The '57 Bel Air is "one of the worst cars ever made" according to this article...

[JamesR]

14 hours ago, victorialynn2 said:

Well, I like the ‘57 Chevy, but I prefer my Ford. 💗

 

 

 

Me too. Ford outsold the Chevy in 1957. And Chevy had nothing as dramatic as a retractable top that year. 😉

[Pfeil]

5 minutes ago, JamesR said:

 

 

Me too. Ford outsold the Chevy in 1957. And Chevy had nothing as dramatic as a retractable top that year. 😉

 

Dramatic yes, but Ford lost money on those retractable hardtop cars, just like  Ford lost money on the Continental Divisions Mark 2.

 

What I can't understand is why 52-57 Fords are not as popular as the Chevy's are today! Great styling. 

[Fossil]

I'm completely neutral about the 55 to 57 Chevrolet. And I did own a 55 which was an OK car.

When I was young my cousin bought a new 57 Chevy. Beautiful white 2 dr. hardtop with bright red interior. I thought that was the most wonderful car ever but never got to ride in it. Talked to him many years later and he was not impressed with it. He said he had to put pieces of match book cover under every piece of trim inside the car or it would rattle. Didn't sound like the rest of the car impressed him much more. They are a nice looking vehicle but I like the 57 Ford Fairlane 500 better. Less chrome and more style I guess. 

[padgett]

"What I can't understand is why 52-57 Fords are not as popular as the Chevy's are today! Great styling" Agree but Ford did not have Dinah.

[Pfeil]

14 minutes ago, padgett said:

"What I can't understand is why 52-57 Fords are not as popular as the Chevy's are today! Great styling" Agree but Ford did not have Dinah.

Thank you.

[George Cole]

I've always thought that if cars appearance determined their gender, the 55 and 57 Belairs would be males and the 56 would have been a female.

[Lebowski]

1 hour ago, George Cole said:

I've always thought that if cars appearance determined their gender, the 55 and 57 Belairs would be males and the 56 would have been a female.

 

What would the '55 Cadillac have been? 

 

 

[Ed Luddy]

I haven't read this article, but I do prefer the 57 Ford's and Plymouth's over the 57 Chev. I'd rather drive a 57 Studebaker than a Chevy. Blasphemy in most circles, so fire away!

[padgett]

Blasphemi is a Roadkill '55. Do think '57 was a great year for cars in general. Personally would prefer the dual-quad Caddy with suicide doors.

[JACK M]

4 hours ago, Lebowski said:

 

What would the '55 Cadillac have been? 

 

 

 

Trans ?

[JamesR]

22 hours ago, Pfeil said:

 

Dramatic yes, but Ford lost money on those retractable hardtop cars....

 

I've heard that, but I think I've also read that Ford was able to transfer a lot of that retractable technology over to the 60's era Lincoln convertibles and T-Bird convertibles - and those cars probably made money - so the net loss for Ford on the retractable project (at large) may not have been as big as one would think, if any at all. On the other hand, I've also heard vintage Lincoln and T-Bird people curse the function of their convertible tops, so they might be plagued with some similar issues that the '57 - '59 Skyliners had.

[JamesR]

13 hours ago, padgett said:

"What I can't understand is why 52-57 Fords are not as popular as the Chevy's are today! Great styling" Agree but Ford did not have Dinah.

 

Yes, but on the plus side for Ford...they didn't have Pat Boone. 😄  JUST KIDDING! I loved Pat and Dinah!

 

Dinah Shore and Pat Boone for Chevrolet - YouTube

[victorialynn2]

1 hour ago, JamesR said:

 

I've heard that, but I think I've also read that Ford was able to transfer a lot of that retractable technology over to the 60's era Lincoln convertibles and T-Bird convertibles - and those cars probably made money - so the net loss for Ford on the retractable project (at large) may not have been as big as one would think, if any at all. On the other hand, I've also heard vintage Lincoln and T-Bird people curse the function of their convertible tops, so they might be plagued with some similar issues that the '57 - '59 Skyliners had.

