I stopped by Mathews Memory Lane Motors today to check out their inventory of Curbside Classics. As usual I was a kid in a candy store with so many tempting old cars and absolutely no way to afford any of them. However, I am only one winning lottery ticket away from amassing a beautiful collection of cool cars, so it pays to look.
Today I found this beautiful 1954 Monarch convertible that was on its way to the gas station. I don’t know anything about this car since I’m more of a photographer than an automotive expert, but I’m sure many of you folks out there will have some interesting info about this beautifully restored Canadian import.
The full ad for the car can be seen here http://www.memorylaneclassiccars.com/forsale/1954-mercury-monarch-lucerene-convertible/
(ED: the Monarch was the upscale brand for Canadian Ford dealers to sell, and was typically based on the Mercury. In 1954, the Ford Monarch actually outsold the real Mercury in Canada. The video and ad are incorrect in calling this a “Mercury Monarch”; it’s just a Monarch, but it would be relatively more correct to call it a Ford Monarch, as it was only sold at Ford dealers and not at Mercury dealers)
Monarchs “bounced” back and forth between being “gussied up” Fords, dripping in chrome, to being Mercurys (when the Mercury was noticeably .different from the same year Ford) but with different trim. The 55 Monarch was on a Ford body.
As for this car, the uninitiated would not be blamed for thinking this was a Lincoln….they looked quite similar in 1954.
The 1955 Monarch was based on the Mercury, not Ford. It was one of those years when the Merc used the Ford shell with different rear fenders and a different, stretched nose.
Gorgeous old car, but it could do without the Continental tire kit on the back.
Yeah. Contrary to the antique car hobby today, continental kits were nowhere near as popular back then as we’re led to believe today. Likewise, optional fender skirts, cowl mounted spot lamps, dual rear swept antennas, nor fake exhaust ports.
Dad didn’t even bother keeping that stuff in stock at the dealership. What did sell, of the dealer bolt-ons, was the under dash swing out tissue dispenser.
I loath all the tacked on rubbish, but “dual swept antennas” could add a certain symmetry, I just like that combination of words
Some interesting cars on that site. Unfortunately the only one I can afford is the Trabant.
I’ve wondered this for a long time – how were Monarchs priced in relation to comparable Canadian Mercurys? Did Monarch have less or more prestige compared to Mercury? By the way, my favorite Monarch is the ’56 model, with its “jousting lance” side trim and completely different grille treatment.
They were in almost all ways equivalent to a Mercury in price as prestige.
The Canadian market convertibles are very rare – low production numbers for most years.
When I was a child in the 50’s we often came to Palm Springs where my grandmother had retired (funny thing, here I am now doing the same!). But I can recall clearly the first time I ever saw a Monarch, it was parked along the main drag, Palm Canyon Drive, it was a ’54 Monarch Lucerne Sun Valley, with the Plexiglas top. I was probably 7 or 8 years old at the time, and I was completely perplexed, wondering what version of a Mercury this was that I had never seen before. My father had looked extensively at ’54 Mercurys before buying our family’s new ’55 Oldsmobile, so I had no clue what this strange creature was, other than my dad describing it as a Canadian Mercury. They always seemed so much more heavily chromed than a U.S. Mercury, and I loved the little crown insignias that adorned it. Great find!
Looks great, sounds great, is great!
Must buy lottery ticket
The Monarch was a separate make sold exclusively through Ford dealers. It’s purpose was to allow the Ford dealerships in Canada a medium priced make. Due to the low population density in many parts of Canada a Ford or Mercury Franchise may have been the only FoMoCo dealer that served a relatively large area. Monarch was introduced in 1946 and was produced until 1961. It was always based on a Mercury, and essentially badged engineered into a new car. Often times the cars would take on Ford styling traits or use Ford style interiors.
For 1954, the Monarch was available in three trim levels, the Custom, Lucerne and the Custom Lucerne. The custom was available as a 2 and 4-door sedan only, the Lucerne and Lucerne Custom as a 4-door sedan, 2-door hardtop, 2-door “Sun Valley” hardtop (with transparent roof panel) and a 2-door convertible. The vast majority of the Monrach’s produced were 4-door sedans, accounting for 81% of production. This was split nearly 50:50 between the Custom and the Lucerne/Lucerne Custom (the Lucerne and Lucerne Custom production numbers were combined). Total production was 8566 cars, which was 38% greater than the Mercurys sold in Canada that year.
The 1954 model year prices ranged rom $2814 to $4247 (CDN). All Monarchs were equipped with the new OHV 256 CID V8 rated at 161 hp. There were only 252 Lucerne and Lucerne Custom convertibles produced making this one rare car. The Lucerne convertible was $3668 while the Lucerne Custom was $4247.
This is a great find and a beautiful rare car. I agree with others that the continental kit is the only thing that spoils this fine machine. Growing up my father always used to chastise these add on kits that extended the bumper out in a rather ungainly fashion. He did however always like the ’56 Bird because of it’s kit, which was done in proper fashion.
How were the Monarchs priced relative to comparable Canadian Mercurys?
David already beat me to the answer but they were almost the exact same price. I don’t have the Canadian Mercury MSRPs but they would have been within a few dollars. Meteors were pretty much on par with Ford prices too, but were typically priced slightly higher.
Great find- beautiful car!!!
BTW- is Dale Matthews still there? Haven’t talked to him in probably 20 years. Good people though.
I don’t know, I rarely speak to a sales person when I visit the dealership. It’s a short drive from my house and I stop by a few times a year just to check out all the cars. One of the Mathews was my state representative for a term or two, he seemed like a nice guy.
I normally prefer the 50s Ford Lincoln Mercury design language to GM, like the modern look of this car for 54, like the 51 Packard , the headlights are nearly the same height as the bonnet, makes the 54 Chevy look dumpy, though what the hell is that thing tacked on the back, ruins it
It may be heresy to the American readers but I find the 57 Chevy looks stubby and frumpy compared to the 57 Ford though I cannot comment on the relative quality of either machine; but the 55 Chevy is a fine looking motor car
I think new car buyers in 1957 agreed with you, in the main (and so do I). Ford outsold Chevrolet for the first time since the 30s in 1957 (if I am remembering my ancient history correctly). Between the all-new 1957 Ford and Plymouth, the Chevy looked like a facelift of a 1955 car – which it was. I have read that the guys responsible for the styling on the 57 were not really happy with the result.
However the 57 Chevy (an overall more durable car than the other two) went on to become an icon and now sort of defines what a 50s car looks like in the eyes of many.