When I saw Tom’s article on the ’74 Thunderbird I was reminded of why I quit liking Thunderbirds in general, and of the last one that I really did like. It wasn’t the ’57. Ford thought they had a better idea when they stuffed a back seat in the ’58 model. That may have been a good decision, but that would be an individual call.
There are a couple of ’59 T-Birds here locally that I looked at some time ago, but I couldn’t find the passion to generate an article. Some things are just better left alone. Tom’s article featuring that bloated baby Lincoln prompted me to look again.
For youngsters from my era who liked the Vettes and the 1955-57 ‘Birds, 1958 was the start of the Thunderbird’s bloat. That can’t be good, can it? Well, some years just wore the bloat better than others. You probably have your favorites, but mine were the 1958-1960 models.
I had a friend when I was in Submarines that drove a 1958 model. He called it the Thunderchicken. He would like to thank all you taxpayers that paid for the facilities at the shipyard that he used to rebuild that engine. I took many a trip from Connecticut to Maine in that car. I promise you, it was a comfortable travel car with as much luxury as I cared to have. Of course when you are comparing it to my 66 VW, anything is comfortable. The standard engine was the 352 V8. It wasn’t going to set any new land speed records, but it kept up with traffic and would cruise at any sane speed you might choose.
Sometimes we have grand plans for restoring these things. Sometimes these plans are delusional. You can almost see the lobotomy scars. This beauty started as part of one of those plans..
When I used to commute I would see these cars every day. They have been setting in the same place for more than 15 years. When I first saw them, there was a third one roosting with them. I talked to the guy who owns them and he told me their story and how he had gotten a good package deal. He said he had sold one and actually seen it running around. I did not tell him that looking at them reminded me of seeing the wreckage of the Titanic or walking around in one of the mothball fleets. He is probably already upset that he was unable to sell them in 15 years.
When you park a car outside long enough it starts to deteriorate. Even in Texas where there aren’t many Tin Worms, if you ignore something long enough the Tin Worms will colonize.
I’m sure that the engine (a 352) was removed with the best of intentions. I’m sure the owner had the best of intentions, with visions of a rejuvenated Squarebird with new paint, interior and a rebuilt engine. I can see how far it got before those intentions dissolved. Not long enough to even remove the straps. I think it’s now worth about $8 per 100 lbs.
Well, I may be a fan of old cars but here is the dirty little secret that applies to most of us. I didn’t put my money where my (old car restoring) mouth is. I may own a ’57 Chevy but this silver Nissan (below) is what I drive (at 30-35 mpg). I wonder what my grandkids will be doing by the time they are my age. I expect this cube will have been long melted down. On the other hand there may be no gas and all of these may have been converted to barbeque pits. In the meantime, these Squarebirds will probably be roosting here for the foreseeable future.
Thanks for new desktop wall paper from the last picture, Lee. Wildly different eras and ideas about design for some odd reason this makes me want to see a picture of every generation of Thunderbird lined up from oldest to newest.
My favorite T-Birds are the 64-66, best ever!
Wrote the article and went by the next week. Bam!!! it was gone. The guy moved the white tbird after 15 years.
strange…. he must have seen you and got nervous! 🙂
I always liked the ’61-’63 T-Birds.
+1 Those are my favorite years too. Super clean styling, afterburner tail lights. Two door Continentals, really, which they kinda were.
I never owned a Bird, but I once owned the next best thing-a 1962 Galaxie 500 XL convertible with a 390. Had buckets and a floor shifter which the T-Bird didn’t. It wasn’t quick but it would cruise at any speed you wanted effortlessly, even when towing my motorcycle on a trailer. Didn’t make any difference whether I drove it fast or slow it was only good for 10 mpg. Traded the thing in on a new 1972 Fiat 128. Got 100 bucks for it. Loved the Fiat, can barely remember the Ford with its Italian Circus decor package.
Had a realtor couple as neighbors in the late fifties when I was about 14 that had a sky blue 58 Thunderbird. These neighbors were also in their mid to late fifties and whenever they were driving past our house toward town, the wife was usually driving and just lighting up a cigarette. I always thought that was a very classy looking scene and could have been used as a commercial for either Ford or a cigarette company. Though my family was non-smoking as I have always been, it was still a brilliant statement of the fifties that has long stuck in my brain. Of course I saw it repeated an endless number of times as I was usually out pushing a rotary mower around our 4 acre apple orchard. The family across the road had a 57 Ford Country Sedan (4 door wagon) and a 57 Ford steel top convertible with continental kit, fender skirts and a spotlight on each front door! I would have taken the convertible over the T-Bird but it was a tough call. My family had a 56 Ford Ranch Wagon, 3 speed and 202 Ford V-8. I drove that through high school and it was a great drive but the dual exhaust ate mufflers annually.
My 1962 Galaxie 390 had dualies. Combined with corrosive leaded gas and the fact that most days I never put on more than 10 miles on it (the engine never warmed up), it was impossible to keep an intact exhaust system on it. But it sounded good. I would nail it on the way home from the train station at night and watch all the bats and crap fly out of the exhaust. Ah, youth!
Surprising that at least one of them found a new owner after all this time, I guess you can take credit for that since you wrote the article essentially saying they were doomed to sit another 15 years. Personally I’m a big fan of the square ‘birds they have such an aggressive look to the front end in my opinion, not that I don’t like the Flair and Glamor ‘birds too.
Adding the back seat was the right thing to do at the time the Square ‘birds sold much better than the 2 seaters and created a new market niche that Ford dominated for years to come.
In ’61, when I was 7, my parents, two cousins, and I visited my Mom’s aunt in Southern California. Well, Aunt Blanche had a ’58-’60 (I really don’t remember which grille it had) Thunderbird convertible, and I just thought that was the epitome of California cool.