Lincoln’s and T-Bird tops are hydraulic and a lot more problematic then the Skyliners. 

Edited August 23, 2020 by victorialynn2 (see edit history)

[Pfeil]

1 hour ago, victorialynn2 said:

Lincoln’s and T-Bird tops are hydraulic and a lot more problematic then the Skyliners. 

 

I can't remember the exact story however my understanding was the 56-57 Continental was going to have a retractable hardtop. The project ( the whole 56-57 Continental project) was so far in the red it didn't happen, but Ford used the tooling for the 57-59 Skyliner.  

[60FlatTop]

You hardly ever see one of those retracticasted Fords with the top all the way up or down. They must ship them in enclosed transports.

[60FlatTop]

On 8/22/2020 at 12:13 PM, TerryB said:

with top down there is no place to put groceries.

 

All I need is room to carry mt camera. Groceries, that work gets delegated.

 

"Who's that guy taking pictures of the woman loading groceries into the old car?"

[1935Packard]

Style is always a matter of taste.  And I find the '57 Chevy a beautiful design, with the '55 and '56 very nice if not quite up to the '57.  But whatever you think of the '55 to '57 style, I'm not sure how you criticize them when you compare them to the style of the '54 that preceded them. 

 

Edited August 23, 2020 by 1935Packard (see edit history)

[Fossil]

I actually like the 54 better. Maybe it was because my Aunt drove one when I was growing up. 

[rocketraider]

I'm neutral on the TriFives. They look good enough and were reliable and simple to maintain.

 

I do not understand the obsession with loading them to the hilt with options when the cars are restored. Anyone should know that highly optioned Chevrolets from that time are an aberration.  Dealers didn't order them as the typical Chevy buyer didn't buy them.

[8E45E]

On ‎8‎/‎22‎/‎2020 at 12:53 PM, JamesR said:

 

 

Me too. Ford outsold the Chevy in 1957. And Chevy had nothing as dramatic as a retractable top that year.

I'm surprised what has not been mentioned yet is Ford had TWO distinctly different body shells on two different wheelbases for that year; the less expensive Custom series and the higher-end Fairlane series, where Chevrolet only had the one for all three trim levels. 

 

Craig 

[Pfeil]

On 8/22/2020 at 11:53 AM, JamesR said:

 

 

Me too. Ford outsold the Chevy in 1957. And Chevy had nothing as dramatic as a retractable top that year. 😉

Interesting story here;

Revisiting the 1957 Sales Numbers

BY JERRY GARRETT

 JUNE 3, 2007 10:49 AMJune 3, 2007 10:49 am

In the May 20 feature, “Fifty, Finned and Fabulous,” it was noted that in 1957 Ford took the sales title from Chevrolet for the first time.

While that’s generally accepted as true, there is more than one way of looking at the sales numbers in the auto industry that year.

The final tally, according to our trusty reference, the Standard Catalog (Krause Publications), was 1,522,406 for Ford versus 1,515,177 for Chevrolet, a difference of 7,359 units.

Clear enough? Not so fast. The distinction is that Ford sold more 1957 Fords during the 1957 model year than Chevrolet sold of its 1957 Chevrolets.

But Chevrolet actually sold 136 more cars during the 1957 model “calendar year” than Ford.

Confused? The thing was, some 7,359 of the Chevrolets sold during that time period were leftover 1956 models.

From a production standpoint, Ford churned out 1,655,065 of its 1957 model Fords. But the final 132,659 of those wound up being sold outside the 1957 calendar year.

Those carryover models, coupled with a deep recession in the country’s economy, fouled Ford sales for 1958. Oh, and don’t forget the introduction of the Edsel that year. Production of 1958 Ford models dropped to just 967,954 units. Ouch!

Chevrolet handily regained the sales title, even though the recession helped drive its sales down to just 1.2 million units.

