I rented dozens of these as Chryslers and Imperials on business. They were an absolute joy for long distance freeway driving and passengers loved the massive leg room.
The K car, and all upscale vehicles based on it, are consistently underrated by most people. I had Chrysler company cars back then & I thought they were the best available on the market
I had a 90 Imperial with a 3.3L V6 in it (3.8L didn't come out till 91) and it was a great car, especially on trips. Very large and comfy, you wouldn't really know it was based on a K car. Sold it years ago to a friend of mine who still drives it to this day.
This car had the distinction of having more legroom than any Imperial sedan since the (in)famous 235" long 1973 model, actually beating the '73 by about 2 inches, while also being the smallest on the outside of any Imperial sedans. The K-car might have been short on sophistication, but it was the most space-efficient American car platform ever designed. If I were in a position to buy a classic car, this would be on my list, despite the half-vinyl roof.
If someone asked Chrysler stylists in 1974 to look ahead and draw the 1990 version of an Imperial, this is EXACTLY the car they’d have envisioned. It’s nothing more than a smaller, slightly more aerodynamic 1974 Imperial with the addition of the ‘79 New Yorker’s funky opera window in the door and the ‘81 Imperial’s bustle trunk, albeit squared off. That being said, I’d buy one in a minute!
One of the big var magazines said they would combine the DeVille's V-8 drivetrain, the Continental's smooth, European styling and the Imperial's beautiful interior and make the perfect American luxury car.
I had a Dodge Dynasty as a dealer loaner for a week or so back in the nineties while my Dakota pickup was in for repairs. What a really nice comfortable car that was!
I had one. My dad and I shared it. It was given to us for free during the housing crisis 2009. White white vinyl top and blue interior. Did great on gas for us. Got us through some tough times. Great sound system too
Love it when you have Bob on! Pure, no bullshit sanity. In the '80s, I had three company K-Cars. By the time the '90s arrived the original platform could scarcely be seen in cars like the last Imperial. A friend's wife had one. She didn't let him drive it, but he could show it to his buddies!
I'm 67 and for it's time it was a beautiful automobile. In some ways I am an old soul. If Bob has any photos of his modified version, he should share them and let us judge.
Honestly, I really liked the boxy "Imperial" with the sloped nose when it came out, and I still do. The only questionable styling faux pas was the MAJOR front overhang.
I was hoping Bob was coming back! In his books, I loved Bob’s take on this car and the disagreements him and Iacocca had about it. In his last book he mentioned making a “Lamborghini Edition” Imperial with Italian leather and Lamborghini wheels.
When those Imperial’s came out, the comment I liked the best was “Well at least Iacocca saved the company for awhile.” In Southern California that’s the car we envisioned was driven by senior citizens who retired to Florida. An ugly box made of tin and Russian steel. And, 33 years later, it still looks like a car drawn with crayons by a five year old. Compare it to a 1962 Chrysler Imperial and shed a tear. Thanks for the always interesting videos. You were able to force me (I mean hold my interest) into watching more pictures of 💩-box 1990s Imperials than I ever would, voluntarily.
I had a 1992 Imperial and loved it as a highway cruiser. It had the 3.8 and 4-wheel air suspension. Also 4-wheel disc brakes with ABS. All white exterior and dark blue cloth interior. It had a full set of analog gauges.Sold it after a warranty repair on the ABS pump at 65,000 miles. It would get 28-29 mpg on the highway. Drove it home one night on the Illinois tollway, easily keeping up with traffic at 90 mph. It served me well and the room in the interior, especially legroom in the rear was as good or better than any other car.
At the time, Imperial 3.8 with four corner air springs and Mark Cross leather was the only fwd American car that would give a fwd Continental 3.8 a good run for its money as far as air suspension ride quality and interior room go. And it did that with a bean axle rear suspension vs the Continental's independent rear suspension.
These cars have always been interesting to me for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is the level of luxury. But then...they also showed how clearly Lee had lost his product "touch". The market had moved onto much more aerodynamic themes (i.e., Taurus, Sable, Continental, Town Car). As you mention at the beginning of the video, Lee was using a very old (by automotive design standards) idea. And it's always great to hear Bob Lutz opine!
1990, GM behind Ford, was far more modern looking than Lee's idea, with the GM10, F cars and reskinned B & C bodies. Opera windows, vinyl roofs, and wire wheels not to be seen. Lee was past his prime and living in the past. It is endemic to executive burnout, as Henry II, Bill Mitchell, Harley Earl, and Lucille Ball before him.
@@davidrodstein9461 Yeah, it's crazy to think that Imperials with crystal pentastars and the 4th gen F-body were built in the same year. I also read some time ago that he mandated with an iron fist that the LH cars have a straight belt line, not curved like the stylists wanted to do. Knowing when to step aside is a tough thing that few can do.
I worked at a Chrysler dealer when this car was introduced. The model with air suspension ride really well. Can’t remember if air suspension was optional or standard.
This was interesting. You have to love bob Lutz and his honesty. I recall this car. I liked how it looked and how it was optioned out, but I would not own one due to some of the reasons you mentioned. You can see the early 1980's Imperial influenced the front end design on this car. I enjoyed the video just for the information and footage alone. The Green Hornet would not drive this versiion Imperial. That concept car came years later than never made it into production. During this era, there was not much difference between this Imperial and New Yorker Fifth Avenue.
I never really knew what to think about these cars. I was a Ford fan who had driven and loved some GMs but never Chrysler. I mostly saw older ladies driving them and thought well, they apparently see something in it". Today the older geek in me appreciates compact (compared to the 70s) luxury and what they were trying to do with it. Heck I don't even mind as much that it was FWD. I also was always curious about the Taurus based Lincoln Continental which Lincoln shoehorned that beautiful 32 valve 4.6L V8 into.
