Chevy was SALTY over 1957... VERY SALTY! Trolls Plymouth hard in this one... The Golden Commando is "nothing special"... etc etc The slant 6 is dangerous!
@@autochronicles8667 Straight six cylinder engines are inherently perfectly balanced--the best setup of any (except maybe V12s). I'm sure the engine's slant had no noticeable effect on weight balance--depends on what axis (vertical position) it was rotated!! Pontiac Tempest had a slant four in 1962--half a 389 V8.
The reason for the slant 6 mopar engine is because of its longer stroke so its slanted for hood clearance. A slant6 you could beat the hell out of and would run forever.
By 1960 the tail fin styling of both brands had faded significantly in popularity. Both would be gone the following year. On the other hand Plymouth was clearly more advanced technically . The Torqueflite automatic transmission was the best on the market for decades . The new slant six had a super high durability and dependability record over that same time period. Roadability of the torsion bar suspension was the best you could get in domestic cars. Eventually all cars would be built with unibody.
There were complaints about the '59-'60 batwing fins that the horizontal extensions hanging over the car's flanks causing lift on the rear end. Plymouth's fins were somewhat more prone to crosswinds, but they were more visible to the driver spotting the corners when backing up.
The '61 Chevy had a clever "ridge" that horizontally branched out from the center (kind of like the '59) but wrapped around the sides, finishing-out (so to speak) the '58-'60 look, while at the same time, ushering-in the clean, tasteful look of the '60s that would follow through 1964.
I sold Chevrolets through the 70's and mid 80's. There is no telling how much money GM spent on propoganda for the sales departments in all divisions. The sad thing is the vehicles got steadily worse in all american cars from 73 on when the companies were run by accountants instead of engineers. I remember a sales meeting in the early 70's where the sales manager was laughing about people he knew that bought a "Toyota instead of a Vega. Even he was brainwashed.
@@MisterMikeTexas 60 mopars were fully dipped so they didn't rust out like the 57/58s... but the rust myth lasted for the next 20 years and the 60 Plymouth was a new minor sheet metal but the same underlying tech. The 59 Chevy was rushed... the 60 Chevys probably still had bugs. I will have to research a bit.
Poor Mrs. Parker can't manage to push a button with her left hand. I wonder how she will be able to operate the Chevy's lights and wipers, which are on the left? Of course she couldn't drive a Ford at all, the ignition switch was on the left.
I have always contended the 1957-58 Plymouth looked best of that generation...and by 1960, the Plymouth design was so gunked-up I have often said "Suddenly it's 1957!" I wasn't aware Chevy was doing the same thing! 😂
58 was the last decent look Ply. until 1967 with the Barracuda, then the 69 Road Runner which I had. The 68' Road Runner rear tail lights and front grill looked weak. 70 Road Runner looked good too.
I was an estimator at an automotive collision shop and I used to get old timers who would complain that “they don’t make them like they used to”. I would show them the government crash video of a 1959 Chevrolet hitting a 2009 Malibu. Nuff said!
"Sonoramic V8" = Ramcharger, a well regarded setup. "TurboGlide" = Buick's Dynaflow, aka, "diarrhea drive" not well regarded. Torsion bars are identical to coil springs (both 'twist' under load) but my recollection of Chevy's 'Jet Smooth Ride' was that it was ultra soft and swayed and bounced a lot. Dealers would underinflate the tires to exaggerate the soft ride.
So some traded in their brand new 1960 Plymouth in 1960. That was a gimmick. Chevy probably bought a new Plymouth just to have in their back room to make their customers believe that buyers sold their Plymouth in for a chevy
"...To the girls young and sweet And the spacious back seat Of our roommate's beat-up Chevrolet.... To the beer and Benzedrine And the way that the dean Tried so hard to be pals with us all...." ----Tom Lehrer (b. 1928, long life to him!) _The Alma Mater_
@@MarinCipollina The 57s were bad cars. The nearly identical looking 58s were a considerable improvement, but still not as good as the 51 and older Chrysler products. The 60 was better still. Remember, the Chevy, Cadillac, and maybe the Pontiac had that X member frame with no side rails. I love the looks of the 58 - 60 GM cars, but safety is not their strong point.
Plymouth had a 3 speed auto trans. Much better than the stupid power glide that seriously impacted performance . I’ve owned both. Particularly for 6 cylinder, which didn’t have enough torque to accelerate much after the sudden clunk into high gear. For manual transmission, the Chevrolet was better because you could get overdrive which Plymouth no longer offered. The slant six was a much better engine than the antiquated splash lube stovebolt six, overall. The Plymouth 318 was a better engine than the Chevrolet small block also.
The early 60s Mopar styling was hideous. I was a kid when all these cars were in the dealers, even then I was a car nut and focused more on Chevy and Ford products. In 1960 our family car was a 1955 Rocket 88 Oldsmobile 2door hardtop. A 50s classic.
Without a doubt, the 1960 Chevrolet was a better looking car than that Plymouth by far. There were just some years during the '60s where Mopar just didn't get it right on styling and 1960 was one of them. Of course that is just my opinion. Other people may have a different one and that's fine.