[Pfeil]

10 hours ago, rocketraider said:

I'm neutral on the TriFives. They look good enough and were reliable and simple to maintain.

 

I do not understand the obsession with loading them to the hilt with options when the cars are restored. Anyone should know that highly optioned Chevrolets from that time are an aberration.  Dealers didn't order them as the typical Chevy buyer didn't buy them.

Restoring a car means restoring it back to it's build sheet. Adding things that were not there even though it was a factory option on the car is not restoring a car it's making a car in your image of what the car should be or should have been .

Edited August 24, 2020 by Pfeil (see edit history)

[Str8-8-Dave]

An observation, then a funny Ford story...

 

Observation- According to Ralph Nader the 57 could not have been the worst car because he announced the Corvair was.  We all remember he wrote a book called Unsafe at Any Speed- wonder how much money he made on that turkey...

 

Ford story- Someone posted about the Ford retractable convertibles.  Ford always seemed to have edgy ideas about convertibles.  My dad was a manager in Custom Vehicle Ops in the early 60's and one of his lease cars was a 64 T-bird convertible which I was totally mesmerized by- thought it was the coolest car I'd ever seen, but I was 14 then...  Pressing the top down button on that car started the trunk panel opening, hinged at the rear bumper, then the top rolled back into the trunk, then a metal tonneau cover deployed from the decklid by which time you needed binoculars to see the top of the thing, then when it worked correctly it all settled down to cover the trunk and the convertible top compartment.  If you opened the decklid and tonneau panel under a low bridge the car could become stuck. 

 

So my dad packed the trunk with our suitcases which meant the decklid opened but the top stayed up.  My dad thought it was great fun to have to reach heavy suitcases over the tops of the rear fenders without denting or scratching anything.  Once the car was packed up the happy family of 4 headed up to Jerry's Marina in East Tawas, MI for a relaxing vacation.  We pulled up in front of the cottage just as it was starting to rain, opened the decklid, removed the luggage, then attempted to lower the decklid.  Nothing happened.  The decklid became a big Mercedes air brake sticking 6 feet up in the air.  My dad and brother wound up driving the car  20 MPH for 10 miles to the nearest Ford dealer, Inglis Ford in Tawas City.  Being a small town dealer they had never seen one of these cars in the service garage.  My dad had to call the Thunderbird desk in the Ford experimental garage at Dearborn Research and Engineering Center to find someone who could troubleshoot the failure.  It turns out under a cardboard trim inside the trunk across the valance panel lived an army of Ford starter solenoids, 8 of em.  The ex garage mechanic told the Inglis Ford garage mechanic which solenoid was the likely culprit.  It got replaced and we all lived happily ever after... 

Edited August 24, 2020 by Str8-8-Dave (see edit history)

[JamesR]

1 hour ago, Pfeil said:

Interesting story here;

Revisiting the 1957 Sales Numbers

BY JERRY GARRETT

 JUNE 3, 2007 10:49 AMJune 3, 2007 10:49 am

In the May 20 feature, “Fifty, Finned and Fabulous,” it was noted that in 1957 Ford took the sales title from Chevrolet for the first time.

While that’s generally accepted as true, there is more than one way of looking at the sales numbers in the auto industry that year.

The final tally, according to our trusty reference, the Standard Catalog (Krause Publications), was 1,522,406 for Ford versus 1,515,177 for Chevrolet, a difference of 7,359 units.

Clear enough? Not so fast. The distinction is that Ford sold more 1957 Fords during the 1957 model year than Chevrolet sold of its 1957 Chevrolets.

But Chevrolet actually sold 136 more cars during the 1957 model “calendar year” than Ford.

Confused? The thing was, some 7,359 of the Chevrolets sold during that time period were leftover 1956 models.

From a production standpoint, Ford churned out 1,655,065 of its 1957 model Fords. But the final 132,659 of those wound up being sold outside the 1957 calendar year.

