I apologize for not properly clarifying making the guidelines of yesterday’s QOTD about which car of the 1940s you’d pick. This is a PN MM (Mental Masturbation) exercise of the kind that I practiced way-too often as a kid, and can still pull off, all too well.
Here’s how it works: you’re going back in time to stay, and you have the resources to buy any American big car, thanks to a rich uncle who wrote it in his will that you get one new car each decade. You do have the knowledge of hindsight, so that you can wait and pick the car you most want in each decade. Or maybe not…something in between? Sorry; the mind is a curious thing.
The point is you’re a youngish guy and you love cars and you get to have one each decade. Its future value is irrelevant; you’re not bringing it back with you. You want the best car, and you’re going to drive it until the next one in the following decade.
So now you get to pick your big American car from the 1950s. Having done this exercise way too many times, I’ll go first. I didn’t need to, but I fell down the rabbit hole and I spent quite a bit of time MM’ing over this one again, and have come back out with even more knowledge, insight and appreciation for its qualities, which I’ll share with you not to sway your pick, but just because I finally have an audience with which to properly share mine.
It’s a bit challenging trying to explain to those who weren’t around way back why the ’55 Chevy was such a superlative car at the time, because of what it and its ’56 and ’57 stablemates have become and the heavy burden of their reputation and image. No, I have little or no desire to actually own one in 2019, except perhaps for a ratty six cylinder sedan as a counterpoint to this. But that’s off in the future; we’re now back in 1955.
And I’m going to take you along with me, and ask you to wipe out all you stereotyped perceptions built up over the decades and try to imagine what its qualities and impact really was like in 1955. Of course we also have to remember that the Tri-Five Chevys became such icons for a good reason (many actually), so we can’t totally ignore that either.
Let’s just say that the 1955 Chevy was one of those rare moments in automotive history when the best inclinations of engineers, planners and stylists converged. Very rare indeed. Unlike the ’55 Ford and Plymouth, which had underpinnings that went back some years, the Chevy was all new; totally so, except for the six cylinder engine and the Powerglide, both of which also received some changes for ’55.
It’s hard to imagine a time when ads featuring the Chief Engineer were used for mainstream big American cars. Porsche, BMW and Mercedes, yes, but a big mainstream Chevy? Ed Cole was a gifted engineer, and he truly did have the assignment of a lifetime, in directly heading up the development of a clean-sheet car including a clean sheet engine too. Realistically, this never happened again, except, in the case of Ed it did, with the Corvair. And there was a lot to be proud of.
The ’55 Chevy incorporated every feasible engineering advance available to Cole at the time: a stiffer frame, lighter but stiffer bodies, a modern ball-joint front suspension with significantly improved geometry resulting in class-leading handling, lighter and more precise steering, etc. It was the last time GM or any of the Big Three designed a new standard-sized car with handling, space efficiency, light weight, and all-round world-class roadability as the primary objective until the 1977’s. The 1958 Chevy that replaced it was all about massive size, a jet-smooth ride, and styling gimmickry, as were the next twenty years of big Chevys and all other big American cars. It was all downhill from here…
The crowning glory of the ’55 Chevy was the new V8 engine. The marriage of it and an all-new and significantly improved chassis with a firm ride and excellent handling for the times would set the standards in its class for decades. The Chevrolet small block needs no introduction, but it deserves accolades for being so significantly ahead of anything comparable, at the time, and seemingly forever. It was more compact and lighter (575 lbs) than the competition, and the combination of its short 3″ stroke and exceptionally well-breathing head gave it unparalleled performance and efficiency.
OK, we all now the Chevy V8quickly became the dominant engine in all fields of performance where it was class-appropriate. But that was no accident. Cylinder heads of an engine are the critcal component in determining an engine’s performance potential, as they determine the maximum flow of intake and exhaust gases. Of course other components like the camshaft, valve train, induction system, ignition and exhaust, all play a role, but the cylinder heads are the gatekeepers, and not so easily modified unlike the other components.
As a frame of reference, I’ll show you the Studebaker V8 because I just happened to find a cross-section of it. The Studebaker was new in 1951, at a time when high performance was just not factor in its design brief. Its initial version with 232 cubic inches had all of 120 hp, yet it had a massive block that weighed 695 lbs, almost the same or more than the big block first generation V8s from Packard (685 lbs), Cadillac (699 lbs), Buick (685) lbs, and Chrysler hemi (745 lbs). A tough engine, although its excessive weight on the front end of the fairly light Studebakers had a disproportionately negative impact on handling compared to the sixes. The Chevy V8 actually weighed 30lbs less than the six cylinder version.
