I surely enjoy finding unrestored originals at the Mecum auction. It seems like more of them appear there every year, reflecting a growing sentiment that “it’s only original once.” This year, the best original I found by far was this ’57 Olds Ninety-Eight. From a distance, it looked really good.
When I came up close, however, I could see the signs of wear. Truth? I’ve kind of had enough of the late 50s GM offerings. But I lingered a while over this one, You don’t see many late-50s Oldsmobiles at shows and auctions, and even fewer unrestored, at least not compared to the more popularly priced GM makes.
To survive 57 years in condition this good, this Ninety-Eight must have gotten light use. Sure, the driver’s seat seams have split. But I have to think that under really heavy use, this seat would be in much, much sadder shape.
The paint on horizontal surfaces is pretty dull; perhaps this car wasn’t always garaged. The tag on this Ninety-Eight said that it still rocks its original engine, probably the 371 cube Rocket V8.
This is a well-optioned car, with power seats, power windows, power top, and a foot-operated Wonderbar radio.
The Ninety-Eight nameplate was already venerable in 1957, as Oldsmobile had been building them since 1941 (skipping the war years, of course).
Stepping back to take in this big Olds in toto, I concluded that it must have spent many of its years as a fair-weather ride. It waited patiently for a sunny day while a series of other cars served as its owner’s daily drivers. I can’t think of a better way to help a car survive.
Related reading: 1975 Ninety-Eight and 1964 and 1965 Ninety-Eights
Great unrestored original. Not my favorite year for the 98, but especially in convertible form, a nice looking car.
The 1957 Oldsmobiles were very good looking and were made even more good looking by the 1958 Oldsmobiles which looked like the front and back were designed by 2 different groups of designers who never met.
That is very true. The chrome trim on the front and rear fenders of a ’58 Olds look like they don’t belong on the same car.
Exactly what I was thinking. This ’57 looks so much better than what followed a year later.
There were quite a few shockers in 58 from both GM and Ford.The 58 Lincoln made a 58 Olds an object of beauty.GM redeemed themselves with the 59s.
I like the feature car a lot especially in this colour
It could be said that the 325 chrome hashmarks on the rear fenders of a ’58 Buick Limited don’t belong on *any* car. But I agree, for sheer incongruity of design and pain inflicted on eyeballs, the Ninety Eight takes the cake.
Most of the divisions recovered for ’59, particularly Buick. Olds still looked a bit peculiar, and suffered a relapse of weird for ’60 (as did Pontiac.)
Before all the madness, these ’57 models are quite good-looking, especially from the rear angles.
Nice original car, but if it was mine I wouldn’t be able to resist “freshening it up” a bit.
Any idea what it sold for?
I’d also be tempted to do a bit of freshening. A little cleaning, polishing and mending would do wonders, without destroying the originality.
Around 1970 we had an 57 88 Super in this exact color and same blue and white interior. It was a 2 door hardtop. Mom nicknamed it her ‘ Blue Baron’. Only had it a couple of years, it was replaced by a 62 Monterey. I don’t recall any problems with it except for getting new mufflers. One time going down Mt. Wilson it got shifted into reverse by mistake, the rear axle hopping madly. Didn’t hurt that car one bit. I do remember us kids and mom getting into the unlocked car at the supermarket and when she put the key in it wouldn’t turn. We were in an identical car!.
I think you’ve identified the real driver behind remote central locking. Heading to where the lights flash saves owners much embarrassment returning to vehicles amid a sea of grey/white/black boxes.
Since all cars look the same today, you are right. Back then, to find your car was no big deal. It really was rare, even in 1970 to find 2 blue 57 88 Super 2 doors in the same parking lot. Now you would find 10 Camry’s in the same lot. Although maybe in slightly different shades of silver and gray.
back when ’57 Chevys were the most desirable cars around, I would have always rather of had an Olds. and a 98 convertible has to be the most desirable Olds
For me, the sweet spot for Olds was 49-55. The new OHV V8 in 49 didn’t seem to get changed in an outlandish fashion till 56. Then gas mileage and all that goes with it seemed to need a big flush. I owned a 50 but think my all time favorite was the 55.