Those carryover models, coupled with a deep recession in the country’s economy, fouled Ford sales for 1958. Oh, and don’t forget the introduction of the Edsel that year. Production of 1958 Ford models dropped to just 967,954 units. Ouch!

Chevrolet handily regained the sales title, even though the recession helped drive its sales down to just 1.2 million units.

 

Thanks for the history. I know a similar thing happened in 1954 in the Ford vs. Chevy sales race. Ford introduced their new overhead valve V-8 in 1954, the Y-block, and that may have helped Ford edge out Chevy by a few units. Or maybe it was the big price war going on between the two companies. Anyway, I think I read that Ford outsold Chevy, but only in the model year, not the calender year. Or it may be the inverse of that...I can't remember. I've also read that Chevy was so intent on maintaining their number one spot that they "registered"  some of their unsold '54 model year cars so they could put them in the "sold" category. (I don't know exactly how that would work...Possibly through a factory lease program or something??) But I think the '54 sales race was even closer than the '57 race. I find some sources that say Chevy outsold Ford in '54, and some sources that say the opposite. Unfortunately, the big price war had a negative effect on the smaller independents like Studebaker and Hudson. They - and other companies - reformed in '55 in part because of the price war.

[Buffalowed Bill]

Whenever one of these outrageous themes comes into print, I chuckle and wait, because I know that car people will pounce. All I have to do is relax and watch the forums light up. The responses are worth their weight in gold.

 

To go on record. I like all 1955-57 cars, with some minor exceptions. It's hard to screw up a trimmed out, shoe-box. But what do I know, I preferred Studebakers. 

 

[TAKerry]

I was never keen to the tri fives. I certainly would not kick one out of my garage but with an unlimited budget one would be low on the purchase list. BUT, I would not rate them as the worse or even a bad car. A billion people cant be all that wrong!

[George Cole]

Far from perfect, but it's been mine for 35 years and a keeper.  Mostly original 283 bored 0.030 over, slip-and-slide-Powerglide, ps, original spinner hubcaps.  Had headers on it when I bought it.  I've threatened to return to stock exhaust manifolds many times, as the collectors drag on practically every speed bump.  Still haven't done it.  That's my brother-in-law in the pic, not me.

[Ed Luddy]

This 1957 Sedan DeVille is a real looker and a mid 50's revelation to the term "Insolent Chariots" a book written long ago with disdain of the big American cars if I remember correctly. Got to go for a ride in it last week. The cost of the car and the ensuing restoration far exceeded it's recent selling price. The owner said he could have got more a 57 Bel Air. This is twice the car at about half the price!

Edited August 24, 2020 by Ed Luddy
spelling (see edit history)

[60FlatTop]

1 hour ago, George Cole said:

I've threatened to return to stock exhaust manifolds many times, as the collectors drag on

 

I think faster than I read. I anticipated that to mean other collectors drag on about the headers.

 

You know how they are. I have cultivated a way of saying "What's that?" in a way that really annoys my wife.

[8E45E]

23 minutes ago, Ed Luddy said:

This 1957 Sedan DeVille is a real looker and a mid 50's revelation to the term "Insolent Chariots" a book written long ago with disdain of the big American cars if I remember correctly. Got to go for a ride in it last week. The cost of the car and the ensuing restoration far exceeded it's recent selling price. The owner said he could have got more a 57 Bel Air. This is twice the car at about half the price!

Or you can find an El Morocco and get the best (and worst) of both worlds!

 

Craig

[Pfeil]

20 minutes ago, Ed Luddy said:

This 1957 Sedan DeVille is a real looker and a mid 50's revelation to the term "Insolent Chariots" a book written long ago with disdain of the big American cars if I remember correctly. Got to go for a ride in it last week. The cost of the car and the ensuing restoration far exceeded it's recent selling price. The owner said he could have got more a 57 Bel Air. This is twice the car at about half the price!