The ’61-’63 Birds were okay, but Ford really lost me around ’66, not to get me back until the round Fox Bird of ’83. That one didn’t have the same image of cool, but made up for it by having actual performance.
These looked Rough To Me… like Cheap Patio Furniture, with clunky power window switches. The 64-66 Is seemingly 20 years ahead of this then 6 year old interior.
When I was a kid I loved all things Thunderbird, from 55 onward, and the day my Dad brought home a nearly new 65 was one of my happiest. The changes made for the 66 model – heavier, chunky grill and full-wide tail lamps – did not work as well for me and the 65 is still my favorite year (sequential turn signals, front disc brakes and nicer styling touches like the Thunderbird emblem on the hood rather than lettering and more streamlined wheel covers all made it better than the 64 for me).
Nothing after 1966 really worked for me, the T-Bird country club, personal car, unique-in-all-the-world image just got progressively more compromised through the availability of four-door models (and demise of the convertible), increasing size – until final decontenting and rental car status demolished it completely. The 69 Mark III really took on the Thunderbird image and continued to hold it quite well through the Mark V.
Prior to the 64-66 Birds, I loved the 1961-1963 models, no more dogleg, streamlined body, cleaner, more luxurious interior, more standard features. Never as big a fan of the Squarebirds, shared too many interior bits (shift handle, steering wheel (?), control knobs and levers) with the regular Fords (which aped T-Bird exteriors in 58 and rooflines in 59) but very sharp, trend-setting design for the time. My Dad’s best friend bought a new beige coupe in 58 but his large size and bad back made it hard for him to drive the car for any length of time as those seats were pretty low due to the unibody and not very supportive, and he hit his knees on the dogleg getting in and out.
Kevin M, those Galaxie 500XLs with the heavily chromed consoles and floor automatic were really cool. I loved them in Rangoon Red, also in the metallic copper – friends had a 63 convertible in that color, alas not an XL.
Why does the Cube give off a strong twenties’ design vibe, especially from the rear? Is car design regressing already?
I expect it’s because they all look tall and boxy. I think that’s just proportion though because this thing takes a corner like a scalded dog. 1.8 with a stick. Gets 30-35 mpg and room for four adults or two adults with lots of luggage. Just my size.
I think your right though. It does bring back thoughts of an earlier time and the rear window is a turn on or turn off for folks.
Came this close once to buying a ’59 T-Bird in Las Vegas, just like the one in the top pic. I agonized over it for a few days, finally ended up with a ’64 Coupe deVille instead. Such a tough choice between those two. I did get excellent service and considerable adventure out of the Caddy, so no regrets. But I often wonder what would’ve happened had I gone with the T-Bird instead. Beautiful car!
BTW, love your Cube. One of the coolest modern cars out there, IMO — for some reason the rear 3/4 view reminds me of a ’32 Ford Victoria…
I spent a few years up close and personal with a 61, and the squarebirds are not really all that different under the skin. The problem with these old hardtops is that the cost so much to bring back to life that it is just not economical once they have reached a certain point. The convertibles – well, that is a different story.
I think that we all forget (or never knew) just how radical that great big console was in the interior. It really did make being in one of these a unique and special experience. And other than rust in the structural portions of the unibodies, these were very durable cars, both inside and out.
I would not kick any Bird from 1958-66 out of my garage, but the 60, 61 and 65 are my favorites.
Not that long ago I was drooling over a 1960 T-bird hardtop I saw on ebay. It had clearly been ordered by a pretty unusual character – it was black inside and out with blackwalls, small hubcaps, a three-speed transmission, and no radio. Iirc it had the 390 engine. It was in very nice condition though as far as one can tell from an ebay ad.
I thought that the 390 did not appear until the 1961 models, and that the 60 offered either the 352 or the 430. Engine swap maybe?
You sound about right. Must say though, we had a 64 Merc with a 390 and there was a lot of confusion as to whether it was a 352 or 390.
For months there was a ’61 in the “CARS FOR SALE” section of a self-service junkyard in my area. It didn’t sell- probably because it was full of rust holes.
Went by last week and the lot was empty. 15 years and no movement. Last month the white bird was gone. That is probably the one that someone would buy. Now the second one is gone. Guess it’s the kiss of death to write about something.
You should get a commission.
My grade school principal drove a white squarebird just like the first photo. One of those few early memories that stuck.
Maybe Frank and Mike stopped by… although the only one I’d really want to meet would be Danielle.
If you hadn’t used the word twice I wouldn’t have commented, but “sematary” even though it is used in the title of a Steven King book is not a word.
The word you want for the place where dead people are buried is “cemetery”.
Thanks Bill. Paul and spell check beat you to it. This place and one other sort of had the feeling of ghosts when I was there. Sometimes clever isn’t clever to everyone. Thanks for reading it.
got a 60 vert out of a junk yard in 1979, still have the car . was sold new at .mitchel motors ford , Gus grissoms home town.
so far ive added 390 , a mculloch huffer, radial tires,( a big help) . and the 1958
bird front shock set up to give me four shocks up front. i’d loaded delco fm radio
guts to a ms 94 radio ,so its am/fm and looks stock. the new speaker will go in soon
its a retro sound dvc 6×9. i hope it fits. exhaust is stock but bumped up one size
to 2 1/4″ . the car has 43,000 mi on it. people Forgot that back then most
Normal drivers (rare today) ,wanted cars to lean a little in the turns to get the left or right side rubber (bias ply) to bite into the asphalt. Or the car would spin out. (radial tires help) but body roll is nice on snowy days ask f body and fox body guys.
still my car looks good blasting up I-65 twards Indy.