Never did get a decent origin story beyond the day of manufacture. Just “here’s its first victim,” then “here’s it sitting for decades unused because it’s owner somehow died mysteriously.” Maybe the book had more info but all we got in the movie was that old man trying to get rid of a car his brother loved so dearly.
@@MisterMikeTexas And how many Plymouths did YOU OWN!?.I had many Plymouths and the 1966 had a little rust on rear quarter,How about the 1973 Chevy pick up,I had a red one,my brother had the lime green,his bed rusted off totally,mine nearly did! Dad had some Mercurys in mid 70s a White one a bronze one both had severe rust,had a toyota had a honda,both had a lot of rust, Okay cars, MADE OF STEEL,Roads have SALT,Salt makes steel RUST!!.
Jess Hadfield A cording to the video the Plymouth is better of the two. Side by side I like the Plymouth over the Chevy. I grew up after the 1957 Chevy but heard it for ever guys thinking great about it. Was never into 1950's cars. I say the only one like was the later 1950's Corvette.
You cant, they’ve all rusted to dust due to inferior rushed-to-production engineering. You can, however, find a perfectly decent ‘57 Chevrolet still good for lifetime of service.
My first car was a used 57 plymouth. It was a reliable well made car. A friend drove into someone's bedroom and only had to replace the grill and fender. I lived in California and there was no rust on that car and I know others weren't so lucky
My grandfather looked at a gold /white top 57 chevy bel air v8 and 57 Plymouth belevdere 4dr same color and went to order the 57 plymouth because it had more engineering feats with a 3 spd auto even though he had trouble free '51 bel air 6 cyl with powerglide but he went to pick up the 4 dr Plymouth and saw a sport fury with off whit4e and gold trim, my dad talked him into looking at it and they heard it start and it was quicker and had a higher top speed than 301 dr and 57 chevy bel air and once they both heard it start and revved it to make the unique dual quad vacumn fully opened carbs open- that was it. Sales contract was torn up, and they asked to take it home for the night with a deposit and finalized on saturday morning. The engine was good and they took the fury across country and it held over 80 mph from coast to coast and uphills in Colorado air and never overheated, missed and ran better when driven like a police cruiser but low quality and moving to Ca extended its life from rust but from a stop light in Denver, a 4spd 57 bel air just left it in the dust but on US 80 and 40 the fury had the cooling system and brakes to beat it [ and another story in salt lake about it having a 1/4 pedal left when floored to 120 and not missing ]after driving the fury , they left 57 bel air felt like a poor mans cadillac. and I guess the fury's look and power sold them, it became my grandmother's car and many family members took their driving tests in it, it stalled with the push button transmission hesitation and "hot start issue" when parallel parking and in one case needed to lay rubber to keep running when hot and backing into a spot uphill . The inspector smiled and was tech for a city garage and said the police plymouths stalled hot and handled well but chevy's had more room and was more comfortable and felt like a better car than it was. He liked the fury and told her how the officers would jab the top or bottom of accelerator to catch speeders depending on need, the plymouths would also a make special "open carbs" sound and if he heard it , that was a fail, She passed the test. We always wondered what happened to it after it was traded with 95 k miles for new 68 cutlass in CA. Many said they were decent cars when basic but when ordered to be like a desoto or imperial, they got too complicated. We have many family stories on the fury, the dog liked to ride in it too and would jump when it started.
I graduated from High School in 1965 and remember these cars very well. Boy, you don't know how much I miss those times. There were gas wars in the 1960s and gasoline went down to .10 cents a gallon and we paid with REAL MONEY (SILVER DIMES).
@@scootergeorge7089 The last year I saw U.S. 90% silver coins were dated 1964 because in 1965 the coinage act was passed to remove them from circulation. I remember many of my fellow G.I.s (1966) on board the U.S.S Maurice Rose being shipped to the Vietnam War were making rings out of Silver quarters by hammering them with spoons. Back then, (early 1960s) it cost 10 cents to see a movie. Small pop corn, coke, candy bar (Snickers/Milky Way etc.) ALL cost a Nickel...EACH!....No tax either.
@@juans6639 - I said 1963, it was '64. My bad. But I NEVER saw gas for a dime. Never. Used to ride with my Dad and he's stop at a gas station and the attendant would ask, "Fill it up?" Dad would say, 'A buck's worth of regular" and get 4 to 5 gallons.
I Drove my baby brother home in a red&white 1957 Plymouth station wagon in 1966 Dad&Mom sat in back seat...w baby brother. He passed away@40 in 2006 RIP Joe love u brother.