My father was in Ford Management and his best friend of that time in GM management. To hear those two talking about Chrysler! LOL This was in the early 1970's. They both knew Ford and GM put out a lot of very poorly engineered and built vehicles. By the end of the 1970's my father had totally lost faith in Ford Products. He was happy to take the early retirement option as soon as it popped up. With Chrysler they were complaining they put race cars on the street. How dependable and tough they were etc. You really were hard pressed back then to beat a slant six or 318 for dependability. The Chrysler Big Blocks did really well in Nascar and at the drag strip. Being in management gave my father the opportunity to buy cars only sold to management or other special people. We had our Ford performance cars. Dang it if there wasn't always a Mopar around that would beat them like a red headed stepchild. Growing up in the car family I did set me up to eventually become a Mopar person.
Chryslers engineering was nothing to sneeze at... the market share thing though... and they were banned from Nascar pretty much with their Hemi... The industry was certainly interesting at that time. The fight for market share was intense.
Since Chevrolet and Plymouth were still clinging onto 1950’s styling in 1960, my vote goes to the all new 1960 Ford Galaxie 500. Far far ahead of Plymouth and of course Chevrolet, Ford was definitely a good buy that year since they did away with the dog-leg windshield post and was about one of the widest cars of that year.
Ford was actually TOO wide, wider than allowed by law for a passenger car in most states (no Federal regs yet). Everyone agreed to look the other way for 1960 as long as Ford made the '61 a bit narrower, which was why it was such a total reskin.
@@nlpnt - Today's car width standard is 80". I had a '59 Olds 98 that was 80.8" wide. I had to have the guards stop traffic coming the other way (via traffic light) on the Washington Crossing bridge between NJ and PA!
This was nearly 4 years before I came into the picture (I'm the youngest), but my parents' first new car (and first Ford) was a red, very base-model, 1960 Ford 4-door sedan. From what my Dad recollected, it was a 6-cylinder, 3 on the tree, manual choke stripper that didn't even originally have a heater! He got one complimentary courtesy of a mechanic friend in the service department who had been a G.I., like Dad was at the time. Dad said he also prettied the car up a bit with white sidewalls and full wheel covers. My parents were previously not brand-loyal, having owned mostly GM second-hand mid-price makes, a used 48 Packard, and then-most recently a 54 DeSoto. But the Ford impressed Dad a lot, and by the time I came around, we were a Ford family, with a new 64 Country Sedan, 352-powered.
Couple things..... 'Salty' is a FLAVOR, NOT A MOOD...... Chevy was understandably frustrated after getting left in the dust in 1957.......the Chrysler lineup blew away the entire Generic Motors family for '57.....and they're still crying. The '57 Chevy looked old and dated still on the showroom floor. Plymouth had already left Chevy in the rearview for good by 1960. Styling belonged to Chrysler: debate over. SonoRamic was a brilliant engineering solution that propelled a '61 Dodge to 60mph in well under 7 seconds. That left EVERYONE in the dust, and particularly humiliated chevy, who had no answer for all the the D-500 Dodges they couldn't catch. The slant-6 was likewise an intelligent engineering solution to lowering hoods for better styling. But don't worry: for those seeking to be overwhelmed with blandness, Chevy could answer the bell with a nicely boring L-6. and antiquated hood dagmars....suddenly chevy was crying for 1952.... Other than quirky brake setup and extra care needed for corrosion protection, chevy was left hopelessly in the past thanks to Chrysler's Forward Look. Best of all, as a Ford guy, it was especially nice to see Chrysler's efforts shove chevy out of first-place sales for 1957....opening that honor for Ford's superior lineup.
Yeah, we've owned three 1961 Plymouths that each clocked over 250k miles, so I too laugh at all the chevies who cost triple to not even last half as long. Very amusing indeed!
GM and Ford beat Chrysler. Full frame strong chassis, four corner coil springs ford stable comfort and longer suspension travel in real world potholes longer lasting/drpendable, sensible styling" better resale value
the x frame was horrible... :) and GM would move to the unibody... now everything is unibody so it works. GM and Ford did certainly win with market share though.
I disliked the Chevy when I was a toddler and the years haven't improved it. I remember a neighbor having to regrade his driveway because the preposterous overhang behind the batwing Chevy was dragging when they turned in and started up the hill. My parents had just bought a new Studebaker Lark and had no such problems.
In 57 and 58 Chrysler corp had some great designs by Virgil Exner. The 1960 model year was the last for Harley Earl before retirement IIRC. GM owned the title in body design from the late 30's to the late 50's. Chrysler crushed it in 55-59 and faded fast by 61. FoMoCo started to come on in 60 and had a strong showing in the 60's, but the GM studio led by Bill Mitchel was a powerhouse from 61-75. Mechanical design was another story as all of the Big Three had there own hits and misses.
Yeah I really love the history that went on the 50s and 60s US auto industry... Crazy times and interesting. The auto makers were huge drivers in the economy... Like the Amazons of yesterday...
You are kidding right?? Chevy styling 55-57 is the Epitome of 50s classics. Even the 58' looks better than the 58 Plymouth. Others agree as Chevy outsold Plymouth every year by a lot.
@@autochronicles8667 Not in terms of total sales.. During 1950s, Plymouth was frequently 3rd highest selling brand.. They made some interesting cars after that, but sales NEVER recovered.
The Dart looked better than either of them, but the flat-iron taillight Rambler or the Studebaker Lark would be my choice. Come to think of it, the '60 Edsel looked better than either. And I'd take the '60 DeSoto over the Chevy.