I know Olds made some pretty good cars later but somehow my mind is stuck in the fifties after looking at this car.
Amen to that. The 49 Oldsmobile 88 is widely considered to be the first factory made muscle car with its powerful V8.
Wow – I love an original car, but they are usually low-trim sedans or maybe an occasional luxury car. But almost never a convertible. I don’t blame you for lingering over this one one bit.
As for the paint, that just may be the old GM lacquer being GM lacquer. Ford and Chrysler moved to enamel around 1940, which provided a much harder finish, although one more prone to imperfect finishes if not sprayed on exactly right. The GM lacquer was forgiving to apply and soft enough to “rub out”, giving it a mirror-like finish when new. However, it’s softness led to durability issues, especially on horizontal surfaces, even on a car that stayed out of the weather.
Thanks for that paint history lesson. I didn’t know!
News to me too. That explains why Holden paint well into the sixties weathered quite badly, and why Holden made a fuss of their “Magic Mirror Acrylic Lacquer” finish on the HD series of ’65. Put enough new adjectives in front and people will forget it’s the same old dull noun.
Yeah my 63 EH originally had enamel paint I redid it acrylic the 59 VW I restored was done in Acrylic in the factory it still had that stuff on it, I bare metalled it anyway.
Nice car ! .
I too love originals over restored .
Bob-O , an Oakie in Ca. , had among his 300 vehicle fleet , a pristine ’54 Oldsmobile Holiday 88 (?) Drop Top , sky blue / white , he dropped the top , filled it with newspapers and let it rot away until he died .
-Nate
Sometimes a color combination can make a car like it does on this ’57 Olds Ninety Eight. It looks very sporty with the black top.
It’s just too bad the car itself couldn’t have been a Buick, ideally a ’56. I have such a hard time telling the difference between late 50s Pontiacs and Oldsmobiles. I thought it was because they looked the same but when I google ’57 Pontiac Star Chief I see that it has (slightly) different styling.
This is different than for the Mercurys which I can always tell are Fords with the different trim. It’s having that second choice for the GM car that isn’t a Chevy, Buick or Cadillac that trips me up. Come to think of it I have the same problem on old Dodges and Plymouths.
The Buick might have been a prettier car in 1955 or 56, but I’m not so sure about 1957. Anyway, I would happily love and care for this 57 Olds on the strength of its wonderful machinery – hard to beat a Rocket V8 and a 4 speed HydraMatic. I would take that combo over a Nailhead/Dynaflow any day.
I’d definitely take an Oldsmobile over a Buick for 1957, both for styling and the drivetrain.
I know what you and JPC mean about the ’57 Buicks that’s why I said “ideally a ’56”. That damn ’57 Buick had the same problem as the ’57 Cadillac, a pretty face but an ugly butt. I’ve not driven a Dynaflow but from what I’ve read it sounds like it was the CVT of the 50s and 60s, but unlike a CVT it was slower and thirstier than a conventional A/T.
If I recall correctly, the main attraction of Dynaflow was that it was buttery smooth. HydraMatic, on the other hand, had been nicknamed “Hydrajerk” in some quarters because the shifts were rather abrupt.
Dynaflow has nothing in common with a CVT. It is basically a torque converter and a manually shifted 2 speed planetary gear set. The slippage to get decent torque amplification is huge and Dynaflow was very inefficient for this reason. When gas was 20 cents a gallon, few cared.
The 1-2 shift of the Hydramatic was quite jerky if the bands were not correctly adjusted but it was a much more efficient unit. It was also heavy and expensive.