@@maryrafuse2297 Mary my family were all semi pro musicians,Joe&I were better,Joe was one of the best singers I ever heard,Mom sort of loved him to death!,I had him an audition in Nashville(1985)Mom Ko'd that. Joe had just started back in church He loved Jesus,I'm 70 not very good health...so hope to see you on other side Mary!,Praise Jesus!!
@@mikehenson819 Thank you Mike,My brother was friends with some of the Hinsons So gospel group,I see you name spelled with an E..have a friend Tom Henson a great fiddle player in Southern Indiana.
Does anyone else find it interesting that once upon a time car ads actually told you about the car in great depth; whereas, these days advertisers seem to think that Blue Tooth connectivity is the most important thing to potential buyers. Must be the same people who post endless drivel on Facebook. So glad I grew up in the 50s and started driving in 1965 before the world became bubble wrapped.
@@badad0166 Yeah, I know. It's obviously way too long for a TV ad. But I can remember as a kid in the late 50s eagerly anticipating and watching the ads that came out in the fall for the new models. In retrospect I guess there was a lot of BS handed out about "lower and longer" with buzz words like "Power Glide" [2 spd auto - what crap] but at least everyone including my parents got a bit excited. These days who cares?
Exner's design for the 1957 Chrysler lineup was so revolutionary that it sent the GM designers back to the drawing board. That's why GM's 1958 models became a one year body style. Too bad Chrysler rushed production. Quality suffered a result.
Nothing influenced GM more than Chrysler's 1957 tailfins. Quality was terrible on '57 Mopars. I had a relative who owned a '57 Dodge. Trans was slipping on day one.
My father bought a new '55 Chevy with V8 and it had a lot of problems - most issues were relatively easy shade tree fixes today but the dealer techs weren't familiar with the new motor. Some pistons cracked and after that was repaired the motor burned a lot of oil when it was only a few months old. When he traded it they found a bolt was missing from the Power-glide which explained why he had to continually add transmission fluid.
True, Exner loved the fact that Torsion bars could lower the car and used this in the design. Chrysler was actually cash strapped at this time. The previous sales years were not good. They got money $250 million from Prudential to develop the next line up. I just wish that one car line up was not winged up. I think Desoto was the best looking with the fins, however the Imperial look was, imho, too much. But then the famous gun sight tail lights would not have been.
Agreed. Watching this with modern eyes, it sounds bitter. Like “How come Chevy is still around and we aren’t? I mean, just look at their 57! It’s shorter and narrower! Why would anyone want a car like that?”
Plymouth was sustained by police car sales in the 60s, 70s and early 80s. Once Chevy took the lead in police car sales, the handwriting was on the wall for Plymouth.
The '57 Chevy became the icon that it did because it was the only one of the '57 "Low-Priced Three" whose bugs were sufficiently worked out to not immediately decay to clunkerdom. It was GM's first "Good Used Car" that didn't have enough appeal to new-car buyers, very much in the vein of the later 3800-engined cars and Cavalier/Sunfires.
Shit, millions of people love the look of the 57 Chevy and could care less about that bullshit. Hot Rodders been building the since day one. Not much looks better than a properly built 57 Chevy gasser. Perfect hotrod material, that's why people love them. I've owned a couple myself years ago. When I was a kid in the 70s, my dream car was a 57 Chevy built as a drag car. An AMT 57 Chevy model car kit I built as a youth is what did it for me.
55 56 57 Chevies were popular with gear heads because they were the first Chevy with a V8 and after a couple of years you could pick one up for peanuts. Any Chev engine would fit. Junkyards were full of them and hop up parts were available cheap. 58 and up Chevs were heavier and more complicated, and the 348 and 409 engines were dogs. All cars rusted through in a few year if you lived in the rust belt or near the ocean. Plymouths were bad but Chevs and Fords weren't much better.
@@matrox It was Ford, not Plymouth, that outsold Chevrolet in '57 to GM's embarrassment. First time since the early '30s that Chevy wasn't top seller. Plymouth had traditionally been #3 but in the '50s often slipped to fourth behind Buick.
I started in advertising in the 1960s and worked at Ross Roy/BBD&O (Chrysler's agency) in the late 90s. This style of presentation makes me feel all warm/fuzzy/proud/nostalgic inside.
It's all whether you like 1950s proportions or 1960s proportions. The 1957s were a huge engineering change for Chrysler and were intended for 1958 model year. The decision came in development to rush them out for fall 1956 introduction. Needed more testing.
No matter which car was better, they both exhibited unique styling as did all other cars of the day. Today with the emphasis on aerodynamics, you can't tell one from another. We have lost something in the interest of fuel efficiency.