😏 With a vid title hook like “ Last of the Imperials “ and a pic of an early 1990’s K car derived Imperial it was an easy click to watch choice Adam.👍Fun to see and hear you and Bob Lutz having a car talk chat / visit. These 1990 - 1993 Imperials was largely based on the stretched FWD New Yorker Fifth Avenue which still had some roots leading to the ubiquitous 1980’s K car that had allowed ChryCorp to platform / drivetrain source mutate into multiple model spin-offs. These early 90’s Imperials were considerably refined, upscaled & given a highly polished execution in contrast to the 198o’s Reliant / Aries K cars. These Imperials had smoothed out front end styling which has aged well and a tail light design which echoed the 1981 - 1983 bustle backed Imperial’s tail light styling. These 1990’s Imperials were given more exterior bling, a nicely trimmed upscale & detailed interior along with ChryCorp’s carry over generic / familiar looking instrument / controls / dash panel. The Lincoln Town Cars and Cadillac Fleetwood Broughams of this era were all around bigger in size, more commanding in stature and both came with V-8’s in the engine room. For Imperial to have been comparable for luxury class competition ChryCorp.would have had to continue making & selling the late 70’s / early 1980’s R bodied Chrysler Fifth Avenue V-8 powered RWD models that somehow were kept current & fresh going into the 1990’s. Instead the R bodied Chryslers timed out after 1981. …GM’s Olds 98 Touring and Buick Electra Ultra SuperCharged V-6 models of this era easily topped these K car derived “ luxury “ Imperials.While the ChryCorp. 3.8 V-6 was a good runner it was not as good as GM’s very smooth running / long life / gas mileage champ 3800 V-6. As for What Was Not A TorqueFlite ChryCorp.’s UltraDrive automatic? Less Said The Better. …What would have helped these K car derived Imperials to be possibly more distinguished and interesting to current collectors would have been some exclusive Imperial only features like a more powerful exclusive Imperial only turbo / supercharged V-6 or better still having a nice V-8 engine installed hooked up with a truly made durable & reliable bulletproofed UltraDrive automatic tranny. A 4 wheel independent well sorted out suspension ( perhaps more akin to that eras Olds Touring Sedan ) would have been a plus.Would such an Imperial have been possible for Chrysler to do & still remain / be an economic to create & make car? Likely not. The last “ Dream Car “ Imperial shown a few years back sadly did not make it past being a dream show car. …Some would suggest the 1981 - 1983 Volare / Aspen / Diplomat / LeBaron / Cordoba / Mirada platform derived Imperial slant back coupe with it’s 318 V-8 and ChryCorp old school torsion bar / leaf spring suspension was a viable contender / candidate for being given the “ Last Imperial “ title. Those 1981 - 1983 Imperials have endured a long running since new really like it / really don’t like it styling opinion -/+ appraisal. Having Frank Sinatra lend himself to endorsing and even namesaking some of these early 1980’s slant backed Imperials for some makes these early 1981 - 1983 Imperials special interest collectibles. …I would suggest the 1967 - 1968 Imperials likely were / are the true “ Last Imperials “ tho there are those who would consider them to be pretender Imperials as well. With Imperial specific dashes and well done interior styling trim details plus specific to Imperial body panels, bumpers, front grille and taillight designs the 67 - 68 Imperials were stand apart Imperials compared to the 1969 thru 1975 Imperials which were based much more on the Chrysler New Yorker. The 1969 thru 1975 Imperials had same basic instrument panel / dash layouts as a New Yorker tho Imperials were still given a different front end / grille and tail light styling differences and a longer wheelbase length for 1969 thru 1973 only. …For more than a few Imperial admirers the only real Imperials are the full framed / separate body 1957 thru 1966 Imperials or 1955 and 1956 Imperials. Unfortunately for we Imperial enthusiasts the demo derby smash’em & crash’em circuit runners have loved to death many 1957 thru 1966 & 67 / 68 Imperials since the 1960’s up to current times. Fun vid to see & hear you visiting with Bob Lutz Adam. Was a good car talk chit chat.👍
I never got why people tended to look down on that car? I knew someone who bought one of those used and we had a lot of fun cruising the city with the top down on weekends. He drove the living hell out of that thing, and it performed beautifully.
@@HAL-dm1ehI think it's because a lot of enthusiasts have a hard time enjoying nice looking cruisers for what they are. They deride them because they aren't fast and have cowl shake, but these aren't supposed to be performance cars. I had the follow up: a 2000 Sebring convert. I wanted a cheap drop and it was in nice shape. I really enjoyed it. It did the four-seat convertible thing really well. I drove less aggressively as it was a 'drop the top and enjoy the scenery' kind of car.
@@johncronin5311 Might be Imperial mpg if he is Canadian ... A Imp gallon is 4.5 litres; a US gallon is 3.8 L. 38 Imp mpg would be ~ 32 US mpg which seems possible at a moderate hwy speed.
I LOVED the packaging of these cars. My sister had a lowly Plymouth Acclaim, I remember groaning when walking up to get into that small, Accord sized car. Open the back, and it was huge! Much bigger than my Taurus. Well, not width wise, but leg wise, which matter far more often since people rarely carry 6 ppl in a sedan. Plus a huge trunk... later K car packaging was almost sorcery it was so well done. So the upper models, WOW, they had room in those essential areas, and offered traditional Caddy/Lincold style cues after those marques had abandoned the unabashed, squared off American look, so these cars fit a great niche! Plus, much more (leg) room, and luxury in all the places that mattered. I'd love to see a modern version of this, a stretched version of the 300 with an aggressive waterfall grille and hidden headlamps (which would fit in great with the 300's retro vibes) and a huge , luxurious rear space, and once again, they would fill a profitable niche that Caddy and Lincoln once again. There IS a market, with lots of money, that want a big, impressive, comfortable and easy to get in out of vehicle, with a big slice of tastful luxury to remind you, and everyone else that you appreciate and can afford the finer things in life. SUVs cannot give that feeling or garner that kind of respect or admiration from others. Too look alike, too many shared parts, too trucky/rough/hard to enter/crude.
Based on looks alone the 64-66 Imperials can't be beat. I also loved the 81's especially the Sinatra edition. If they hadn't screwed up the fuel injection I think they would've been more successful. I never liked the 90-93s
When I was a kid in the 90's there was a red LeBaron convertable up the street from us and my high school English teacher in 2006 had a New Yorker with the button leather.
Always liked these Imperials. They were seldom seen even when new and hardly ever now. Showed just how far the K car platform could be taken. The C body 88-93 New Yorkers, Dynastys and this Imperial had floor pan width extenders to make the floorplan a bid wider along the rocker panels. I thought the Imperial was more tastefully styled outside and particularly inside than the New Yorkers. However I thought the New Yorker's 20% vinyl roof looked better than the Imperials 50% top. These cars had an abundance of of leg and head room front and especially rear, although as pointed out they were fairly narrow cars. The 3.3 an 3.8 were some of the best V6's ever built. Bulletproof engines, and smooth and torquey. The cloth seats are a rare and desirable option as the leather did not wear well. You could also order a combination with leather bolsters and cloth inserts.
My friend had one of these. It was so great for road trips. Although as squishy and comfy as those seats felt at first I can Defo see why all cars have gone to more supportive seats. After awhile you have to shift around to get comfortable. But you have lots of rooms and options for the way you could stretch out
I liked the stock form. It was extremely comfortable on a cross country trip we took in one. I have heard from owners that after the warranty period, they became 'bug prone' and expensive to continually repair. The back seat space in terms of leg room was incredible!