Looking at its cross section, its ports are clearly not as ideally configured as the Chevy, the combustion chamber is not a wedge, the valves are smaller, and this along with its longer stroke and heavier valve gear made it rather unsuitable for higher outputs except with forced induction.
It’s not easy to see here, but Ford’s Y block V8, which arrived on year before the Chevy also suffered from poor porting and weighed some 625 lbs. There were some improved heads available in ’56 on a HO version, but by that time the Y block was essentially already history, to be replaced by the better-breathing FE in 1967. Ford also resorted to supercharging to keep up with the Chevy.
Plymouth got its first V8 in 1955 too, but it was hardly new, compact, light or inherently well-breathing either. It was the “polysphere” V8, which had a new, cheaper to build head on what had been the smaller hemi V8 that Dodge originally had. The hemis were all proving to be too expensive and heavy, and the poly was supposed to incorporate some aspects of their breathing abilities, but it didn’t work out that way.
“Hemi Andersen”, as quoted at Allpar:
You have to remember that this was happening in 1953-1954, as they planned for a V8 for the ’55 Plymouth. They still had six or seven years to go with the archaic flathead 6 which came out in the early 1930s, so they weren’t thinking very new; they were looking for a cheaper version of the existing Hemi.
This is why the 1955 Chevy V8 turned out to be so far advanced. Chevrolet came out with a whole new design, which Chrysler sort of finally arrived at with the wedge-head 273 in 1964, nine years late. The Y block Ford overhead-valve V8 was rubbish when it came out in 1954, but it improved, and the 312 was a pretty good engine in a lot of old stock cars.
Pete Hagenbuch (also at Allpar):
..the performance improved by getting rid of the silly polysphere. A wedged chamber (like the Chevy) have some advantages… you can build in a lot of what we call squish, where the chamber is just part of the cylinder head surface and the piston has a flat area that matches up with it. Squish is why you can run 12:1 on a wedge head because without squish you would have to run 9:1. It gets the charge moving and mixed, moving through the chamber at high velocity, which means the flame travel is fast and there isn’t anything left to burn by the time it gets to top dead center where you expect the detonation. Anything that reduces detonation also helps reduce pre-ignitionm which is catastrophic.
And Chrysler’s legendary J.C. Zeder, Director of Engineering (also from Allpar):
“We are not seeking to develop higher speeds and greater power than anyone else. The increased speeds and torque of the 1955 Plymouth, when combined with the PowerFlite transmission, results in improved performance in low and middle ranges, plus greater economy.” In other words, Plymouth’s new V8 was considered to be no more than a higher-powered extension of the traditional and reliable Plymouth flathead six.
The horsepower race, at the time, was considered by Chrysler to be exclusive to luxury cars. Chevrolet’s new V8 brought that concept to an end, and brought the horsepower race to the low-priced field.
I am including these other engines and these quotes because they reflect on the state of the low-priced field and the state-of-the-art in engine design prior to the Chevy’s revolutionary appearance. All of them were offered in four barrel variants that produced reasonably competitive outputs, including 177 hp for the 260 Plymouth, 198 hp for the top 292 Ford, and even the Studebaker 259 managed 185 hp in the late ’55 year top version, although only available on the Speedster and President. The difference was that there wasn’t that much more in them, not without resorting to more extreme cams and carburation, whereas the Chevy was just barely getting started.
Ed Cole insisted that the new Chevy V8 be truly new and groundbreaking, and no doubt he was likely already being influenced at the time by Zora Arkus-Duntov.
Duntov already had a legendary career in various facets of engineering, including the famous Ardun hemi head for the Ford fatthead V8. In January 1953, Duntov saw the Chevrolet prototype Corvette at Motorama. He wrote an ambitious letter asking for a job, outlining his ideas to make the Corvette an even better car. GM hired him to work with Maurice Olley in Chevrolet Research and Development as an assistant staff engineer, focusing on suspension and chassis development. He quickly established a reputation as a brash and outspoken but innovative engineer.