Unfortunately, most people did not like the torsion-aire ride because it was too firm. Ford actually outsold both in 1957 because Ford offered the softest ride and that is what people wanted. The 1957 Chevrolet will bring in 5 times more today in terms of dollars.
@@waynejohnson1304 thanks for the feedback. Since a week or 2 i got hooked on the fords from 1960 like the starliner or the thunderbird. The kind of beauty you don’t see today.
@@luckym0nk3y A neighbor up the street from us father had a 60'Ford. I never liked the styling. At the time we had a 55' Rocket 88 Oldsmobile 2 door hard top. Another 50s classic. I wish my father would have kept it.
One of the cars I looked at as my first car was a 57 Ply. The owner wanted $50 for it in 1975. I went to look at it, the owner tried to start it then the engine seized. We checked the oil and the oil was like sludge. I saved up some more money and ended up getting a 69' Ply. Road Runner. Another real classic today.
I had a 1957 Plymouth Belvedere 2-door hardtop with the 318-V8 and one 4-barrel carb, and Torqueflite, two-tone beige and yellow, my parents bought it for me like new in May 1965 for my high school senior graduation gift. It was fast and fun to drive and I felt important and part of the cool guys on campus on my last month of senior class before graduating in June. I loved it! I also had a 1958 Plymouth Fury, like new, in 1968, Buckskin Beige and gold trim, with the Golden Commando 350-V8 and dual quads, with Torqueflite. That thing was the fastest car I ever had! It could do a quarter mile at 5 seconds flat! All factory stock! And in 1969, I bought a 1960 Plymouth Fury 2-door hardtop with the 383-V8, single 4-barrel carb, and Torqueflite.
Funny how the Plymouth six cylinder engine, which was still an old side valve design from the 1930s, was not mentioned. An overhead valve six, which Chevrolet had always had, wasn't available until 1960, with the famous slant six.
@@saxongreen78 That's why even in '59 that 2/3 of Plymouths came with the 230. The 25 inch L-head was better in some ways and continued to be used on a limited number of trucks until '68. The older Stovebolts with babbitt often got replaced with the newer ones. I don't know why GM was slow in upgrading that motor, I guess it worked well enough. Go babbitt! I'd like a video of a GM engine factory pouring babbitt - seems like more work than its worth.
Chrysler thought the 6 cylinder engine would soon be a thing of the past for standard-size cars. The 58 recession changed their mind though. That's why the Slant 6 came as a larger 225 cube version instead of only a 170.
In 1957 Fury was a sub-series of the Belvedere; it was not until two years later that Fury became its own series. One year later, the 318 (5.2-liter) "V-800" engine was increased in displacement to 350 cubic inches (5.7 liters) and became the "Golden Commando" V8. The year after that, 1959, the displacement was increased again, to 361 cubic inches (5.9 liters).
This early '57s had metal treatment issues, as well as some torsion bar issues (they were too thin), maybe the cost of all new design had a negative effect on the product's quality but, that was for sure solved by the "face lifted" '58 model. I have one and it is safe to say it is surprising, even to modern standards, how it corners for being a 50's car, the smoothness of its shifting and power once you want to overtake, the crazy amount of room in it and the comfort. Brakes are sure not the best, that has to be said as well. Sure the analisis if the video is purely trying to sell Plymouths and trying to underestimate the Chevy in a quite ridicule and annoying way. But sure Chrysler corp suspensions, engines, transmissions... Were ahead back in the day.
Mr. Walter Chrysler and his company were always ahead with implementing new innovative engineering. Great example was hydraulic braking systems at a time when Henry Ford was slow to abandon cable actuated brakes.
Actually, the Plymouth's brakes were indeed better PROVIDING they are properly adjusted and "bedded in". Properly adjusting them is the problem with them.
@@michaelbenardo5695 Adjusted mines many times and were fully rebuilt.. Front "total contact" brakes with twin wheel cylinders worked fine the first first or second step on them... But never the third.... I ended by fitting front disc brakes... Everything was solved. With this brakes and power steering, its nearly like driving a modern thing!
I always remember the 58 Chevy and the beginning of the X-frame GM's. These were known for breaking half in side collisions and dropping the rear bumpers on the ground when rusted.
Along with the Ramblers, the '57 GM cars that actually still had chair-height seating. Those Mopars were, across the line, famous for their thin, underpadded seats.
That Plymouth was pretty sweet riding on the interstate, over the chevy ....i am a lover of the 1954 belair and 1956 belair, never really liked the '57 or 58 belair's. Between 1965 and 1970 Chrysler dodge Plymouth ruled!