I had a 91 Dynasty. Loved the car put a lot of miles on it gave me very little trouble. If they still made them by the time it wore out I would’ve gone down and bought another one
In 1991 my parents bought a 1985 Chrysler New Yorker at Ray Thomas Chrysler Plymouth in Cuyhoga Falls Ohio, on the same day it was being traded in on a 1991 Imperial. The same salesman that sold it new and sold the imperial sold the New Yorker to my parents.
@@alitheretrokid yes I can attest to that lol. Every Chrysler I’ve owned with one they never gave me one but if problems. Just the rust always was what got them
I wish they still offered these to people who don’t mind less power and a bit higher fuel consumption (if even compared to the 3.6) in a trade off for not having to worry about durability and reliability. It’s like ford with their 2.5 and 3.0 duratec engines. I’d consider a new bronco or escape if they offered either of them still
@@joshuagibson2520Pacifica with a 3.8 is rare. But you have the newer high output 3.8. If that engine you have was under the hood of an Imperial, it would turn it into a hotrod.
This was as far as the K car could be taken; Bob is right. I liked these, and they were very comfortable for four passengers. For the time I wasn’t offended by the styling. OTOH, the Executive Sedan and Limousine did look like posers.
They were pleasant and attractive cars throughout the 90's. Quiet and comfortable and roomy, plush interior. I have seen a few Dynasty examples just take a beating and kept on going. A friend of mine her parents owned a fully loaded burgundy w/ burgundy leather 1993 New Yorker Salon. It was a low mileage, flawless, garage queen through the 90's into the early 2000's. From what I gather, or remember one of the grandkids snuck it out and totalled it in the middle of the night. Then they went with the 300M. Chrysler folks. I wouldn't mind having a clean New Yorker today.
Great interview. I appreciate Mr. Lutz time. In my younger years, I would agree with Lutz about Iacocca not getting it. Now after having issues with pain, I agree with Iacocca. I think there's a place for both the Imperial and the LHS.
The Imperial transmission is mentioned as a weak point of this car, I had and still have a 1992 LeBaron convertible 3.0 and I'm on my fourth (or is it my fifth) transmission. I can only conclude both cars had the same gearbox. I just turned 196K and every drive without a transmission fault is another great day. Bob Lutz is a rock star.
I ran across a 92 Chrysler imperial for sale yesterday. I remembered this video. I’m thinking about purchasing the car and making it look like Bob’s imperial has sort of a tribute car.
These weren't bad cars. Much better than anything coming from Dodge/Chrysler today. The downside to them is that they had a V-6 where the Cadillac Fleetwood and Lincoln Town Car had V-8s. People said these felt underpowered compared to the rivals. I've heard people complain about these having some electrical gremlins that were very hard to keep fixed.
The only real competitor the Imperial had at the time was the Lincoln Continental. These two were the only fwd American luxury sedans with four wheel air suspension and the roomiest fwd interiors.
I grew up in the Detroit area and lived there until I was 43. I loved watching the road for test cars and prototypes out for a run. My family all worked for Ford, but I dated a G.M. exec. in the late 80’s. I remember him telling me all G.M exec. cars had the same RCZ or RCY Michigan plates. They were easy to spot. The other thing that was easy to spot on Detroit area freeways were the high numbers of newer Chrysler vehicles left on the side of the road, disabled, waiting to be towed in for repair. My husband and I now drive Mazda.
I was in GM engineering based out of Flint. Although I was constantly all over SE Mich. All the Flint region assigned vehicles came out of building in the Buick City complex. All GUS, GUT, or HHF plates. I know the Warren Tech Center people would get theirs off of a building on E 11 Mile. This is in the 1990’s still using the blue Michigan plate. In 1996 the Flint region needed new plates and got the automobile centennial plate with 3 letters and 2 numbers. Those all were EDS prefix. Plus you could spot the North American Operations barcode sticker in the lower left of the windshield. There was a staggering amount of GM company vehicles on the roads between Flint and Detroit. Lansing to an extent too. Well after the “restructuring “ (internally we were never allowed to use bankruptcy) the company car program changed drastically. To conserve money assigned drivers were no longer getting a different vehicle every 90 days. It’s one year of driving or longer currently. It’s still somewhat easy to spot a GM owned vehicle. They never change the plates to start with. So they are the basic white and blue Michigan plate but old and beat up all with SEP tags and on new but boring GM vehicles. Many times I was driving M plated because of my job. Was there from 95 to 2018. Moved to a different company but enjoyed my time there.
My folks owned a low-mileage white example back around 2000-2001. Gorgeous car with an incredible ride, creature comforts, decent power and surprising gas mileage. However, the electronics and auto-leveling rear suspension were just atrocious. The entire electronic dash cluster had to be replaced, and the car was constantly in the shop with suspension issues. Finally my folks threw in the towel and traded it in for a new (at the time) PT Cruiser. They never looked back! 😂
If it had the air suspension, just put new air springs on it. And the digi dash on any old car usually just has to have the contacts resoldered back on.
1:01 - 2:00 though Adam is talking about the New Yorker Fifth Avenue, it's not clear the car shown is not the Imperial, but rather a 1992-1993 New Yorker Fifth Avenue
Bob was one of the few real car guys of the era who understood how to build a car that people wanted, too bad he was always fighting those bean counters 😂
That's not a Cimarron trick. Cimarron was an entry level Cadillac based on an econocar. Imperial was a flagship product based on Chrysler's prior flagship New Yorker Fifth Avenue, which was a stretched version of the already large New Yorker Salon. Not a good comparison lol.
In the 1980s, a neighbour of ours had a number of businesses (side hustles), among them a limousine service. He actually had a K-car based limo, white in colour, stretched even more than that Imperial. I always thought it looked ridiculous, but he used it for a few years and then something must of happened to it mechanically, because it sat for years after that beside his gas station, getting steadily more and more mouldy and moss covered. I always thought the K-cars were truly dreadful (my grandfather had a Dodge 600, and other relatives owned Reliants, Caravans etc), but they certainly saved Chrysler from bankruptcy.
I was a Ford guy by the time those '90s things came out and didn't really care. Back in the early '80s as sort of a kid(smart but just a kid), I got the pleasure oi installing 2 Imperial(early '80s) retrofit kits.. At the time I thought "what a joke?" this is. Kit consisted of a pallet or pallets of parts(fuel tank, the largest) to convert the fuel injection system to carburetor. I think the cast iron intake manifold was the heaviest part in that so-called kit. The gas tank was the largest item. I wish I had one of those 'kits' now. It would be very valuable. Hated it in '83. I know these are the K-Imperials. Not the ones I'm speaking of. Sorry for the fluff.