1953 Chevrolet
This was just what Chevrolet needed at that time. Despite Harley Earl’s styling, the Chevrolet division offered lackluster products with even more lackluster six cylinder engines. In mid-December 1953, Duntov wrote a memo destined to wake up the Chevrolet division. He argued that Chevrolet should manufacture and sell high-performance parts itself, rather than leave outsiders to direct the market and reap the profits. Olley would have none of that, and banished him to the truck department.
But Ed Cole “got it”, and soon had him fulfilling his dream of making the Corvette into a true sports car, starting with adapting the new V8 into the six-Cylinder Corvette, which became available in mid-1955. It was the beginning of a long legend.
The Chevy V8’s potential, thanks to its intrinsic qualities, was instantly recognized as the second coming of the engine-messiah, as this article from 1955 details. It was easy to increase its power very substantially with cheap over-the counter parts from Chevrolet or by aftermarket suppliers who quickly saw a gold mine.
But let’s first look at how the stock ’55 Chevy performed, and not just in a straight line. The 265 cubic inch V8 initially came in two power levels, a base 162 hp two-barrel single exhaust version and the 180 hp with a four barrel Carter WCFB carb and dual exhausts. The heads were the same, with a mild 8.0:1 compression ratio and an equally mild camshaft. Nevertheless, the 180 (gross) hp ’55 Chevy was quickly acknowledged to be about the fastest accelerating sedan that year, thanks to its relatively light weight. Road and Track managed a very decent (for the times) 0-60 of 9.7 seconds and a 17.4 second 1/4 mile.
It’s important to put that 180 hp rating in perspective. Back then, Chevrolet made both gross and net hp ratings available, and this little engine made 160 net hp, which is just ten less than the 170 net hp of the 350 4 barrel V8 of the 70s, an engine in a roughly comparable state of tune, meaning mild cam and modest-sized four barrel cam. Of course torque wasn’t nearly as much as the 350, but for these relatively light cars, that was not an issue. They simply revved higher and created more power.
Duntov’s adaptation of the 265 V8 for the Corvette included a new camshaft, the first of at least four famous cams grinds by him and his staff for the small block Chevy. This first iteration raised rated gross hp to 195, at a lofty 5,000 rpm, which was an unheard of speed at the time for a mass-produced large engine. The actual redline on the Corvette’s minuscule tach was set at Ferrari-esque 6500 rpm.
But look at the net hp number: 180. Not only is that remarkably high, but given that it’s only 15 hp less than the gross, one wonders if the gross number was being sandbagged already. And this is still with the same low 8.0:1 CR heads. Quite remarkable, but just the first step in an almost infinite number of progressive steps that would see the stock small block make a genuine 400 hp from a blueprinted but stock-legal ’67-’69 Z28 302 with open headers, despite being rated at a ridiculous 290 hp. The 302 made its peak power at around 7000-7200 rpm.
The impact on the Corvette was dramatic; it now scooted to 60 in 8.5 seconds, did the 1/4 mile in 16.5 @ 83 mph, and hit 118 mph. Ironically, those results were with the Powerglide, as curiously the V8 ’55 Corvette kept its standard PG except for a very small number of three-speed manuals that were built at the very end of the year. the Corvette had originally never been planned to have anything but the PG, so it took a bit of doing to adapt the manual. But it’s important to note that this first Duntov cam, as well as the second one, the famous “097” cam, were tame enough to be teamed with the automatic. We ran a 1957 Motor Trend vintage review comparison a while back, and the Chevy had the 270 hp dual quad 283 teamed with the PG.
As to just how fast the 195 hp Chevy sedan was, I don’t have ready info. But with the right transmission and gears, I’m going to guess it was as good or more likely better than the PG Corvette’s stats (60 in 8.5 secs, 1/4 mile in 16.5 @ 83 mph). May not seem like much from today’s perspective, but in 1955, these were superb for a highly affordable car. BTW, the Corvette only weighed about 300 lbs less than the ’55 sedan, not as much as one might imagine.
So let’s get into the details of my ’55 Chevy. I really love the Nomad, with its distinctive sports-wagon body and those big rear wheel openings. But it is some 130 lbs heavier than the Bel Air coupe (3295 lbs), and I want the best-handling, best-going ’55, so unless I change my mind (we are MM’ing, don’t forget), it will be the coupe.
And no frilly two-tone paint for me, thank you. This gold looks nice; I’m also a sucker for white. But no stripper two door sedan even though it does weigh 85 lbs less. It’s not worth it; I’m not exactly planning a career at the drag strip.