The only thing that a Dynaflow would have in common with a CVT is the lack of shifting in D, which can feel odd to some if you are used to having a car go 1,2,3 while driving. Dynaflows just sort of ooooooooooze away from the line.
“Dynaflow has nothing in common with a CVT. ”
You guys kill me. “Sounds like it was the CVT of the 50s and 60s” refers to the stepless nature of the transmissions and that they were both much maligned. No I didn’t think there was a steel belt and pulleys in a Dynoflow and no I don’t think the whip cream ride in my Cadillac comes from Reddi-wip in the air shocks 🙂
Great find! Interestingly, if the car had been treated more harshly, it might very well have undergone a full restoration by this point.
Or worse, a resto-mod. Shudder.
I believe that 1950s GM convertibles are generally worth restoring to their original state. There’s a strong market for GM convertibles (and hardtop coupes) from the 1950s.
This is beautiful! A car worth restoring PROPERLY – NO resto-mod – EVER!
If you are going to use it as a daily driver, disk brakes and rack and pinion steering make for a much nicer ride, however.
I’ve had a thing for ’57 Oldsmobiles for awhile and the auction buyers have been upping the ante for a few years now. In my view they look like a ’57 Chevy done up for a night on the town, and I mean that in a good way. They also tend to be done in more subdued 1960’s type colors in single tones so they were harbingers of the future. Add spinner hubcaps and 3 duece carburation with HydraMatic and what’s not to like?
A few years ago, a member of the Oldsmobile Club of America put a sign on his 1957 Eighty-Eight at a small car show that said, “This is what a 1957 Chevrolet could have been if GM hadn’t made it cheap enough to compete with a Ford.”
What’s not to like? Gas mileage. It took a dump in ’57. That was the reason my dad held on to his ’56 and let the ’57 pass.
The 1957 Olds is the slightly-better-looking sister of the 1957 Chevy, and way less ubiquitous. I’d take the prettier sister who isn’t as *a-hem* popular with the boys. 🙂
Buick’s dynasquish slushboxes were simply wretched from the jump .
The Hydromatic was a terrific tranny , they used it in tank and OTR trucks .
Firm shifts mean longer life in real world applications .
Chevy went to recirculating ball steering boxes in 1941 and the improvement in road feel and reduced effort was about 90 % ~ I guess some here have never actually driven one so equipped with the correct size tires as 1/4″ wider than designed for , make it drive like a tank .
In 1941 Chevy’s sales slogan was ” If it steers like a truck , it’s _NOT_ a Chevrolet ! ” truth in advertising .
My avatar Nash has worm & peg steering and it’s murder in that tiny car unlike the ’46 Chevy truck’s recirculating ball gear .
-Nate
Great color and I’m loving the black/blue/white leather seats. Typical wild dash too – bet it looks really cool lit up at night.
I don’t know that I’ve ever actually seen a ’57 Olds up close and that transition from the rear door backwards is very unique/weird, especially with the black trim. I kinda like it, but I’m also reminded of the Boattail Riviera CC (might not look so good from certain angles).
Nice find! Love the color combination and the originality.
Personally, I prefer the styling of the ’56 Buick-Olds-Cadillac, just the right blend of understated elegance and sportiness depending on body style, and the best for the final year of the ’54-’56 B/C-bodies (quite unusual for facelifts).
The ’57s in my opinion, look like caricatures of the ’56s, but of course WAY better than what was to come in ’58!
GM used the dip in the beltline to great effect in the mid-50s; what was always strange to my eyes about the ’57s and ’58 B-O-C cars was the raised height of the windshield base compared to the beltline.
Take another look at that dash: to my mind, its the epitome of elegant GM glitziness. A hazard of course, what with all the chrome AND the chromed inside windshield frame, etc and stab-you-in-the-sternum steering wheel. Seat belts? Ha! Ralph Nader, call your office.
Another interesting thing is there was a cavity between the dash and that “grill” at the bottom of the windshield. People were always losing fountain pens and such down that maw.