A talk with Mr. Lutz about the infamous Cadillac BLS would be welcome. I remember the "hype" in the press when it was launched. It ended in a big bust, even worse than the Cimarron.
The Imperial was absolutely beautiful inside. The seats and door panels and dash were beautiful and elegant, one of the best trimmed interiors ever. The styling of the exterior was beautiful. The only problem were the proportions: it needed to be a few inches wider and a few inches taller.
I had a burgundy Dodge Dynasty for three years that I selected as a company car while I had my own Volvo 940GL. The Dynasty was pleasant on most roads and had very nice seats though nothing like the seats in the incomparable seats in the Volvo but the Dynasty became flustered when it encountered complex bumps in the road because of its torsion beam rear suspension as many economically built front wheel drive vehicles that are built to a price point and don’t employ a full independent rear wheel suspension encounter on bad roads. It’s the difference between a pedestrian vehicle and a great vehicle and one that you’ll remember. That’s what the esteemed Mr Lutz was talking about and why he was disappointed in the last Imperial which was an imposter.
Interesting that you had both a Dynasty and a 940. I always thought with some exterior trim rearrangement, the Dynasty could almost have visually "passed" as a 7/900 series!
These are AWESOME cars! Take out the load leveling in the back and ABS and switch over to the modern A604 computer, and they are a blast to drive alongside rock-solid reliability.
Do not remove the load leveling or the rear will sag even when empty. These cars have super soft springs and bushings. I want one with the four wheel air springs, softer ride and keeps the chassis perfectly level.
@@Skyisthelimit4me Absolutely. Springs make them from a suspension standpoint bulletproof. Although if the system still works might as well keep it unless you don't have AAA
@@elasticmusic2084 The idea is keep it maintained. I think the non air suspension models had air shocks in the back for leveling if I remember correctly. Either way all Imperials had either one of two self leveling suspensions. I like the air springs because they reduce unsprung weight. Those steel coil springs are very heavy. When the car needs new tires change the springs. That's how I maintained all my Lincoln's and never had an issue. I changed the air springs when I got tires whether they were still good or not.
This was a higher level of luxury than the last Imperial sedan was before in 1975. Because in 1976 that Imperial was renamed the New Yorker. So when the Imperial returned to go above the New Yorker, it was a step up from what the inheritated from the previous Imperial sedan.
I absolutely HATED these due to the geriatric details. In the day, it was perfectly suited to 80 year-olds like my grandparents. And ONLY people in that demographic. My teenage self felt quite sure nobody but the oldest drivers would ever buy one. But… I recognized its basic good shape and proportions, as did Bob Lutz, who largely modified it the way I would have to remove the geriatric details, and allow the shape to be clearer and better-expressed. I still hate the car, but I appreciate the feature, your kind review of it, and Bob’s commentary on it. Always well worth watching- even when I don’t like the vehicle features.
It's interesting how Mr Iacocca's influence on Chrysler is talked about. Lee Iacocca was CEO from the late 70s to his retirement in 1992. I believe that the K car development was well underway when he came on board. While he is credited with the K car ( and squeezing every possible variation out of that platform), it was also under his leadership that the remarkably different and visionary LH platform was launched in 1991. My opinion is that Iacocca was a brilliant pitchman for the K car, making the best out of a very utilitarian but visually uninspiring design, while at the same time, allowing the designers come up with something completely different for the decade following his term as CEO.
In late 1989 my Grandmother was looking to replace her 1986 Olds 98 Regency. On her short list was this Imperial, a Lincoln Town Car, and the new Deville (which got "fins" back in 1989...at least we thought that then with the new refreshed tall taillights). After driving all three, the Town Car was just too big. One of her mall-walking friends had a Dynasty, and the Imperial felt too much like a fancy Dynasty. I'll be honest...I told her the Imperial was nothing but a K-Car in a dress... She bought a beautiful 1989 ruby red over red leather Deville. No regrets on not getting the Imperial, as that Cadillac was a wonderful car that she loved and was trouble-free.
I liked the looks of these but thought the scale of these were too small. If somehow the R-bodies had lived longer and this design theme had been put atop of that body with a 318/torqueflite it may have been more of a success. Look how well the 5th Avenues sold in the 1980's.
@@JazzzRockFuzion Agreed! Just imagine how well an R-bodied Imperial would have sold in the mid-1980's. GM and Ford full-sized cars really took off sales wise in 1983 but obviously Chrysler didn't have a crystal ball. Even their M-body Fifth Avenues sold very well from 1983-1989. Good to see a fellow R-body fan out there.
I still have great hope for all of the American Chrysler brands to emerge as front runners in engineering again in this new era of automotive technology and possibly even gain their own independence by becoming a financial giant again as they were when Mercedes found them financially attractive in the early nineties. They could have the potential to spin off on their own and an Imperial as an offering would represent their financial might and a crowning accomplishment. Chrysler needs to offer another authentic finely crafted Imperial with quality on a level that it was in the models produced between 1961-1968 to represent that the corporation is capable of producing exceptional engineering in its luxury divisions and that its engineering benefits are built into all of its products at every level. If they don’t spin off they need to lead with Stellantis within Stellantis because the strongest Chrysler brands have been supporting the Fiat family of brand that were acquired in the merger. Chrysler’s engineering capabilities cannot be compromised as Mercedes forced them to be in their partnership.
Adam, I scrolled through your video list looking for any take on a first generation Lincoln LSC, around ‘88 or so and didn’t see one. Is that a car you might feature someday?
I am a Mopar fan and have been for 50 years . However , this Imperial unlike my 1959 & 1967 with a torqueflite had a nasty habit , when decelerating, of downshifting with a slam bang that felt like someone had rear ended me. I never owned one of these but I did rent one.
There were a few of these for sale that I thought about buying this spring. I ended up not however because I was looking for something to take long trips with, and the fact that I've never even seen a 90s imperial in person before tells me that they must not be that reliable if they aren't on the road anymore. I ended up getting a cadillac fleetwood instead
I remember the "New YorKer", but I guess my brain pushed out all thoughts of Imperials after the 1983 Sinatra edition... (BTW, I sorta thought Bob had 1 of those.) They should have put a longer trunk on that car, a la the mini-Cadillacs, but I always did love their Mark Cross interiors! BTW, Bob isn't always right: I always loved my father's cars. If "It's not your father's Oldsmobile!" then I don't want it! LoL
I rented dozens of these as Chryslers and Imperials on business. They were an absolute joy for long distance freeway driving and passengers loved the massive leg room.