The next step is the transmission. No thanks, Powerglide. I’ll take the 6-speed manual. What, you say? Yes, Chevy also introduced a new overdrive three-speed Saginaw in 1955, and teamed it with a mighty aggressive 4.11:1 rear axle ratio to take full advantage of all those six gears (the regular three-speed got a 3.70:1 axle).
Of course to really take advantage of all of them, I’d convert it to manual operation as I did on my ’66 F100, which gives me five very nicely spaced gears, clutchless shifting, and a 1900 rpm cruise at 60. On my transmission, first OD and second direct are too close to make it worthwhile using both.
Here’s the Chevy gear ratios. There might just be enough of a gap between 1st OD (2.058:1) and second direct (1.68:1) to make it worthwhile.
And here’s the engine speeds at various speeds and gears. That 36.1 rpm at one mph equals a lazy 2160 rpm @ 60 mph in 3rd OD. What a relaxed way to cruise! And even 100 mph only equals 3600 rpm. And with that 4.11 rear axle, acceleration in first and through the gears is going to be wicked.
I just calculated the maximum speeds in each gear, assuming a 6500 rpm redline (shift point): 1st : 52mph; 1st OD: 61.3mph; 2nd: 75mph; 2nd OD: 107mph; 3rd: 126mph. So maybe the optional 4.56:1 rear axle is the way to go. According to one article, it suggests just that combo, so that the 1/4 mile can be done in just second, second OD, and third gear, with a super fast shift from 2nd into 2nd OD.
Just to clarify: although I might find myself at the drag strip in my ’55 Chevy, that’s not really what I’m after. I want a world-class all-round performing car, and Chevy made it easy, thanks to their new policy of offering all the goodies as options or over-the counter parts. The 195 hp 265 already has those engine parts, but check out the chassis parts. Actually, that’s just a few; I also found an option list that includes factory installed HD springs front and rear (in various ratings), 6.70×15 6 ply tires with 30lbs pressure (instead of the softie 24lb standard tires), a front stabilizer bar, and some other goodies. A set of premium aftermarket oversize shocks will be added. And the longer Pittman arm from the power steering unit can be easily swapped in to create a faster 23:1 steering ratio.
I’m sure these parts all found their way into Smokey Yunick’s ’55 Chevy, the first of many for him.
Chevrolet published a very detailed guide that showed exactly what parts to buy and how to prep a competitive NASCAR stock car. The 1957 version is online here at oldcarbrochures. It makes fascinating reading, if you’re crazy like me.
And since I was a thrifty lad and didn’t go for a Chrysler 300, which was more powerful but not necessarily quicker, and weighed well over 4,000 lbs, I have plenty of money left over to improve my ’55 Chevy. In 1956, the dual-quad engine had 225 hp. And there was a late year version with 240 hp, thanks to 9.5:1 compression and the next iteration of Duntov’s cam. All easy to swap in.
And in 1957, I’ll sell my hot but tired 265 to some kid with a Ford roadster to replace his flathead, and buy myself a new 283 hp fuel injected 283 over the counter at the Chevy dealer. This exact same engine was rated at 290 hp in ’59, and it’s widely acknowledged to actually make right about 300. Instant starts, instant throttle response, and no surge or leaning out in hard cornering. It ran cleanly to 7000 rpm. And made wicked sounds doing it. Yes, my kind of engine. And I moved to Nevada, which had no speed limits.
In a ’57 Corvette, this mill yanked it to 60 in 5.7 seconds and the 1/4 mile in 14.3 seconds. These were startling in 1957, and simply the fastest times for any production street car in the world.
I’m still mulling over as to whether to add the Fuel Injection badges or not.
And there’s plenty of future upgrades to make to my ’55 as the years go on. Maybe I’ll just keep it forever, as I could argue that Detroit never built a full-sized car as all-round good and capable as these. Peak Detroit, peak Chevrolet, peak Paul’s MM’ing.
Well, I need to wrap this up, so I can spend some time driving my ’55 Chevy in my mind some more. And we never got to its styling. Oh well.
