that sounds like humdinger of a plan, boy howdy! don't forget to stop off at your local haberdasher for a new 3 piece suit, and the local barber for a haircut you can set your watch to.
I'll buy one 57 Chevy but only with the modern upgrades and safety features~$20.000 !!! *** 😂hahaha. Plust the price of the car. 👍Great looking car though.
The good news is that Repro parts are readily available, this means that if one has deep enough pockets the dream can become a reality. I would be second in line line after you. My only dilemma now would be choosing the colour combination. What a fine automobile.
Bruce Bryant well now we have things like “automatic braking” and “airbags” so everyone survives a crash. We shoild bring back survival of the fittest, shitty drivers wont last as long
How can you avoid the crash with a 5000 lb boat reigned in with manual steering, manual drum brakes, and bias ply tires? Any wonder annual traffic fatalities in the US were the same in the 1950s as they are today-with only 1/4 of the miles driven.
Contrary to urban legend, driving barefoot is not illegal anywhere in North America, except if you are on a motorcycle in Alabama. Barefoot driving gives you the best possible control, and even improves your gas mileage because of the greater feel of the pedals.
@@TheOzthewiz : No, it never did. If it did, it would not have survived initial proving ground testing. But it did, and GM factories around the world made millions of cars for years with wrap-around windscreens.
@@nellyfarnsworth7381 you ain't going to turn a profit... $200k back in 1957 is like $20k so you would be paying like $200k for all 10cars then it'll cost you money to store all them cars for 64yrs (which would cost like $1.5mil)... at this point if you're thinking that you'll make a cool 1/2mil profit well you forgot the sales tax when you was buying the cars back in 1957... in short it ain't worth it
Back in the fifties they are talking about lowering the center of gravity for safety. Now everybody is driving over sized and top heavy SUV's and pickups, thinking they are safe.
It's not 100% wrong, pickups and suv's tend to be heavier so they move other things when they hit. Also, We have made improvments to suspention to help with that risk.
5-digit license plates! Far fewer cars on the road must have added to the safety factor. Surely the late 50s/early 60s was the golden age of the automobile. Thanks for uploading this video.
In high school I got a 1957 Chevy script down telephone company car just a heater and wipers. I put two carb manfold and fenton cast iron headers hurst floor shifter. Poor kids hot rod! This was in 1964.
One of my favorite and most others iconic classic collectible cars. I love the stability test around the cones. I thought they would pop those tires. Say what you will, I wish I had a mint one.
Yumpin Yiminy, A brand new 1957 Chevrolet Bel Air Sport Coupe set you back $2500. A fully restored frame -off restoration one today will set you back $60,000.
Yumpin Yiminy A mint one today would be nice as a once a month Sunday driver. Those cars were no fun as daily drivers back in the day, though they were marginally better than the clunkers just 5 years before them.
@@HoneyTone-TheSearchContinues I had a 1957 Chevy I bought used in 1967,it had a 283 V8,and 3 speed standard transmission,shifter on the column, and I drove it daily,it had plenty of power and a really smooth ride, I liked it the whole time I had it,the only thing I didn't like, and this was on almost all of the cars in the 1950's,were the drum brakes,in hard rain when the street would have a lot of water build up, water would get in those drums and you had no brakes until you pumped the brakes hard and furiously to get the water to drain out of the small drainage holes on the drums,I can tell you that made my heart beat really several times when trying to stop in time from hitting a stopped car in front of me,anyway I wish i still had that car,I sold it when I went into the Army.
My first car was a '57 Chevy 210 4-dr. hardtop my Dad gave me because I figured out the performance problem. It had a 283 cu.in., 2-bbl engine and a Powerglide. I "earned" it at 15 y/o, but had to wait until I was 18 y/o to drive it. My Dad was a WWII Marine and things were done his way. I finally got behind the wheel in '72.
A brass filter screen under the needle valve seat was clogged with fine rust particles. An in-line filter was the quick fix until I located another gas tank.
@@nemolevola Judy Tyler had just wrapped up filming "Jailhouse Rock" with Elvis Presley. Judy and her husband decided to drive back home to New York. So, Judy purchased a 2 door hardtop, jet black limited addition 1957 Chevrolet Belair...off the show room floor (with zero miles on the odometer) 4 days later July 3, 1957 Judy, her Husband, Kitten, Puppy, and passenger in another car died in a horrendous head on broadside crash just 3 miles north of Rock River, Wyoming.😭💔
I will never forget the moment in oh 1966 when I was walking with my friends in the Bronx. We came upon a brand new I think Dodge Charger. This was my first sight of a FASTBACK rear window. We were stopped in our 12 year old tracks. Awed by that car and checking it out over and under. That moment, I can see it so vividly.! That car was BOSS.!