The K car, and all upscale vehicles based on it, are consistently underrated by most people. I had Chrysler company cars back then & I thought they were the best available on the market
Great cars, especially when new.
I had a 90 Imperial with a 3.3L V6 in it (3.8L didn't come out till 91) and it was a great car, especially on trips. Very large and comfy, you wouldn't really know it was based on a K car. Sold it years ago to a friend of mine who still drives it to this day.
Hanging on to a rare, collectible car
This car had the distinction of having more legroom than any Imperial sedan since the (in)famous 235" long 1973 model, actually beating the '73 by about 2 inches, while also being the smallest on the outside of any Imperial sedans. The K-car might have been short on sophistication, but it was the most space-efficient American car platform ever designed. If I were in a position to buy a classic car, this would be on my list, despite the half-vinyl roof.
If someone asked Chrysler stylists in 1974 to look ahead and draw the 1990 version of an Imperial, this is EXACTLY the car they’d have envisioned. It’s nothing more than a smaller, slightly more aerodynamic 1974 Imperial with the addition of the ‘79 New Yorker’s funky opera window in the door and the ‘81 Imperial’s bustle trunk, albeit squared off. That being said, I’d buy one in a minute!
One of the big var magazines said they would combine the DeVille's V-8 drivetrain, the Continental's smooth, European styling and the Imperial's beautiful interior and make the perfect American luxury car.
These are absolutely beautiful cars. I know people like to poke fun at them, but when you see one in person, you'll appreciate it.
Great cars, when new.
I truly treasure your conversations with Bob. I don't know if people realize the icon that he is. He certainly is one around this area (Michigan).
I had a Dodge Dynasty as a dealer loaner for a week or so back in the nineties while my Dakota pickup was in for repairs. What a really nice comfortable car that was!
My neighbour had a 1990 Dynasty which he kept for 28 years. He bought it when it was a year old after it was used by a rental car company.
I had one. My dad and I shared it. It was given to us for free during the housing crisis 2009. White white vinyl top and blue interior. Did great on gas for us. Got us through some tough times. Great sound system too
I️ would LOVE to see a picture of Bob’s Imperial.
Love it when you have Bob on! Pure, no bullshit sanity. In the '80s, I had three company K-Cars. By the time the '90s arrived the original platform could scarcely be seen in cars like the last Imperial. A friend's wife had one. She didn't let him drive it, but he could show it to his buddies!
I'm 67 and for it's time it was a beautiful automobile. In some ways I am an old soul. If Bob has any photos of his modified version, he should share them and let us judge.
Too bad there isn’t a photo of Bob’s custom Imperial. Sounds beautiful.
I was just going to post that same thought, lol, you beat me to it. Yes, sounds like it was really cool!
In the crusher, a shame really.
Agree!
Yeah I searched for that online with no luck 😁
Honestly, I really liked the boxy "Imperial" with the sloped nose when it came out, and I still do. The only questionable styling faux pas was the MAJOR front overhang.
I was hoping Bob was coming back! In his books, I loved Bob’s take on this car and the disagreements him and Iacocca had about it. In his last book he mentioned making a “Lamborghini Edition” Imperial with Italian leather and Lamborghini wheels.
The Bob Lutz interview was terrific!
When those Imperial’s came out, the comment I liked the best was “Well at least Iacocca saved the company for awhile.”
In Southern California that’s the car we envisioned was driven by senior citizens who retired to Florida. An ugly box made of tin and Russian steel. And, 33 years later, it still looks like a car drawn with crayons by a five year old.
Compare it to a 1962 Chrysler Imperial and shed a tear.
Thanks for the always interesting videos. You were able to force me (I mean hold my interest) into watching more pictures of 💩-box 1990s Imperials than I ever would, voluntarily.
I just love the scotch highball in the cup holder at 3:38
I had a 1992 Imperial and loved it as a highway cruiser. It had the 3.8 and 4-wheel air suspension. Also 4-wheel disc brakes with ABS. All white exterior and dark blue cloth interior. It had a full set of analog gauges.Sold it after a warranty repair on the ABS pump at 65,000 miles. It would get 28-29 mpg on the highway. Drove it home one night on the Illinois tollway, easily keeping up with traffic at 90 mph. It served me well and the room in the interior, especially legroom in the rear was as good or better than any other car.
At the time, Imperial 3.8 with four corner air springs and Mark Cross leather was the only fwd American car that would give a fwd Continental 3.8 a good run for its money as far as air suspension ride quality and interior room go. And it did that with a bean axle rear suspension vs the Continental's independent rear suspension.
Thank you for asking Bob about his imperial, sincerely appreciate it
These cars have always been interesting to me for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is the level of luxury. But then...they also showed how clearly Lee had lost his product "touch". The market had moved onto much more aerodynamic themes (i.e., Taurus, Sable, Continental, Town Car). As you mention at the beginning of the video, Lee was using a very old (by automotive design standards) idea. And it's always great to hear Bob Lutz opine!
1990, GM behind Ford, was far more modern looking than Lee's idea, with the GM10, F cars and reskinned B & C bodies. Opera windows, vinyl roofs, and wire wheels not to be seen. Lee was past his prime and living in the past. It is endemic to executive burnout, as Henry II, Bill Mitchell, Harley Earl, and Lucille Ball before him.
@@davidrodstein9461 Yeah, it's crazy to think that Imperials with crystal pentastars and the 4th gen F-body were built in the same year. I also read some time ago that he mandated with an iron fist that the LH cars have a straight belt line, not curved like the stylists wanted to do. Knowing when to step aside is a tough thing that few can do.
I worked at a Chrysler dealer when this car was introduced. The model with air suspension ride really well. Can’t remember if air suspension was optional or standard.
It was optional
Bob Lutz interview excerpt, and garage, great stuff!
This was interesting. You have to love bob Lutz and his honesty. I recall this car. I liked how it looked and how it was optioned out, but I would not own one due to some of the reasons you mentioned. You can see the early 1980's Imperial influenced the front end design on this car. I enjoyed the video just for the information and footage alone. The Green Hornet would not drive this versiion Imperial. That concept car came years later than never made it into production. During this era, there was not much difference between this Imperial and New Yorker Fifth Avenue.
I never really knew what to think about these cars. I was a Ford fan who had driven and loved some GMs but never Chrysler. I mostly saw older ladies driving them and thought well, they apparently see something in it".