I don’t know what you’re going to be driving in the 1950s, but if you happen to see me in my ’55, beware…
Related reading:
CC 1955 Chevrolet Bel Air: The iCar – GM’s All-Time Greatest Hit PN
Automotive History: 1957 Chevrolet 283 Fuel Injection – Ahead of its Time and the Competition PN
After reading all the responses here and viewing the accompanying pictures and looking at new car ads and pictures; this meme keeps popping into my head:
I’m sold on the 1955 Chevrolet – I’ll take a gray & coral Nomad.
The cost is no object choice would be a 1957-58 Cadillac Eldorado Brougham, but would be impractical for trips to the Hardware Store & Safeway.
Honorable mention goes to 1950-51 4dr Lincoln Cosmo, 1956 Lincoln Premier, 1953 Kaiser Dragon, 1954 Kaiser Manhattan, 1957-58 Chrysler 300, and 1957-58 DeSoto Adventurer.
The best daily driver would be a 1954 Willys Aero Ace Deluxe, but it’s a Compact.
So many choices! The 1954 Studebaker Commander Starliner would be my first choice, but it isn’t a “big” car, even by the standards of its day. If the choice is limited to big cars, then a 1954 Hudson Hornet Hollywood hardtop.
It’s the last of the true Stepdowns, but with a moderate restyle that included a one-piece windshield and a less rounded back end. Given the production figures, I wouldn’t see myself coming and going too often.
Daily driver, here in the northeast? With our moist climate and heavily salted winter roads, something cheap and expendable. Any six cylinder-stick shift Studebaker, Rambler, Ford, Plymouth, etc will do.
The good Sunday go-to-meeting car? A 1953 Packard Patrician Formal Sedan by Derham in an appropriately understated dark blue with black padded top and black-wall tires.
Growing up in the fifties, I saw a lot of American cars in my part of town. two in particular stand out in my memory.
First is the ’59 Chevy, for those wild batwing fins. In Australia we got little ‘bats’ hanging upside down from them – the amber indicators required by law. But that’s not my choice.
It’s a car I first saw when it was some twenty years old. It just looked so wild, so different from anything else on the road, with its wrap-around multi-pane coupe roofline, and the rocket-like grille intake. A circular grille, aided by horizontal slits and subsidiary intakes underneath – of course it’s the bullet-nose Studebaker. Okay, nowadays I know it’s a rework of a Forties design, and I hope Paul doesn’t disqualify it for that, but in 1970 I’d never seen anything like it. I must’ve spent at least ten minutes walking around that car, marvelling at that shape, and the detailing. Just beautiful. And yes, I like it even more than the famed ’53 coupe.
But which one? The ’50 Commander wins for me. Although it lacks the first V8 from an independent, it has the longer front end which really makes the design work. Also I like its front end detailing better.
With this kind of question, I try to place myself in say, 1957. There are loads of finned, bechromed behemoths on the road and everyone knew in what direction cars were going-longer, lower and wider. There are some compelling buys. The 1957 Plymouth was a very attractive car, especially with torsion bar suspension. They really did handle better than anything else at the time. However, even showroom cars had huge quality problems. My dad had one and the block cracked at four years of driving.
The Chevrolet is also a very good buy and after three model years, reliable. Yes, this really mattered in 1957 and first year cars, like the Plymouth were best avoided. But I have always been different from the crowd, so I don’t want a Chevy that everybody and his dog in Canada already had.
Thus, my choice would be a 1957 VW Beetle. I live in a congested urban area even for them. The roads to the mountains were so atrocious that travelling them was a rarity for most folks. The Beetle is cheap to run, easy to park and can take bad roads better than any big car. It can maintain and fix it myself. The climate here is mild so the fresh air heater would be just fine.
Really, I can’t think of a better car for rural roads in BC in 1957, with mud, ruts and potholes everywhere.
I really wanted to come up with something that hasn’t already been said, but I can’t think of anything that comes in the ballpark of the 55 Chevy, the engineering the packaging styling all were perfection. I’d pick the 2-door sedan however, the longer roof looks better with the radiused fenders for the slicks 🙂
I’m quite sure that this will be the only vote for the 1954 Chrysler New Yorker. I’ve always had a soft spot for them. The 54 Imperial was also pretty sweet. Dare to be different!
model of the ’54 DeSoty had 54 yrs ago
Given my background, it’s Chevrolet or nothing. And it’ll be one of dad’s dealership cars. No contest. 1958 Impala two door hardtop in silver blue.
Chrysler 300 C, D or E. Failing that, ’59 Impala. All convertibles. At that time, black exterior, red interior and white top was pretty much the best color combination.
