Let’s start conversation about a huge style change in GM cars between 1958 and 1959.

[Angelfish]

I like the look of the '58 Chevy better than the '57.  Don't tell my Dad, he'd disown me.  But the '56 is still the best.  

[Pfeil]

11 hours ago, rocketraider said:

Tortuously.

 

Undoubtedly there was a lot of metal finishing involved on these quarters. 

 

Re 59 Pontiac: I like the styling except for that sweepspear aft of the rear wheel opening. To me it was incongruous to the rest of the styling cues. I realize it was part of Harley Earl's last chrome-slathered styling gasp, but take it off and you have an incredibly cleanly styled automobile.

On Pontiac, yes, they could have split the molding around the rear quarter body spear. 

[Pfeil]

20 hours ago, John348 said:

Craig,

Let me clarify, the decision on the one year body style on the 58 Chevrolet was not influenced by Chrysler's design department  

John, the 58 Chevrolet has a lot of 1957 Cadillac in it

[60FlatTop]

23 minutes ago, Angelfish said:

I like the look of the '58 Chevy better than the '57.  Don't tell my Dad, he'd disown me.  But the '56 is still the best.  

In my Junior year of High School I had a '58 Chevy 6- 3 speed, that was 1965. My Dad found it and we swapped on a front clip because of a fender bender. Then in my Senior year I got a '57 V8 three speed. After having the '58 the '57 was like a truck. Never liked it. At the end of the year I bought a '60 Buick.

I do agree that the '56 Chevy was the best looking of the Tri-Fives. A '56 2-10 two door hardtop was among the five cars that "vaporized" while I was in the Navy. I never licensed it but it was a special one to remember.

 

Cars seemed to age quickly in the mid to late 1960's. Model changes, good economy, rust areas particular to each make all made them much more consumable. Cheaper cars in the low price field. I remember not completing a brake job on a '64 Chevy and leaving it sit overnight on the bumperjack. Came back in the morning and the quarter panel had folded up with the frame rail. Cheap stuff.

[Bhigdog]

2 hours ago, Pfeil said:

I agree but you could take the same basic car and order it the way you want. Look at these two 58 Pontiac's. You could have it either way.

A Star Chief below;

Or a Chieftain Below;

Yes, that's Shelby

 Pontiacs were the pick of the litter. Since beauty is in the eye of the beholder and I don't want to insult anyone I'll refrain from naming my choice(s) of the butt ugliest.........Bob

[8E45E]

2 hours ago, Pfeil said:

That's why most diehard Pontiac guys don't consider them as Pontiacs!!! The ENGINE is a big part of the brand!

It definitely was, at least as far as General Motors customers were concerned.  Keep in mind how much market share GM lost in the 1980's with continued 'brand dilution', including sharing of engines.  In 1978, a Cadillac owner successfully won a lawsuit over an Oldsmobile engine in his brand new Cadillac.

 

Craig

[avgwarhawk]

The 58 Buick took some time for me to like.   Now I love the tank of a Buick. 

[Peter J.Heizmann]

On 1/13/2022 at 9:43 AM, Neoflyer said:

There was a huge style change in GM cars between 1958 and 1959. All of the different divisions’ cars went from boxy to rounded overnight. Look at Buick as a prime example. Can anyone give a little background on what was going on at the company at the time? I’ m intrigued by the sudden change in body styles and think this might be a good topic of conversation.

With all the responses so far when will you join the conversation?

[Pfeil]

5 hours ago, avgwarhawk said:

The 58 Buick took some time for me to like.   Now I love the tank of a Buick. 

Buick, as far as hardtops are concerned had two hardtop roofs for 58 in two door cars.

 SOLID CITIZEN, I like that.

[rocketraider]

Unlike them showbiz Oldsmobile folks!🤣

[JamesR]

I love looking at all old cars, no exceptions (I was drooling over Crosleys last night online) so if I make some negative  statements about styling for a particular year or model, don't take offense...I  realize that every car is a composite of pluses and minuses. My guess is that GM had an idea about what the future held for the buying public, and they felt that extreme ornamentation and chrome on top of chrome was what people wanted, but when Chrysler introduced their '57 models, GM  1) saw how enthralled the public was Chrysler styling, and 2) compared Chrysler designs with upcoming '58 GM designs and finally understood what a mistake they had made. 

 

The '58 Chevy was the only good looking car from GM that year (Corvette aside) but it didn't have to be that way. The basic shapes of most of the body styles that year had rather pleasing lines - the Pontiac is a good example - but it was in the ornamentation that stylists off the deep end. The chrome and trim wasn't only excessive, it was often also incongruous in shape and contour when put on those otherwise nice looking bodies. That doesn't mean I don't like GM's of '58 - I do - but I like them in the way that people might like a circus (as contrasted to a symphony. ) And to be fair, I think the '58 designs were slightly better than the '59 GMs, many of which didn't even have nice body lines.