Today the older geek in me appreciates compact (compared to the 70s) luxury and what they were trying to do with it. Heck I don't even mind as much that it was FWD. I also was always curious about the Taurus based Lincoln Continental which Lincoln shoehorned that beautiful 32 valve 4.6L V8 into.
😏 With a vid title hook like “ Last of the Imperials “ and a pic of an early 1990’s K car derived Imperial it was an easy click to watch choice Adam.👍Fun to see and hear you and Bob Lutz having a car talk chat / visit. These 1990 - 1993 Imperials was largely based on the stretched FWD New Yorker Fifth Avenue which still had some roots leading to the ubiquitous 1980’s K car that had allowed ChryCorp to platform / drivetrain source mutate into multiple model spin-offs. These early 90’s Imperials were considerably refined, upscaled & given a highly polished execution in contrast to the 198o’s Reliant / Aries K cars. These Imperials had smoothed out front end styling which has aged well and a tail light design which echoed the 1981 - 1983 bustle backed Imperial’s tail light styling. These 1990’s Imperials were given more exterior bling, a nicely trimmed upscale & detailed interior along with ChryCorp’s carry over generic / familiar looking instrument / controls / dash panel. The Lincoln Town Cars and Cadillac Fleetwood Broughams of this era were all around bigger in size, more commanding in stature and both came with V-8’s in the engine room. For Imperial to have been comparable for luxury class competition ChryCorp.would have had to continue making & selling the late 70’s / early 1980’s R bodied Chrysler Fifth Avenue V-8 powered RWD models that somehow were kept current & fresh going into the 1990’s. Instead the R bodied Chryslers timed out after 1981.
…GM’s Olds 98 Touring and Buick Electra Ultra SuperCharged V-6 models of this era easily topped these K car derived “ luxury “ Imperials.While the ChryCorp. 3.8 V-6 was a good runner it was not as good as GM’s very smooth running / long life / gas mileage champ 3800 V-6. As for What Was Not A TorqueFlite ChryCorp.’s UltraDrive automatic? Less Said The Better.
…What would have helped these K car derived Imperials to be possibly more distinguished and interesting to current collectors would have been some exclusive Imperial only features like a more powerful exclusive Imperial only turbo / supercharged V-6 or better still having a nice V-8 engine installed hooked up with a truly made durable & reliable bulletproofed UltraDrive automatic tranny. A 4 wheel independent well sorted out suspension ( perhaps more akin to that eras Olds Touring Sedan ) would have been a plus.Would such an Imperial have been possible for Chrysler to do & still remain / be an economic to create & make car? Likely not. The last “ Dream Car “ Imperial shown a few years back sadly did not make it past being a dream show car.
…Some would suggest the 1981 - 1983 Volare / Aspen / Diplomat / LeBaron / Cordoba / Mirada platform derived Imperial slant back coupe with it’s 318 V-8 and ChryCorp old school torsion bar / leaf spring suspension was a viable contender / candidate for being given the “ Last Imperial “ title. Those 1981 - 1983 Imperials have endured a long running since new really like it / really don’t like it styling opinion -/+ appraisal. Having Frank Sinatra lend himself to endorsing and even namesaking some of these early 1980’s slant backed Imperials for some makes these early 1981 - 1983 Imperials special interest collectibles.
…I would suggest the 1967 - 1968 Imperials likely were / are the true “ Last Imperials “ tho there are those who would consider them to be pretender Imperials as well. With Imperial specific dashes and well done interior styling trim details plus specific to Imperial body panels, bumpers, front grille and taillight designs the 67 - 68 Imperials were stand apart Imperials compared to the 1969 thru 1975 Imperials which were based much more on the Chrysler New Yorker. The 1969 thru 1975 Imperials had same basic instrument panel / dash layouts as a New Yorker tho Imperials were still given a different front end / grille and tail light styling differences and a longer wheelbase length for 1969 thru 1973 only.
…For more than a few Imperial admirers the only real Imperials are the full framed / separate body 1957 thru 1966 Imperials or 1955 and 1956 Imperials. Unfortunately for we Imperial enthusiasts the demo derby smash’em & crash’em circuit runners have loved to death many 1957 thru 1966 & 67 / 68 Imperials since the 1960’s up to current times.
Fun vid to see & hear you visiting with Bob Lutz Adam. Was a good car talk chit chat.👍
I LOVE my 1991 LeBaron 5 speed V6 convertible. Best $1800 I ever spent, and 38mpg!
That's great, I'm happy for you, I hope you have years of trouble free service.
I never got why people tended to look down on that car? I knew someone who bought one of those used and we had a lot of fun cruising the city with the top down on weekends.
He drove the living hell out of that thing, and it performed beautifully.
@@HAL-dm1ehI think it's because a lot of enthusiasts have a hard time enjoying nice looking cruisers for what they are. They deride them because they aren't fast and have cowl shake, but these aren't supposed to be performance cars.
I had the follow up: a 2000 Sebring convert. I wanted a cheap drop and it was in nice shape. I really enjoyed it. It did the four-seat convertible thing really well. I drove less aggressively as it was a 'drop the top and enjoy the scenery' kind of car.
There is absolutly no way 38mpg
@@johncronin5311 Might be Imperial mpg if he is Canadian ... A Imp gallon is 4.5 litres; a US gallon is 3.8 L. 38 Imp mpg would be ~ 32 US mpg which seems possible at a moderate hwy speed.
I LOVED the packaging of these cars. My sister had a lowly Plymouth Acclaim, I remember groaning when walking up to get into that small, Accord sized car.
Open the back, and it was huge! Much bigger than my Taurus. Well, not width wise, but leg wise, which matter far more often since people rarely carry 6 ppl in a sedan.
Plus a huge trunk... later K car packaging was almost sorcery it was so well done.
So the upper models, WOW, they had room in those essential areas, and offered traditional Caddy/Lincold style cues after those marques had abandoned the unabashed, squared off American look, so these cars fit a great niche!
Plus, much more (leg) room, and luxury in all the places that mattered.
I'd love to see a modern version of this, a stretched version of the 300 with an aggressive waterfall grille and hidden headlamps (which would fit in great with the 300's retro vibes) and a huge , luxurious rear space, and once again, they would fill a profitable niche that Caddy and Lincoln once again.
There IS a market, with lots of money, that want a big, impressive, comfortable and easy to get in out of vehicle, with a big slice of tastful luxury to remind you, and everyone else that you appreciate and can afford the finer things in life.
SUVs cannot give that feeling or garner that kind of respect or admiration from others. Too look alike, too many shared parts, too trucky/rough/hard to enter/crude.