A 1957 Buick Caballero says “I’ve arrived.” The longroof. The sweepspear. The full rear wheel cut-out.
What a great ode to the ’55 Chevrolet and the SBC Paul. While I do agree with much of what you wrote, I think it’s also critical to mention that SBC valvetrain as being one of the keep aspects to it’s free revving nature. The stud mounted stamped rockers were light and simple, although it was Pontiac engineers who designed that valvetrain.
Now, for the question of the day, I’d really want a ’57 Fuelie Vette if I were a young guy looking for a daily driver that was fun, but that is far from a big car. Since this is an exercise in MM, I guess I have to go back to my first true love, a ’57 Bel Air 2-door hardtop hard top fuelie (283 hp version). I’d order a Corvette 4-speed OTC from the dealer and swap it in with a floor shift conversion. It’d also have to be a clean version; no skirts or kits, no bumper guards, or cheesy accessories.
From my earliest memories as a child I was enamored with the ’57 Bel Air. It was just the right blend of 1950’s styling cues without going over the top. And of course liking fast cars, once I learned of that 283 fuelie, that made it even more appealing. I was probably the only 6 year old kid who could rhyme off detailed specs on the car at a moment’s notice. I have to admit, that in adulthood I have gown much more fond of the ’55 Chevy too, so it’d be a close second – I just don’t have the same history with a ’55!
One point that I would like to add though is in relation to the hp ratings. While GM did rate these engines in net power, no one can say how close they are to the SAE net rating used from 1972. SAE set out a very specific guideline under SAE J1349 and I doubt GM was following that in 1955. Even with SAE J1349, there was still some descrepencies, which were supposedly addressed under SAE J2723 for Certified power that came in 2005 (several engines ratings were dropped under this new rating).
I bet if that engine would have been tested under SAE net ratings it would have been lower than 160 hp. Regardless of the hp rating, performance is always a true indicator. This is supported by the performance numbers form the R/T test. I have that test, and it ran 17.4 secs and it looks like (from the graph) with a trap speed of 76 mph. C/D tested an 170 hp LM1 Caprice, which was significantly heavier than the ’55 (test weight of 3952 lbs) and hampered with steeper gears (2.56:1), and it ran 16.8 secs @ 79.3 mph. Just looking at the trap speeds alone suggest the lighter Chevy makes quite a bit less power. I’d put this 265 more on par with the 145-hp 305-2bbl Chevrolet. A ’77 Caprice ran 17.9 secs @ 76.8 mph with 2.56 gears, which is much more comparable with the ’55 265.
Here’s one I saw at a show that was pretty close to what I’d pick.
Looks nice in black, Vince, but I’d probably want mine in that 50’s turquoise.
My neighbor when he was much younger had one in some sort of metallic rose color that was similar to that 1965 Caprice color, Evening Orchid. To remember the car of his youth, he has a die cast model of his ‘57 Belair 2-door Hardtop in the same color as his old car. It’s beautiful.
I can’t believe in 129 comments, that you and I are the only ones to speak up for the ‘57 Chevy, but then this is CC, and here we tend to stay away from the ubiquitous cars. 😉
This was also my Dad’s favorite from the 50’s. He had a ‘56 4-door 210 Sedan in India Ivory over Sherwood Green. He couldn’t afford a new ‘57 as a young man, and bought a slightly used ‘56. Like my neighbor, he has a diecast model of each of these years ‘56 & ‘57, but no original ‘55. But when we go to car shows together, he swoons over any Tri-Five.
For me, the ’57 has to red or black and all one colour, no two tone. I am back and forth on the colour, but I’d take either. There is a beautiful top quality (over)restored turquoise ’57 convertible locally. It was restored by Legendary Motor Car, of TV fame.
It’s not too surprising about the lack of love for the ’57 Chev here. CCers tend to be non conformist and I guess everybody and their uncle likes the ’57 Chev. For me though, I was literally barely old enough to talk when I became fascinated with the car. My dad showed me one and I was smitten – love at first sight. While in adulthood there are other cars I like more, I can’t forget how my love of cars started with the ’57 Chev.
My dad actually always preferred the ’55, as he said he like the Ferrari style grille. He also owned a ’55 Bel Air before I was born. I have to say the ’55 is an awesome car too, but the ’57 still edges it out for me.