Me too, goofydog! And it's not because I was born May of that year. As a VERY young child (age 2!!) just learning to talk my Dad told me I'd point and make a fuss over that car while we were driving, and if I saw one in the parking lot. I love seeing them at car shows and hope to again once things normalize to whatever extent they do. I've got framed ads for them and some high-end diecast models for them too. I also love the '58, '59 & '60 (just not as much), then it skips ahead to the '63 Impala. :-)
@@robmcgowan4034 You left out the '55? I believe that is the most popular of the Tri-Five model which included the '56 and the '57. The Tri-Five was broken up the '58 which changed basically everything that drew the Tri-Five models. In fact, the public didn't like that year either. I've owned 2 '57's and nothing has satisfied me when scootin' around town.
@@goofydog2 Gee, I hope that doesn't mean you're mad at me? The model we know as the '58 was supposed to BE the '57 to compete with the all-new Ford and Plymouth for '57 but apparently wasn't ready. This is why the '57 Chevy was given such a drastic facelift, to appear to be as new as the others. I take it you don't like the '58 either. That's okay. Just remember it was the next logical step as the windshield and rear windows wee on the '57 Buicks and Cadillac's first. Would you have preferred Chevy have done yet another facelift on that model? Now I'm curious as to why you feel the way you do about the '58.
My dad bought a '57 Chevy brand new. It had the "Power Pack." It had a 4 barrel carb and the stupid "Power Glide" transmission. The transmission went out at least 3 times. The engine, was the 283, and it never stopped running.
Don't doubt you at all about that particular Power Glide (with a cast iron case no less) in that particular car completely failing three times. Ironically, later on the Power Glide was improved enough by Hot Rodders with after market components to become one the most rugged, dependable and preferred transmissions in drag racing.
if that “stupid” transmission went out several times it was probably a troublesome Turboglide and not a Powerglide! Powerglide s were great transmissions. Why they built Turboglides from 57-61 I’ll never know! They were a POS!
If you want to see a REAL scientific demonstration of Chevrolet superiority, check out "Comperative of Chevrolet Caprice---Ford LTD---Plymouth VIP 1966.wmv" on David Martinez YT channel from 10 yrs ago. Btw, this comparative was sponsored by Chevrolet. They a "balance test" showing the suprior ride of Chevrolet by balancing a quarter on a flat spot of the dash WHILE THE CAR IS IN MOTION......believe it or not the coin does not tip over! Maybe TRICK photography was used OR the coin was GLUED to the dash. The real kicker was.........they NEVER showed the "test" being done on the Ford or Plymouth! LOL And, of course, THE CHEVROLET COMES OUT ON TOP in every category. This "comperative" by Chevrolet is an absolute JOKE!!!!
Starting at 7:40 you can watch the driver in the Ford/Mercury 2 door hardtop come out of the left merge lane and cut-off and nearly side swipe the fellow in the pick-up truck (?)! It doesn't appear the drivers back then were any better.
Haha, some fellow's dumb driving mistake is forever engrained into a Chevy ad, being watched 60 years later. The driver probably didn't think twice about that event, that it would have such a profound effect on the future. I mean, we spent a good half minute each typing these comments, which is surely 1000 times what the driver was expecting the event would have on the future. He thought that the day would just be forgotten, but it actually impacted us to an extent. It makes you wonder how different the future would be for every single action you take. What if you decided that going to the supermarket the day you made your comments instead of watching RU-vid was a better idea, and ended up buying a lottery ticket and winning a billion dollars? You would never know. How big of a difference would it make if you never spent the time reading this comment? If in an alternate dimension you never read this comment, how different would it be if in both dimensions you teleported exactly 10 years into the future? Maybe you'd find yourselves at home in one dimension, and at McDonald's in the other. In any case I would not want my driving skills to be showcased on an advertisement being watched 60 years in the future. We need time travel or interdimensional travel. That would solve everyone's problems. Rewind time and fix a mistake, or memorize the lottery numbers and rewind time. Travel to another dimension and steal from the federal treasury in that dimension, and return home. When somebody teleports to your dimension from another one and steals your money, teleport to another dimension and steal theirs. It would be a never-ending cycle of happy endings, as long as there are infinitely many dimensions. As long as money is your happiness. My happiness is food.