Based on looks alone the 64-66 Imperials can't be beat. I also loved the 81's especially the Sinatra edition. If they hadn't screwed up the fuel injection I think they would've been more successful. I never liked the 90-93s
Well said completely agree!
When I was a kid in the 90's there was a red LeBaron convertable up the street from us and my high school English teacher in 2006 had a New Yorker with the button leather.
Wow! What an honor that you got to meet with the one and only Bob Lutz!
Had new in 1992. White on blue. It wasn't a car I cared much about. The room inside was great. From Clearwater Beach Florida USA
Here in Europe Bob's legacy lives on with the mid-2000's Cadillac BLS (Bob Lutz Special)
PLEASE find a photo of the Bob Lutz Imperial! That sounds awesome!
I would love to see that Bob Lutz special 😀
I wish that I could see a picture or twelve of Bob's modified Imperial.
the casual cut to bob lutz smoking a giant cigar was so fucking awesome
I knew a business associate in California with one of these. I remain very impressed by it.
Always liked these Imperials. They were seldom seen even when new and hardly ever now. Showed just how far the K car platform could be taken. The C body 88-93 New Yorkers, Dynastys and this Imperial had floor pan width extenders to make the floorplan a bid wider along the rocker panels. I thought the Imperial was more tastefully styled outside and particularly inside than the New Yorkers. However I thought the New Yorker's 20% vinyl roof looked better than the Imperials 50% top. These cars had an abundance of of leg and head room front and especially rear, although as pointed out they were fairly narrow cars. The 3.3 an 3.8 were some of the best V6's ever built. Bulletproof engines, and smooth and torquey. The cloth seats are a rare and desirable option as the leather did not wear well. You could also order a combination with leather bolsters and cloth inserts.
My friend had one of these. It was so great for road trips. Although as squishy and comfy as those seats felt at first I can Defo see why all cars have gone to more supportive seats. After awhile you have to shift around to get comfortable. But you have lots of rooms and options for the way you could stretch out
I liked the stock form. It was extremely comfortable on a cross country trip we took in one. I have heard from owners that after the warranty period, they became 'bug prone' and expensive to continually repair. The back seat space in terms of leg room was incredible!
I had a 91 Dynasty. Loved the car put a lot of miles on it gave me very little trouble. If they still made them by the time it wore out I would’ve gone down and bought another one
What did you buy instead?
“Road to nowhere”…Lutz nailed it. Iacocca hit his thumb trying.
Adam rockin' that Members Only jacket. That's awesome.
In 1991 my parents bought a 1985 Chrysler New Yorker at Ray Thomas Chrysler Plymouth in Cuyhoga Falls Ohio, on the same day it was being traded in on a 1991 Imperial. The same salesman that sold it new and sold the imperial sold the New Yorker to my parents.
Love your interviews w/ Mr. Lutz!
Super interesting vid and I got a big laugh out of Bob. Never miss your vids - please keep up the good work 🏆
The 3.3 and 3.8 were fantastic engines!
Those engines outlast the car they're in 99% of the time.
@@alitheretrokid yes I can attest to that lol. Every Chrysler I’ve owned with one they never gave me one but if problems. Just the rust always was what got them
I wish they still offered these to people who don’t mind less power and a bit higher fuel consumption (if even compared to the 3.6) in a trade off for not having to worry about durability and reliability. It’s like ford with their 2.5 and 3.0 duratec engines. I’d consider a new bronco or escape if they offered either of them still
I have a 3.8 in my 07 Pacifica. Not sure if that's the same engine or not? Might be a different generation but same basic block.
@@joshuagibson2520Pacifica with a 3.8 is rare. But you have the newer high output 3.8. If that engine you have was under the hood of an Imperial, it would turn it into a hotrod.
This was as far as the K car could be taken; Bob is right. I liked these, and they were very comfortable for four passengers. For the time I wasn’t offended by the styling. OTOH, the Executive Sedan and Limousine did look like posers.
The styling of the imperial and fifth avenue were massive upgrades styling wise compared to the executive/limousine.
Bob is such a gem! Love these videos where he's featured.
They were pleasant and attractive cars throughout the 90's. Quiet and comfortable and roomy, plush interior. I have seen a few Dynasty examples just take a beating and kept on going.
A friend of mine her parents owned a fully loaded burgundy w/ burgundy leather 1993 New Yorker Salon. It was a low mileage, flawless, garage queen through the 90's into the early 2000's. From what I gather, or remember one of the grandkids snuck it out and totalled it in the middle of the night.
Then they went with the 300M. Chrysler folks.
I wouldn't mind having a clean New Yorker today.
Great interview. I appreciate Mr. Lutz time. In my younger years, I would agree with Lutz about Iacocca not getting it. Now after having issues with pain, I agree with Iacocca. I think there's a place for both the Imperial and the LHS.
My father had one of these. It was quite nice. Too bad it fell apart after 3 to 4 years.
Transmission made out of glass
Not well maintained
The Imperial transmission is mentioned as a weak point of this car, I had and still have a 1992 LeBaron convertible 3.0 and I'm on my fourth (or is it my fifth) transmission. I can only conclude both cars had the same gearbox. I just turned 196K and every drive without a transmission fault is another great day. Bob Lutz is a rock star.
Lee in his final years thought he could do no wrong, but he did make a few major mistakes.
Like the Pinto when he worked for Ford
@@kevinbarry7475was he involved in the coverup? Otherwise the pinto was a very successful car.
@@gordtulk yes, he told Ford employees to keep quiet about the Pintos rear bumper bolts penetrating the gas tanks causing explosions
Usually executives are good for about a decade then it's time for fresh leadership.
I ran across a 92 Chrysler imperial for sale yesterday. I remembered this video. I’m thinking about purchasing the car and making it look like Bob’s imperial has sort of a tribute car.
These weren't bad cars. Much better than anything coming from Dodge/Chrysler today. The downside to them is that they had a V-6 where the Cadillac Fleetwood and Lincoln Town Car had V-8s. People said these felt underpowered compared to the rivals. I've heard people complain about these having some electrical gremlins that were very hard to keep fixed.
The only real competitor the Imperial had at the time was the Lincoln Continental. These two were the only fwd American luxury sedans with four wheel air suspension and the roomiest fwd interiors.
I'd love to see pictures of Bob's Imperial. I bet it was nice
I grew up in the Detroit area and lived there until I was 43. I loved watching the road for test cars and prototypes out for a run. My family all worked for Ford, but I dated a G.M. exec. in the late 80’s. I remember him telling me all G.M exec. cars had the same RCZ or RCY Michigan plates. They were easy to spot. The other thing that was easy to spot on Detroit area freeways were the high numbers of newer Chrysler vehicles left on the side of the road, disabled, waiting to be towed in for repair. My husband and I now drive Mazda.
