Jump to content

1951 Chrysler Imperial Convertible - $15,900 - Sarasota, FL

Recommended Posts

Not mine:  




Owner contact info:  330-921-5671


per seller:  “Hello, here is a super rare convertible, 1 of 600 produced, how many remains? This car was driven into a warehouse and there it sat for 33 years till the owner passed and the family sold the warehouse. I bought it to restore myself but I just finished a 51 Chevy convert and just don’t have it in me to do another, too many candles on the birthday cake!!!
The interior is in great shape and you will be able to use it, options are “Hemi” with fluid drive, dual spot lights, radio, PS, Power windows up front, padded dash, 5 Wire wheels.
The body is in great shape but it does have a few patches in the trunk, but that could be an easy fix. The floors have been heavily under coated and when you scrape the undercoat off you see black floors!
The top has a small rip in it, but that could be repaired. Can you imagine cruising down the road with this big boat, you may never see another!
I was told that the motor turns by hand but there is no battery in it, will need the usual prep for a car stored 33 years, clean the gas tank, pull the spark plugs, do the brakes. The good part is it’s all here and you won’t have to start looking for parts.
I may consider a trade on a GM product, send a few pics, you will need a transport company with a winch, almost all of them have a winch. Car is located in Sarasota Fl.”



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe just get it running and drive it! Could be pretty reasonable under those circumstances if you don't hit a huge mechanical ice berg. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Marty Roth said:

I like the idea of this one, mostly as-is,

but am not a fan of Fluid-Drive,

and don't have room or time for another 

Yes! Fluid Drive (or GM Powerglide)...I remember a demonstration where they set up two house hold fans, facing each other and then turned one one, which made the other one go 'round. It showed how "fluid drive" worked. I could help thinking "wouldn't a shaft be better?"

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What have you heard that is bad about fluid drive ?  It is just a fluid coupler between the standard trans and motor that allows you to come to a stop without needing to depress the clutch except to shift into a lower gear.  On hills you dump the clutch and never have to worry about a stall or rolling back into the car behind you.  In snow it is great because you limit breaking traction. In my 50 Chrysler, combined with the semi auto, it is the pinnacle of trans/ motor before fully automatics in mopars.  A fluid drive unit is not the trans, it is not the motor, it is a coupler that never seems to fail. And the ones in my mopars are originals. Can't say that about starters or carbs, etc.   Don't confuse it with a dynaflow which is great really (tested in WW2 in tank destroyers) which has it's own special needs via drips which in no way affects it's function.  But the "dyna-slush" is one of those issues though at 12 mpg regardless I never notice much.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would take him to task on that. If anything it is less so because it takes RPMs to get the fluid coupler to "engage" and then so it happens in moderation per rpm.  No clutch chatter as it is already mated.  Now there is some vibration at a stop but nothing to get worried about.  Technoligy at the time.   I would like to watch this episode

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brooklyn Beer said:

"....Don't confuse it with a dynaflow which is great really (tested in WW2 in tank destroyers) which has it's own special needs via drips which in no way affects it's function.  But the "dyna-slush" is one of those issues though at 12 mpg regardless I never notice much."

Hydra-Matic, which was introduced in the 1940 Oldsmobile, is the automatic transmissions you are thinking of that was utilized in WWII tanks.  Dynaflow Drive was introduced by Buick for 1948.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, usnavystgc said:

I have heard nothing good about fluid drive.


6 hours ago, usnavystgc said:

Well, I just saw a Jay Leno's garage video about it and he didn't like it. 

One persons opinion doesn't necessarily make it true.

First off I've never owned or driven a fluid-drive. Have had a long standing interest in them. 

I know where there is a 51 Desoto setting with close to 300,000 miles on the odometer and as far as I know the Fluid-drive was never been apart. The engine yes but not the tranny. Same family since the middle fifties. They are clunky but from what I've gathered are very reliable. I believe there were at least 3 different versions but I'm not aware of any notorious issues with any of them. 

I am ready to be corrected if I'm mistaken.  


Link to comment
Share on other sites

What could you possibly get that is more reliable than fluid drive? If the shifter is to be believed, it is fluid torque drive, not fluid drive, but to the reliability question it doesn't really matter. Chrysler used fluid couplings (fluid drive) and torque converters (fluid torque drive) in so many different combinations with semi-automatic transmissions (including the ubiquitous M6), manual 3 speeds, and 3 speed overdrive it is almost impossible to keep them all straight. There are scads of these still on the road after all these years that have never been overhauled and still work perfectly. Quite a few are still running on the original fluid. Is there any other automatic or automatic-ish setup that can come close to matching that? I don't think so.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Create New...