 

Here's what too much ornamentation can do to otherwise attractive lines (compare and contrast):

Edited January 15, 2022 by JamesR (see edit history)

[John348]

1 hour ago, rocketraider said:

Unlike them showbiz Oldsmobile folks!🤣

 

That's Great! I believe that later became the Ed Sullivan Theatre, still looks the same last time I walked past 7 years ago 

[8E45E]

5 minutes ago, JamesR said:

My guess is that GM had an idea about what the future held for the buying public, and they felt that extreme ornamentation and chrome on top of chrome was what people wanted, but when Chrysler introduced their '57 models, GM  1) saw how enthralled the public was Chrysler styling, and 2) compared Chrysler designs with upcoming '58 GM designs and finally understood what a mistake they had made. 

 

Here's what too much ornamentation can do to otherwise attractive lines (compare and contrast):

 

If that gal was from the UK:  Vauxhall Cresta PA | The Independent | The Independent

 

Craig

[John348]

2 hours ago, Pfeil said:

Buick, as far as hardtops are concerned had two hardtop roofs for 58 in two door cars.

 SOLID CITIZEN, I like that.

Pfeil,

They came back with the reverse "C" pillar that GM used earlier which worked well. It is odd that the styling studio would revisit an idea that was done three years earlier.

 

[John348]

21 minutes ago, JamesR said:

 My guess is that GM had an idea about what the future held for the buying public, and they felt that extreme ornamentation and chrome on top of chrome was what people wanted, but when Chrysler introduced their '57 models, GM  1) saw how enthralled the public was Chrysler styling, and 2) compared Chrysler designs with upcoming '58 GM designs and finally understood what a mistake they had made. 

James, you did have guess, but not a good one. While in 1957 Chevrolet did finish second in sales to Ford, Plymouth still remained third. The 59 models were already done before 58's went into production, so the 1957 Chrysler's design had no influence. As I pointed out in an earlier post this was corporate decision by GM that in 1959 that all of the divisions that shared 'like' body styles would share the same curved glass, thus reducing cost and increasing profits to share holders.

I don't think Virgil Exner's styling department had GM Ford or the Independents really shaking. 

 

As far as a lot of the trim on the quarter panels on the 59-60 GM cars it is covering factory welds  

[JamesR]

10 minutes ago, John348 said:

While in 1957 Chevrolet did finish second in sales to Ford, Plymouth still remained third.

 

That's a very good point. If Chrysler set the world on fire in '57, why didn't they sell more Plymouths than GM sold Chevies? I really like the styling of the '57 Plymouth, but I admit I like the '57 Chevy better. I don't think I'm alone in that opinion. 

[Pfeil]

1 hour ago, John348 said:

Pfeil,

They came back with the reverse "C" pillar that GM used earlier which worked well. It is odd that the styling studio would revisit an idea that was done three years earlier.

 

Yes John, I know, But it was done in a different way on the 57 Cad, 58 Chevrolet Pontiac with those "A" pillars. It just comes off new.

Compared to old.   And talking about shared canopies! all or most of your glass will interchange with the Pontiac below.

 

Edited January 15, 2022 by Pfeil (see edit history)

[8E45E]

7 hours ago, JamesR said:

 

That's a very good point. If Chrysler set the world on fire in '57, why didn't they sell more Plymouths than GM sold Chevies? I really like the styling of the '57 Plymouth, but I admit I like the '57 Chevy better. I don't think I'm alone in that opinion. 

Ford outsold Chevy in 1957.  The one brutally battered marque for 1957 was Packard.  Imperial sales jumped something rediculous, like 300%, no doubt more than a few owners of older Packards trading them in for the newly restyled Imperial.

 

Craig

[Ed Luddy]

10 hours ago, JamesR said:

 

That's a very good point. If Chrysler set the world on fire in '57, why didn't they sell more Plymouths than GM sold Chevies? I really like the styling of the '57 Plymouth, but I admit I like the '57 Chevy better. I don't think I'm alone in that opinion. 

Chrysler Corp. did not have anywhere near the production capability of GM. Plymouth couldn't build enough cars to meet demand. The sped up assembly lines resulted in very poor quality built cars that came back to bite Chrysler hard.

[Pete O]

On 1/13/2022 at 2:21 PM, Pfeil said:

 Put a 1957 Ford or Chrysler product next to any 1957 GM product and the GM styling looks half a decade behind the times- with the benefit of hindsight.

 

OK, let's put a 1954 Chrysler and a 54 Mercury next to a 1954 Olds and see whose styling is old.

