1960 Chrysler vs. Mercury and Thunderbird Dealer Promo Film 

That’s a pretty brilliant advertising strategy

Wouldn't you....lol

Well it's a Chrysler advertisement so....

Lol

Where's Cynthia now? Pushing up daisies?

The Chrysler was a good looking car. The Mercury was kind of a dog.

Too funny!!!-- yet so true!!!

There mind was --" somewhere else""

I had a 59 New Yorker, my first car.

I remember those days as well

She didn't seem to have one though.

I am in midst of restoring a 61 imperial

Yeah, but us good old boys always knew what was best. This was when music was soft, girls were sweet, and cars were strong. Maybe another golden age will appear, doesn't seem likely but I hope for our kids' sake it happens.

@Liberty Tree - Elect any of the Commie Socialist Democrats, and on a downward spiral to economic doom ..

Yeah, just look at a woman today, and they scream sexual harassment. But they develop low self-esteem if you ignore them. You can't win.

@Herman Greenfield Always slandering Slavics.

Time to get rid of the feminazis. The good ole days were way better than today.

the ford had a good feel when you set in it .i had a t bird loved that car the feel the drive.girls loved it low to the road.better than 61 trans in them no good .my frind had 61 my car was alot better than his all power windows not working rain getting in it not good in cold weather

Not surprising. Chrysler Corp. was the smallest of the "Big 3" American manufacturers and was always outsold by GM and Ford.

Interesting statistics.

@billmcdevitt1298 AMC and its predecessors never got up to the level of Chrysler in sales, much less Ford or GM.

Your right, hope she can phase through the large cast of metal blocking the way for 3 quarters of the seat in that Mercury. Use your brain, that isn't a scam, you couldn't back up further if you tried to get out whereas the slide style seating in the Chysler transitions to a much larger space to get out.

+matrox On a smooth road at moderate speeds, the Olds probably rode better than the Chrysler. But good ride and good high speed handling are two different things. . . . especially in 1960. Today's cars can manage both quite well.

By today's standard the handling and performance of these cars were rubbish.

By yesterday's standards, modern cars are mere cookie cutter appliances.

@@johnazhderian5734 I can assure you the modern American car will definitely "not" be admired, desired and sought after like these classics!!! The cars of today are about as exciting as a "Wet Weekend!" To coin a phrase!

Unibody was a company too, not just a form of support. And of course you end with the very bizarre delinquent phrase "Lol".

Better than the 57-59s and ALL cars had rust issues back then. The unibody is rocksolid and had a FEW weak spots, that can be easily taken care of, but even with rear quarters and rockers gone these cars are still rigid and driveable. Wanna see "shit" bodys? Look at European cars of the 60s and 70s. These cars were literally falling appart.

Lol, and other cars didnt?

Chrysler's literally rusted out in 5 years on these cars. Not many left today.

@@bigblockjalopy In germany they started salting the winter roads in the early 60's, that was the doom of many a car

I'm also a Buick guy who appreciates Chryslers. Historic note: Walter P. Chrysler was an employee of....Buick!

+WAQWBrentwood Actually, Walter P was president of Buick. . . .

+herman452 Correct,

Very true. My Merc used a lot of oil. It had the 312 V8.

Kumbaya; isn't that what has brought us to our present level of despair?

Me too, rust permeates my bones and has taken its' toll. I was not all that convinced of the Chrysler "rust cure", however, the deep rinse and acid etch prior to paint is now an industry standard. The 1960 Chrysler design didn't win the day however their mfg method (for rust proofing) has become the standard world wide.

Truth!

@@buddyroeginocchio9105 decades of engineering any process improves it. Some of these people don't get it

The fault for the owner, not the automobile as you'd soon to figure out, unless you live right in heart at the north pole.

The '60s and '61s were Virgil Exner's last good styling years at Chrysler. Except for Dodge (what were they thinking?)

Right on! 1960 Chrysler was absolutely beautiful. Dodge, I don't know it was just weird. Plymouth, what were they thinking, the forward look takes a backward slant? Desoto, just a toned down Chrysler. In 1961 they suicided the Desoto just like Ford suicided the Edsel in 1960.