 

The 1957 Cadillac Coupe de Ville is my favorite G.M. car of 1957. The windshield is not unique to G.M. as Oldsmobile and Buick on some models in 1954 pioneered the panorama glass with a past 90 degree dogleg sweep ( Cadillac gets it in 1957, Pontiac and Chevrolet won't get it until 1958 ) The roof rear "C" pillar of the Cadillac in 57-58, a revision of Pontiac Chevrolet Hardtops of 1953-54 but IMO look better on Cadillac of 57-58  and will show up on Pontiac and Chevrolet for 1958.

 

 

You will notice that both the Coupe and the Sedan de Ville both have sweep cut fender styling. Cadillac was so adamant that a skirt should never be used that they used chrome wheel lip molding to prevent it.

[Pfeil]

5 minutes ago, 8E45E said:

Or you can find an El Morocco and get the best (and worst) of both worlds!

 

Craig

 

No, I would rather have Cadillac's 365 cu. in. engine and Dual Coupling 315 - 4 speed HydraMatic than a Chevy 283 and a 2 speed cast iron powerglide.

[padgett]

"I do not understand the obsession with loading them to the hilt " Same way I ordered new cars back then so why not ?

 

ps for years a 57 Brougham sat behind the Gulf station near the police station. Kept trying to buy it but was always refused. Years later I saw the same car at Auburn. Still had a distinctive crack in the vent window. I only like a few 4-doors.

 

Edited August 25, 2020 by padgett (see edit history)

[Pfeil]

1957 Cadillac roof section applied to 1958 Chevrolet and Pontiac.

Note non stock exhaust tips and 1960 Pontiac spinner hubcaps and since it's a Chieftain someone added one extra star in the cove and eliminated the chieftain script

 

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

[padgett]

Ok if you want to be silly.

 

 

[Lebowski]

34 minutes ago, padgett said:

Ok if you want to be silly.

 

So it started out as a Corvette and then they added a front end similar to a '57 Chevy and a rear end similar to a '59? That's a lot of work for a car that might be worth $5000.... 

[rocketraider]

4 hours ago, Ed Luddy said:

"Insolent Chariots"

 

And what, pray tell, is wrong with having an "insolent chariot"? 😼

 

Padgett, you were the exception. The difference is if a car was ordered new and delivered fully loaded vs having options slathered on 30 years after the fact.

 

I know a GTO guy who actually lost sleep because his 65 didn't have every possible option. It progressed from obsession to mania.

[Str8-8-Dave]

So to recap- 55, 56- beautiful, 57- ok 58, uh oh, think the bean counters overloaded the styling studio, 59, 60- well better than 58, 61- for everyone, 62, 63, cool, 64- Let Hertz put you in the driver's seat...

 

 

[padgett]

Lebowski: no it started out as an XLR so is worth more like $15k

Rocket: no, never ordered a car with a speedminder (though did have to add cruise to a few back when GM did not offer CC with a four-speed. Now a major challenge is finding the &^$& CC. (Buttons on left of CTS wheel, Right on Jeep, bottom on Allante, pushbutton in turn signal for GTO (had to add but did correctly) and its own lever for the Mercs.)

 

ps just looked at my 78 Sunbird WS (had to add CC to that also). $3773.36 Base $5,668.60 bottom line. Was considered an economy car but ticed all my boxes. Did have to give dealer $1,000 deposit to order a car in south Florida that was "not available with AC".

[Pfeil]

18 minutes ago, Str8-8-Dave said:

So to recap- 55, 56- beautiful, 57- ok 58, uh oh, think the bean counters overloaded the styling studio, 59, 60- well better than 58, 61- for everyone, 62, 63, cool, 64- Let Hertz put you in the driver's seat...

 

 

 

What's not to like? I do know what it says though. Cadillac in a Chevrolet.

G.M. Art and Color have done that ( and with Buicks ) for years starting with the 32 Baby Cadillac. The 39 Chevrolet baby Cadillac, the 40 Chevrolet baby Buick.

A sharp car for the money.

 

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