 

 Slab sided, Sweep cut fender styling front and rear. An "A" pilar that is swept back past 90 degrees with a vista wrap around windshield. This car makes the other two look like they are from another era. FYI, Buick shares that windshield and roof, and Cadillac won't get an "A" pillar swept back like that until 1957, Pontiac and Chevrolet until 1958.

Compared to Olds and Buick for 1954 The 1954 Chevrolet and Pontiac are two styling sequences behind Olds and Buick.

 

Ok, I'll give you that the '54 Olds is fresher than the Merc and Chrysler, but the '54 Olds was a brand new design for '54, and the Merc and Chrysler were old designs nearing the end of their lives.  Let's compare the bread and butter, high volume makes, Ford and Chevy.  From the first postwar design in '49 to the '57, with each new body introduced over the period, the Ford is more "modern" (sleeker, more taut, more lithe) than the Chevy.  The only time they were close was in '55,  and the '55 Chevy was and is hailed as a breakthrough in styling.  But in hindsight, all they did was to catch up to where Ford had already been in my opinion.

Edited January 15, 2022 by Pete O (see edit history)

[Pfeil]

Take a look at this 1956 G.M. / Chevrolet Impala dream / show car.

The double spear shows up on the 1961 Pontiac.

61 Catalina

 

For 62 Pontiac uses the very same doors of 61 but takes off the front spear point and extends it forward to the headlight trim to make the car look wider. Out back it keeps the spear open ended and adds the faint body creases (upper and lower) of the coke bottle styling that last through the 60's on Pontiac which many makes copied even into the 70's.

The coke bottle flair starts just aft of the door (only two door cars) 

The top part of the coke bottle flair has stainless molding, bottom doesn't, the 62 has the new simulated convertible " bow roof" in the hardtop.

 

The 63 below the side spear is gone and the emphasis is on "Coke Bottle styling" and stacked headlamps, the "A" pillar is changed, but the rest of the roof is the same until 1965.

]

by 65-66 it's much larger

  

 

 

[Brill_C-37M_Bus]

You should see the change in GM transit bus styling from ‘58 to ‘59!  They had made only minor changes since WWII, when a totally new design debuted in 1959. Here’s a late-model “Old Look” and a pair of mid-production “New Look”s from the AACA Museum collection (except New Look 778, with the nose logo missing, that’s in private hands).

 

 

 

-Steven

[Pfeil]

48 minutes ago, Pete O said:

Ok, I'll give you that the '54 Olds is fresher than the Merc and Chrysler, but the '54 Olds was a brand new design for '54, and the Merc and Chrysler were old designs nearing the end of their lives.  Let's compare the bread and butter, high volume makes, Ford and Chevy.  From the first postwar design in '49 to the '57, with each new body introduced over the period, the Ford is more "modern" (sleeker, more taut, more lithe) than the Chevy.  The only time they were close was in '55,  and the '55 Chevy was and is hailed as a breakthrough in styling.  But in hindsight, all they did was to catch up to where Ford had already been in my opinion.

Yes, I can see that the 49 Ford went too far with slab side styling and in 52 Ford brought back modified pontoon rear quarters and Ford lost its #1 lead for 49 to Chevrolet in 1950.

As far as 57 goes; Ford sold 1,522,406 cars in the 1957 model year, while Chevrolet sold 1,515,177. Yet even today there's argument as to what company really sold the most. Chevrolet actually sold more cars during the 1957 calendar year, but those sales included several thousand '56 models. I don't really care because I like both cars, and I also like all fords from 52-59 and that includes the 58. The 58 if optioned right with the right colors can be an attractive car.

If I owned G.M. and I had five divisions, I would choose the divisions that were not as high volume compared to Chevrolet do the experimentation. That is plain good business sense.

So???  

Edited January 15, 2022 by Pfeil (see edit history)

[Pfeil]

8 minutes ago, Pfeil said:

Yes, I can see that the 49 Ford went too far with slab side styling and in 52 Ford brought back modified pontoon rear quarters and Ford lost its #1 lead for 49 to Chevrolet in 1950.

As far as 57 goes; Ford sold 1,522,406 cars in the 1957 model year, while Chevrolet sold 1,515,177. Yet even today there's argument as to what company really sold the most. Chevrolet actually sold more cars during the 1957 calendar year, but those sales included several thousand '56 models. I don't really care because I like both cars, and I also like all fords from 52-59 and that includes the 58. The 58 if optioned right with the right colors can be an attractive car, and I could get the new 352 FE. 

If I owned G.M. and I had five divisions, I would choose the divisions that were not as high volume compared to Chevrolet do the experimentation. That is plain good business sense.

So???  

 

Edited January 15, 2022 by Pfeil (see edit history)

[Pete O]

2 hours ago, Pfeil said:

Yes, I can see that the 49 Ford went too far with slab side styling and in 52 Ford brought back modified pontoon rear quarters and Ford lost its #1 lead for 49 to Chevrolet in 1950.