The little “beep” was the signal to hit the button for the next slide. This was a “film strip” with an accompanying sound recording. This was better than trying to get salespeople to read a training manual, and the little slide projector and phonograph were much less expensive and easier to run than a regular movie projector.
Around the third "bink" I was transported through time, back to my childhood classroom. There is a hypnotic Pavlovian effect from that "ding". "Fresh stimuli coming!" Slide shows remained viable and used right up to the early '90's in corporate stuff. Partly "if it ain't broke" and partly because slides could be easily edited for the market. Then came computers...
Those 57 Plymouth’s are definitely good looking, and make for a good movie car. I personally like the 55 Chevy more over the 57. The 55/56 Ford was also nice.
All the 50's cars had more style than cars today. And, although most of the cars were rusting through within 5 years, especially if you lived in the Midwest, Chrysler products were the worst. They did offer some strong engines, however.
I believe we will all agree that 1957 was a banner year for the American Auto Industry. Three Brother friends had one each of Chevy, Plymouth Fury and Ford. My favorite was the Ford however, the Chevy was one of the all times favorites.
There's no doubt in my mind , the 57 Chrysler s looked great and as popular as the 57 Chevy is and was it is not as impressive in the styling depth. Having said that I owned a 59 (58 Equivilent US model) right hand drive Australian assembled Desoto Firesweep that were arguably generally better assembled than some of the US model Chrysler bodies as they were considered luxury vehicles here and the South Australian assembly plant workers took a bit more care IMO. It had the 361cu 305 hp V8 providing plenty of power and through the excellent 3 speed Torqueflite not a 2 speed Powerglide as in the Chevy. Maybe due to Australia's warmer and drier climate rust was not as much of a problem and my 59 was still rust free in 1976. I also believe the Desoto was the better looking of the models, Plymouth, Dodge, except for the Chrysler 300 series, the Desoto's beautiful front grille and those 59 Caddy style bullet tail lamps were stunning IMHO. It was quite a stable platform and with a firmer set of shock absorbers handled very well and would stop on a dime, off course brake fade was a possibility on all drum brake models. I did have to replace some torsion bar/ front suspension bushes however but the replacements are held up well. Interestingly many American based models made in Australia were factory fitted with front disc brakes well before basic US models in the mid 60's.
When Christine came out, I had told my dad what a cool car the Plymouth was. He said the Chrysler products were garbage. Squeaks, rattles, engine and trans problems. My dad had a 56 Chevy in the day. None of my family liked Chrysler products. We are from South of Pittsburgh. Of course every car rusted out there!
Anyone with a CB or ham radio could hear a 58 Chevy coming from a couple blocks away. They had the noisiest ignition system of any car on the road at the time.
I rode many miles in both types of car as a kid. There were two 57 Chevies on my block, and a friend's dad had a 57 Plymouth he drove us took to the lake two or three summers. Once, playing around in the Plymouth when it was parked, I pushed 2 of the buttons on the push-button transmission, and, to my horror, they got stuck. Cover plate came off with a couple screws, and it was an easy fix. I remember the power steering in that car as being "one-finger" control. I can't say I was particularly crazy about the looks of either, but then I didn't necessarily dislike them. Ironically, I liked the tail lights on the 58 Plymouth more, and they were very similar to the 57 Shaker's. All that said, I'd have to say Plymouth made a pretty compelling case for themselves here. 290 horse, dual quad engine option? Way more tranny options with even overdrive available?? Except for the fact that the Chevy had that cool door in the fin hiding the gas cap, the Plymouth would seem to be the better buy. Nonetheless, car collectors certainly ended up favoring the Chevy. The first car I ever rode in was my Dad's 48 Plymouth. It had a great big gorgeous logo of a square-rigged sailing ship on the huge horn button in the middle of the steering wheel. Maybe it wasn't as big as I remember; after all, back then I could stand on the backseat and jump up and down, no problem. It's always weird to me how many seemingly timeless, 'permanent' auto brands and divisions have disappeared. Besides Plymouth, there's Oldsmobile, which, I think, was the second oldest marque in the world at the time they were shuttered. Mercury, DeSoto, Imperial, Packard, Hudson, the entire American Motors as well as Studebaker... Car biz is brutal.
Sales of the big Plymouth plummeted in the following years due to the poor quality of this 1957 model. Chrysler Corporation should have either waited to introduce this design until 1958...or kept the new body and kept a conventional suspension at least for this model year to take pressure off their engineering staff. The 1957 Chevrolet had an older taller design but the quality was better than both Plymouth and Ford that model year.