Is your friends model car a Highway 61 die cast in dusk pearl? I have that car and it is a beautiful model, very well detailed and an amazing colour. I attached a photo of it.
I will try again with the photo shrunk down. It seems it didn’t like the large photo.
Yep! That’s the model… and he said his actual car looked like that, although I believe he said his was a non-pillared hard-top.
As to large photos, I’ve noticed that lately too, Vince. I believe Paul is trying to save server space, and I gotta say I can’t blame him. Today’s high pixel cameras (even on your iPhone) make pictures with file sizes that are way too big to be practical.
Like you, we’ve got an over restored ’57 in our area that I occasionally see at my mechanic’s shop. It’s a Bel Air 4 door sedan in that very light green color with a white top. Looks brand new.
I agree that the ’57 needs to be a single color. I even argue that the ’55 should also be a single color, but I like my ’56 Chevys in two-tone….
The above picture was from a post a while back when someone posted pictures of a ’56 Chevy Two-Ten that was repainted like a Bel Air… a pet peeve of mine. Thus the text on the screen shot. I am sure YOU know how these were painted. ;o)
My Dad’s Two-Ten looked like this one form the brochure….
I’d wait for the second-year ’56 on a Chevy. Mechanically your spec sounds good, but I’ll take a post sedan. Not a strippo, though – either a Bel Air or a 210 Delray Club Coupe.
While a 55 Chevy has its merit, I’d go for a supercharged Studebaker Hawk. Or if I could choose an Import, a Jaguar MK I
It would be obvious for me to take the 55 210 Delray Club Coupe. Make it light blue with a white roof like our family car back in the day.
Or I could go really big with the first Wide-Track Pontiac — a 1959 Catalina 2-door hardtop with the 389 V8 and the 4-speed Hydramatic. The Pontiac was the least radical of the GM’s wild 59s and I’ve always admired GM’s Peak Wraparound Windshield used on all of their 59-60 big cars. The Catalina is a little smaller than the Bonneville and Star Chief and has the more desirable to me small oval taillights.
Mine would not be resale red as shown in this photo; I’d choose turquoise with a white roof and definitely no fender skirts.
I concede that the Ford Y-block didn’t match Chevy’s 265/283, but I’m a Ford loyalist, and that’s that.
Tough to decide between two 1956’s. More practical is the Country Squire; I think I like how the head/taillights match up to the Thunderbird’s:
And then there’s the Continental Mark II—sober and austere as compared with the ravishing Cadillacs, we might say. As long as rich uncle can keep me in maintenance and gasoline, it’d be a great way to see and be seen, especially cruising the new Interstate System:
But Ford had a much superior THREE speed automatic transmission; compared to the sloppy “slip-n-slide” TWO speed Powerglide automatic transmission in the Chevy.
A powertrain wash-out between the two, in my opinion.
Not mentioned about the ’55 Chevy in the write-up was the beautiful Bel Air interior, with the stylish dashboard and all the little bow ties in it, repeated with all the little bow ties on the hubcaps. The feeling of size and headroom inside while the outside didn’t seem that big at all. Also the solidity of the doors, especially in the sedans. They felt sturdy, made out of thick metal hung on big hinges, and the sound and feel of that thing slamming shut was something few cars have ever matched. So many of the later GMs, even some of the Cadillacs, felt spongey on the hinges when opened, and the innards would rattle around when you slammed the big, heavy doors shut. Not so on the ’55 Bel Air. So while a step down Hudson, a Leowy coupe, or a ’57 Corvette are all attractive cars, the overall driving experience of the ’55 is likely to outshine them all.
57 Tri tone Nash Ambassador. The Ramblerized 58 Ambo would be just fine too. Along with any of the finned mopars.
So many interesting large cars of the 1950’s! The 120″ wheelbase of the Studebaker Coupes and other C/K models is a large car to me. I’ll take mine with the pillars, a V-8 and Overdrive.
Wow, for beauty it has to be the timeless ’53 Studebaker Commander V8 Starliner. For nostalgia a ’54 Chevy 210 DelRey Club Coupe like we had from ’54 to ’61. For alliteration a Hudson Hornet Hollywood Hardtop with Twin-H. Nah, forget all of them, make it a ’56 Continental – pure, unadulterated class – and I want air conditioning too.
A) CALLED IT. (See my comment from yesterday’s 40s car article.)