My 57 Chevy Bel Air is stil all original, even the upholstery has been well kept under the clear pastic cover. I will never consider it safe, a crash at 60 MPH could easily kill me in that hunk of metal, but I love it!
Wait till many years down the road they crash test these alongside modern cars.The 1960 Chevy crash test REALLY opened my eyes.THAT was a horror show.WELP,I'd love to sit here and talk,but I have a 1960 wagon to finish up so I can sell it.
But they are tested against cars that are moving much faster. Cars in that era were not driven as fast because people understood the speeds because the car through the driver gave feed back. Road deaths have not decreased per population.
In 1957 a man said these new cars have to many damned safety features. 1973 a man said these new cars have to many damned safety features. Today I say these new cars have to damned many distractions like that large ass iPad built into the dash and it makes to many noises
@@briankelly9347 In fender benders maybe. Very much not in serious crashes. The modern car will crumple to a point to absorb the crash energy, but the passenger cell will remain intact. Look up modern crash tests to see it in action and compare it to the very first, mid 90s ones on the EuroNCAP.
Cars have now begun getting higher and its REALLY clear that their weakness is their top heaviness. Notice how a lot of SUV drivers brake way down for corners?
@@keithammleter3824 Those 1950s cars were for cruising. Body roll was not an issue because the car gave the driver lots of feed back so the driver could feel the limits. Modern cars are powerful but sterile so that an old person with no reflexes and poor eyesight has no true feeling from the car.
It is interesting that in the 50's and also maybe early 60's they actually shot film, they were actual video! But in the late 60's and 70's those promos were those slideshows with the beeps! Haha I find that weird/interesting and would expect the opposite :)))
I love all the spec info in these old promos. They don't make cars this stylish anymore either. Now it's just about making them bigger and bigger. The American sedan is dead.
The irony of this film is that the National Institute for Highway Safety would not be founded for another year. True safety developments would begin soon after. At this point, that steering wheel and steering shaft is still a lethal weapon, and everyone sitting inside the car is still a potential projectile without seatbelts.
That true safety is not safer. Road deaths have not changed at all. The amount of accidents has slightly increased. For all that safety cars are now faster but with a lot less feed back. Many drivers do not understand the difference today between 40mph and 60mph.
@@joe6096 No the number is exactly the same overall per population. While numbers surviving accidents has increased so has the number of deaths. The problem is that seat belts are a good idea for safety of 1950s vehicles they are useless in fast moving modern vehicles.
*Nelly Farnsworth* A Handling anecdote … Aussie motoring journo of the 60s/70s (?) Evan Green was commenting on a fancy US car mag’s comparison of an E-Type Jag and a Mustang (It may have been the Mach III). The mag’s test driver/journo had claimed that the ‘Stang handled as well as the Jag, to which Green responded: “The average American motorist wouldn’t know handling if he found it in bed with him”.
Hardly, I remember my dad driving one (yup 1957)and saying that is a terrible handling car, hated 57 chebys ever sense and over the years has also proved how bad they are
Bench seats don't have side support and they can get throwed out from the car during a side impact, those are the reasons car manufacturers don't use them anymore.
The problem with the era of seatbelts is that the cars have became more sterile and faster and overall traffic speeds have increased as drivers have no feed back. Thus nullifying seat belts as a real protection overall. Clearly being in a modern moving vehicle without a seat belt is crazy.
My favorite uncle had a '58 when they came out, Anything my uncle liked and drove, I liked them as well. I was just saying they were not a real popular model. A lot of people disliked them, I had another cousin who had the '58 Impala! That was nicer than the pther Bel Air models But I liked them all, but not as much as the Tri-Five's which had a handling advantage over the '58. Yeah, so not pissed off at anyone, especially another 50's Chevrolet fan...
4:41 I suppose this explains why we didn't get SUVs until after the 1970s. Weren't most cars sent out from the showroom with absurdly thin Bias-Ply tires until 1973 or 1974? Maybe that's just when they switched to Radials but there were still wider tires available? I don't know.
A commercial talking about "safety features" in a 1957 Chevy, a car that had no seatbelts, which meant probable death in a major head-on collision. How ironic, lol. These cars were historic works of art, though. Beautiful cars.
@@markdraper3469 Mr Scott I know you can handle that small problem..if you need any logical solution consult mr spock..I need warp factor 7 ASAP so we can leave this crazy time warp and enter a more sane and peacefull time where people aren't acting so unstable and just plain crazy..
