i saw the car listed for sale on a brocery store bulletin board. my father said i could buy it if i wanted it because it didn't have a V8 engine, we called about it, we went about 4-5 blocks from where we lived to see it, after seeing it and starting it up, my dad offered Mr. Zito $150.00, and i drove my 1953 catalina home, two weeks later i got paid from my job and gave dad back the $150.00. i still have my 1953 Pontiac Chieftain Custom Catalina today. so just two owners covering 67 years.

And what a car it will be Charles, How is the project coming?

Edited March 28, 2020 by Pfeil (see edit history)