B) This might be the greatest piece ever written on the big Chevy and the SBC.
C) I agree with Paul’s commentary on this car. The late 50s cars might be beautiful in their way, but from an engineers standpoint they’re not much-SSDD (same shit, different day.) the 55/v8 combo was maybe not Citroen or Tatra levels of cool, but for a mainline American brand was insanely good.
I’d like one of these, please (1955 Studebaker President, preferably with a 259 and a 3-speed with OD and Hill Holder. Oh, and the Climatizer, if it was optional. Thank you.
My contenders:
1) Continental Mark II
2) Studebaker Speedster
3) If those aren’t large enough, ‘59 Catalina Convertible, v8, turbo hydramatic
4) 1955 Chrysler 300
My winner: 52-54 Cunningham C-3
My first car; a 1957 Dodge Custom Royal Lancer 2 dr HT with a 325 4bbl and torqueflight plus limited slip rear end. The build quality was better than my Father’s 1958 Plymouth Belvedere, and certainly better than his 1960 Dodge Phoenix.
Attributes; good V8, actual dependable 3 speed automatic, when many had 2 speed; and decent front suspension.
While the 1955 Chevy would be the practical choice, for all the reasons mentioned, my heart is with a 1958 DeSoto Fireflight, optioned with air conditioning and Sure-Grip differential. Torqueflight and the new 4bbl 361ci 10:1 compression B series wedge engine were standard.
The quad headlight version of the ’57-58 and stacked taillights on the soaring fins made this one of the best looking 1950’s cars, IMO. A three seat station wagon version would make this car more practical. A 300D may have been cleaner looking and a better performer, but living with a more high-strung engine in a daily driver for a decade may have been too much of a challenge.
The horrible quality of the 1957 cars was supposedly fixed by 1958.
1956 Packard Caribbean convertible (one of 276).
I’d insist that S-P equip mine with a standard 3-speed transmission (I should be up on this, but I don’t recollect if any came that way or not).
And I’d insist that mine be painted a solid color of my choice.
We saw a 56 Clipper last September in Staunton Illinois with a 3 speed. If you could get it on a Clipper I would imagine that it was a possibility on a Caribbean as well. Don’t know about OD though.
15 or so years ago I was working on a cold planing crew doing road construction somewhere in Sanford Maine. There was a house on the road that we were working on that had not one, but two, 1956 Packard Carribean convertibles. Both were mint. Lucky duck that man was.
1957 Mercury Colony Park hardtop wagon please. Maybe in Fiesta Red or Brazilian Bronze.
I can’t dispute the revolutionarity of their V8—won’t even try—but I don’t want a ’50s Chev. The ’55-’57s everyone seems to love leave me colder than cold; I just don’t like ’em from any angle.
Fords are right out of the question.
I think I’ll probably have one or another ’56 from the Chrysler Corporation. A 4-door or a wagon. Could likely be perfectly happy with a Plymouth or a Dodge with overdrive, but maybe I’d go for something higher up the line.
Or maybe I’d take the opportunity to try out a Packard or a Studebaker (“a bear in his natural habitat—a Studebaker!”, it’s been said).
I knew it would be a Mopar. But I was torn between the ’55’s and ’57’s.
In the end I went with the ’57 Imperial Crown convertible, single headlight version.
I already have it !
My 1957 Olds Super 88.
So it will be back to the 50’s again this summer.
Can’t wait.
Sorry.
Here is the picture.
»applause«
Sounds like moms “Blue Baron”. I’ll take it in the J2 version.
The 1950s–flash and fins and prosperity for all. Wish I could have lived it firsthand. My baby-boomer father only has fleeting memories of this decade, most of them from the tail-end of the decade.
Lots of tasty options that decade, and even though I’m a Ford man at heart, the only car from them that really makes me drool is the T-Bird. But for this exercise, that car is strictly off the table, per the rules. So I’m going to choose something from the GM camp, and the choice may surprise you.
1953 Oldsmobile 98. It’s a lovely car with great lines and beautifully trimmed. Oldsmobile was known as the Innovation Division within GM, so I’m going to get all sorts of cool options on my ’53 Olds that others don’t have, like a transmission I don’t have to shift. If my memory of history is correct, those came with the excellent 330 CID OHV V-8, but sadly, the horsepower figure escapes me. I know for the era it was rather high–we’d laugh at it today, but for the 50s, it was some stout stuff!