The marvelous lines established for Chrysler Corp. cars in 1957 were out of style by 1960-'61, but the company stuck with them for several more years, unfortunately. By then they looked peculiar and unattractive.

Two big after 1958

I always referred to the Thunderbirds at that time as having "jukebox" styling.

They lasted as long as the life of the car.

PETER MAINWALD Chrysler engineering: Did you know that the for "years" Chrysler had no Park function in their automatic transmission (even though the Plymouth and Dodge did) You put it in neutral, depressed the parking brake and prayed that it didn't roll away on you. I had my 1962 roll away so many times I would use steel wheel wedges under two tires when I parked it.

+inkey2 Not to be an a$$, but isn't that the same method used with a manual tranny, I never relied on that thumb sized parking pawl in ANY automatic tranny and set the parking brake as routine.

+WAQWBrentwood but in a manual tranny you can park it in gear and use the parking brake as well. Couldn't do that with a chrysler automatic.

Chrysler's parking brake was a drum on the drive shaft. Not particularly effective.

@@2packs4sure bullet proof drivetrain.

The Edsel was suicided by Ford in 1960. (Desoto) The sister product to the Chrysler was suicided in 1961. If you doubt me look at the 1960 Edsel and 1961 Desoto respectively. Here are two examples of anti-design used to kill a product line.

Edsel was never a success, market-positioned to compete with Mid-range Fords to low-line Lincolns from the start of the marque, and the recession of '58 didn't he;p. DeSoto was successful from the start, but Chrysler initiated the DeSoto brand when they were unsuccessful at buying established independent brand Dodge in 1929. When Chrysler finally acquired Dodge after introducing the DeSoto, WPC's corporate structure positioned Dodge firmly between the upper-mid-priced DeSoto and the low-priced four-cylinder Plymouth, just at the start of the Great Depression. Through the late fifties, Chrysler added a low-priced Firesweep model based on the Dodge body to the DeSoto line and pushed the mid-priced Windsor down-market to compete with the upper end of the Dodge range, effectively squeezing DeSoto out. Edsel and DeSoto were killed off by corporate cannibalism.

My first car as a teen was a 60 Mercury Monterrey. Didn't look as good as the Chrysler and was always having issues of lack of quality.

True .. the onlt women around were the ones serving the coffee and donuts, and cleaning up after the meeting was over .. You KNOW that's true!

@@classic-kool yeah, great days!😌😉😊

more like David Seville and the Chipmunks

Nah, in those days, that was considered to be normal, acceptable behavior.

Not in 1960 lol

Ralph and Herman have heard all this BS before. William is the new guy trying to suck up to the boss.

"suck" being the operative word here

Yeah, I was thinking that might be the case. The charms of Cynthia and her twin were lost on William.

Yes, we were, unfortunately.

Yes, yes they were.

The audience were the sales staff. You would not show this to the end customer.

Yeah, you do that!!! Bland & boring like every other car built in the last 20yrs!!!

The personnel (HR) department was run by men.

Did they even have "human resources" departments in 1960?

This is not Party Approved Correct Thinking and Speech.

Yet another woke millenial!!!

@@keithdukes5990 Me?!

Sue Barker, ask any Chrysler 300 5.2 l semi-hemi owner, "They still leak."

Agreed. Correct me if I am wrong, but Fiat now owns Chrysler, don't they? I must admit styling on their products is real kick ASZ!

I can't understand why they still have that problem. The 300 is their top of the line too. Also, many of Chrysler's interior trim pieces are some what lacking for a car of that status.

Those problematic points are not flaws, they're futures. Put in place to increase aftermarket sales, to help augment what they feel is the true value of their product, and to keep the initial pricepoint down.

Sue Barker. Boy do I remember that. The humidity on a rainy day was a nightmare event for my 1969 Plymouth VIP. It was an upscale Plymouth III and it was near impossible to start and then would dangerously stall on rainy days until the engine was very warm.

Can't believe 5 people up it's this haha.

+Jeffrey Cruz up voted.

dear albert fish