As far as 57 goes; Ford sold 1,522,406 cars in the 1957 model year, while Chevrolet sold 1,515,177. Yet even today there's argument as to what company really sold the most. Chevrolet actually sold more cars during the 1957 calendar year, but those sales included several thousand '56 models. I don't really care because I like both cars, and I also like all fords from 52-59 and that includes the 58. The 58 if optioned right with the right colors can be an attractive car.

If I owned G.M. and I had five divisions, I would choose the divisions that were not as high volume compared to Chevrolet do the experimentation. That is plain good business sense.

So???  

Ford went too far with the slab side in '49?  I don't agree.  It took GM 5 years to catch up!   🙂 I don't see the '51 styling feature on the Ford as a reversion to a pontoon fender, it is more like a stylized  air duct.  And as for sales figures, like I said in my first post,  GM had a majority of the market at the time so American cars for the most part looked like GM cars during the period, and vice versa.  But we're looking back with a modern eye to the styling at that time, and sales figures don't impact that argument.

[8E45E]

18 hours ago, Brill_C-37M_Bus said:

You should see the change in GM transit bus styling from ‘58 to ‘59!  They had made only minor changes since WWII, when a totally new design debuted in 1959. Here’s a late-model “Old Look” and a pair of mid-production “New Look”s from the AACA Museum collection (except New Look 778, with the nose logo missing, that’s in private hands).

GM still kept the 'Old Looks' in production, up until 1968/'69, long after the New Look was introduced.

 

Craig

[James-Wahl Motors]

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.

[Cadillac Fan]

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. 
 

 

 

Edited January 21, 2022 by Cadillac Fan (see edit history)

[Paul Dobbin]

On 1/13/2022 at 12:05 PM, Graham Man said:

Ok I am not a GM guy, and have a lot to learn about the cars of this era, but I do love cars of all styles.  Just looked at some pictures 1958 and 59 Impala, both nice looking cars, but side by side there are a lot of similarities in styling.  I would not want the chrome bill from either car, but the 58 overall looks more balanced, the 58 has the longer leaner look.  The scant C pillar on the 59 radically changes the look of the roof.

 

 

 

The bigger question is how did they stamp the 59 quarter panel? 

 

 

  Gramham Man

 

On 1/13/2022 at 12:05 PM, Graham Man said:

Ok I am not a GM guy, and have a lot to learn about the cars of this era, but I do love cars of all styles.  Just looked at some pictures 1958 and 59 Impala, both nice looking cars, but side by side there are a lot of similarities in styling.  I would not want the chrome bill from either car, but the 58 overall looks more balanced, the 58 has the longer leaner look.  The scant C pillar on the 59 radically changes the look of the roof.

 

 

 

The bigger question is how did they stamp the 59 quarter panel? 

 

 

  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.  

Edited January 21, 2022 by Paul Dobbin (see edit history)

[bryankazmer]

How about 1956 and 57 Chrysler 300? Or 1966 and 1967 Alfa Romeo Giulia Spider?

[Cadillac Fan]

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.  
 

 

 

[Pfeil]

46 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.  

No doubt about the follow up cars. The 57 Cadillac is a great looking car and for 58 which is essentially the same basic car they ruined it I guess they never head the term " Less is more". I suppose they had or were required to do something. I differ with the 58 Chevrolet because it's a stand-alone one-year style that for some reason has grown on me over time, but it has to be the right color and the right options to make it work.

[Pfeil]

8 minutes ago, Cadillac Fan said:

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.  
 

 

 

The hit was the economy and something really new since 1949. I count the 53-54 a warm over.

[Cadillac Fan]

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. 

[Pfeil]

19 hours ago, Cadillac Fan said:

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. 

They settled because of looks, price, reliability and something called brand loyalty. Also, some people like myself happen to like flow through fender styling started by Olds in 1948 only on the 98 and all 1948 Cadillac. Chevrolet, Pontiac and Oldsmobile in the 88 series all used the same basic styling almost unaltered through 1953 and Chevrolet and Pontiac modified it from 53-54. Pontiac even modified the "A" body in 1954 sort of an "A+" version for the StarChief and its long rear deck on the "A" body see below;

 

Edited January 22, 2022 by Pfeil (see edit history)

[Pfeil]

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.

[Cadillac Fan]

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

 

 

Edited January 22, 2022 by Cadillac Fan (see edit history)

[Pfeil]

5 hours ago, Cadillac Fan said:

 

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

 

 

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.

[Cadillac Fan]

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.  

Edited January 23, 2022 by Cadillac Fan (see edit history)

[Pfeil]

2 hours ago, Cadillac Fan said:

Yes.  I agree re 1932.  But by the early 1950s they had lost their way with regard to Chevrolet styling.  

This front-end of 1972 Chevy has got Cadillac written all over it,