@@Rick-S-6063 Two seat cars are a small niche market. The 1958 Thunderbird had a very late introduction but sold well because it was a new design and created a new personal luxury market. U.S. industry sales were weak for the rest of the industry (except Rambler) during the 1958 model year for two reasons: economic recession and bad styling. GM had decent quality but Harley Earl's final designs were awful, especially Pontiac, Oldsmobile, and Buick. FoMoCo suffered with Edsel and Lincoln/Continental which were turkeys and Mercury which didn't sell too well. Chrysler had better quality than 1957 but the public wasn't so sure.
The Riverside Casio has a '57 Plymouth and '57 Chevy next to each other in their museum. The Chevy might as well be a '54. The Plymouth is longer lower wider, "four" headlights. My Parents had '57 Plymouth. I remember my Dad saying the brakes left a lot to be desired. Better than doesn't mean good!
I like the 57 Chevy better, I wouldn't mind owning either one, but would prefer the Chevy, I dad owned 6 57's when I was a kid. They are one of my favorites.
I remember when both these cars were plentiful on the road when I was a kid. My next door neighbor was a cab driver and had a 57 Ply. which doubled as the family car which was common back then. That being said I have always been a big fan of the 57 Chevy. The 57 Chevy in the 2 door model is just a bad ass looking classic styled car. Think of the 1950s and the 57; Chevy is a great representation. The 57 Ply was over styled until it looked clunky. I thought so then, though the style has grown on me but can't stand up to the 57 Chevy styling.
Good Lord how embarrassing, i've always loved 50's cars but the 57' Chevy was always outdated & i never understood why it's the 'Face' of the 50's Car when Plymouth or other MoPar's, heck even other manufacturers were so far ahead of the curve with not only styling but mechanical features
Yeah the Chevys are still out there on the road. But when's the last time you saw one of those Plymouths on the road or even at a show or a cars and coffee, hum?
I like the styling of the Plymouth,but the sad fact is that by 1960 you would be shovelling up your 57 Plymouth up off the driveway.From a power train perspective they were very good tho.
Too bad the 57 Plymouth was so poorly built. Conceptually, it truly is a superior car. These 57s were originally going to be 58s, which meant the 57 was a mass produced prototype. The 58 was just as beautiful, even faster, and better quality.
As most people don't know Ford outsold Plymouth and Chevy for 1957 so they should have compared to Ford . Plymouth had all new styling for 1957 but so did Ford and Thunderbird sales were 5 times Corvette sales , it would get worse in 1958 with the 4 seat Thunderbird . This was made early in the model year when they assumed that Chevy would be the best seller , but the better built Fords were their true competition they just didn't know it yet . As by 1959 Plymouth products had a poor reputation for build quality that was well deserved .
My fathers Australian 1948 Chev Stylemaster had factory electric wipers. Yet GM Holden here had vacuum wipers until 1962 or so. So maybe depended on what part of GM's wide range of makes and models.
On the acceleration and hill climb tests, they had they Chevy equipped with a 2 spd power glide vs Plymouths 3 spd torque flite. Of course its going to win!!! Equally equipped, I don't think so.
The 56 chevys were used by stuntmen on a track, jumping ramps, rolling over, and riding on two wheels; something that Plymouth never been used in such demonstrations
Plymouth styling with Chevrolet build quality would have been a fantastic car. I’ve seen several immaculate low mileage ‘57 and ‘58 Plymouths and every one had the optional factory underseal.
By 1959 Chevy copied the look as best they could, lower body lines, more glass, wider etc. then Ford out sold them both with an older design, the 60 Ford though was a much cleaner car.
Lol, I had both, the Plymouth body parts where cheaply built, they had crappy brushed aluminum grill plush the dash where junky built, the motor in the Plymouth was awesome as well the torque flite transmission, take the two cars today everyone will choose the chevy
all this talk by plymouth..yet they skipped over any talk of the 6 cylinder engines ....i guess they didnt want to talk about their outdated flathead 6
The Bel Air was better looking then, and it's an iconic classic now. No one cares about the Plymouth. The Bel Air still attracts crowds. Harley Earl was a legend.
A lot of people love these Plymouths, the Chevy survival rate was far better since they were better built. Plymouths rotted out within three years. Put them side by side today and car enthusiasts will be more interested in the far rarer Plymouth than the 20 or more Tri-Chevies you see at every show.
If the 57 Plymouth was so great, how come you never see one at a car show? But you see many 55, 56, and 57 Chevys. The only good parts from a 57 Plymouth were the full cone styled wheel covers. These were on many cars of the time. The rest of the car was rust bucket junk.