I was in GM engineering based out of Flint. Although I was constantly all over SE Mich. All the Flint region assigned vehicles came out of building in the Buick City complex. All GUS, GUT, or HHF plates. I know the Warren Tech Center people would get theirs off of a building on E 11 Mile. This is in the 1990’s still using the blue Michigan plate. In 1996 the Flint region needed new plates and got the automobile centennial plate with 3 letters and 2 numbers. Those all were EDS prefix. Plus you could spot the North American Operations barcode sticker in the lower left of the windshield. There was a staggering amount of GM company vehicles on the roads between Flint and Detroit. Lansing to an extent too. Well after the “restructuring “ (internally we were never allowed to use bankruptcy) the company car program changed drastically. To conserve money assigned drivers were no longer getting a different vehicle every 90 days. It’s one year of driving or longer currently. It’s still somewhat easy to spot a GM owned vehicle. They never change the plates to start with. So they are the basic white and blue Michigan plate but old and beat up all with SEP tags and on new but boring GM vehicles. Many times I was driving M plated because of my job. Was there from 95 to 2018. Moved to a different company but enjoyed my time there.
Bob or someone at Chrysler has to have a photo of this, I'm picturing a blacked out Imperial with gold BBS wheels and I'd give it a thumbs up too!
My folks owned a low-mileage white example back around 2000-2001. Gorgeous car with an incredible ride, creature comforts, decent power and surprising gas mileage. However, the electronics and auto-leveling rear suspension were just atrocious. The entire electronic dash cluster had to be replaced, and the car was constantly in the shop with suspension issues. Finally my folks threw in the towel and traded it in for a new (at the time) PT Cruiser. They never looked back! 😂
If it had the air suspension, just put new air springs on it. And the digi dash on any old car usually just has to have the contacts resoldered back on.
I always wondered why Chrysler could make the K car longer but not wider. All the K derived cars look too narrow especially the long wheelbase ones.
The narrow bodies made them easier to park and maneuver. That went out the window with the LH cars, those things were WIDE.
I drive the Saturn Sky, also from Bob Lutz. Another great vehicle!
One of the perks of being one of the corporate big dogs....a factory custom company car...very cool indeed.
The new yorker was the smoothest ride ever
1:01 - 2:00 though Adam is talking about the New Yorker Fifth Avenue, it's not clear the car shown is not the Imperial, but rather a 1992-1993 New Yorker Fifth Avenue
Bob was one of the few real car guys of the era who understood how to build a car that people wanted, too bad he was always fighting those bean counters 😂
I think Chryslers pulled off the 'Cimmeron trick' more sucessfully than GM. A co-worker owned a 92 Imperial.
That's not a Cimarron trick. Cimarron was an entry level Cadillac based on an econocar. Imperial was a flagship product based on Chrysler's prior flagship New Yorker Fifth Avenue, which was a stretched version of the already large New Yorker Salon. Not a good comparison lol.
Only Bob could take a K car Imperial and make it sporty, would love to see a picture of that car.
Bob Lutz is Legend
In the 1980s, a neighbour of ours had a number of businesses (side hustles), among them a limousine service. He actually had a K-car based limo, white in colour, stretched even more than that Imperial. I always thought it looked ridiculous, but he used it for a few years and then something must of happened to it mechanically, because it sat for years after that beside his gas station, getting steadily more and more mouldy and moss covered. I always thought the K-cars were truly dreadful (my grandfather had a Dodge 600, and other relatives owned Reliants, Caravans etc), but they certainly saved Chrysler from bankruptcy.
I owned a 1993 Fifth Ave base model Gold with matching interior.
You should ask Bob if he has any pics of his Custom '90-'93 Imperial!
I was a Ford guy by the time those '90s things came out and didn't really care. Back in the early '80s as sort of a kid(smart but just a kid), I got the pleasure oi installing 2 Imperial(early '80s) retrofit kits.. At the time I thought "what a joke?" this is. Kit consisted of a pallet or pallets of parts(fuel tank, the largest) to convert the fuel injection system to carburetor. I think the cast iron intake manifold was the heaviest part in that so-called kit. The gas tank was the largest item. I wish I had one of those 'kits' now. It would be very valuable. Hated it in '83. I know these are the K-Imperials. Not the ones I'm speaking of. Sorry for the fluff.
Adam, what is the black car in the video behind you? The left rear quarter looks very much like a Chevy Vega.
I'm wondering that too. I'll let you know if I find out.
A talk with Mr. Lutz about the infamous Cadillac BLS would be welcome. I remember the "hype" in the press when it was launched. It ended in a big bust, even worse than the Cimarron.
The Imperial was absolutely beautiful inside. The seats and door panels and dash were beautiful and elegant, one of the best trimmed interiors ever. The styling of the exterior was beautiful. The only problem were the proportions: it needed to be a few inches wider and a few inches taller.
I love the real wood trim on the outer sides of the front seats where the controls are. Noone else has done that I don't think.
I had a burgundy Dodge Dynasty for three years that I selected as a company car while I had my own Volvo 940GL. The Dynasty was pleasant on most roads and had very nice seats though nothing like the seats in the incomparable seats in the Volvo but the Dynasty became flustered when it encountered complex bumps in the road because of its torsion beam rear suspension as many economically built front wheel drive vehicles that are built to a price point and don’t employ a full independent rear wheel suspension encounter on bad roads. It’s the difference between a pedestrian vehicle and a great vehicle and one that you’ll remember. That’s what the esteemed Mr Lutz was talking about and why he was disappointed in the last Imperial which was an imposter.
Interesting that you had both a Dynasty and a 940. I always thought with some exterior trim rearrangement, the Dynasty could almost have visually "passed" as a 7/900 series!
I would have loved to see that car.
These are AWESOME cars! Take out the load leveling in the back and ABS and switch over to the modern A604 computer, and they are a blast to drive alongside rock-solid reliability.
Do not remove the load leveling or the rear will sag even when empty. These cars have super soft springs and bushings. I want one with the four wheel air springs, softer ride and keeps the chassis perfectly level.
@@Skyisthelimit4me Absolutely. Springs make them from a suspension standpoint bulletproof. Although if the system still works might as well keep it unless you don't have AAA
@@elasticmusic2084 The idea is keep it maintained. I think the non air suspension models had air shocks in the back for leveling if I remember correctly. Either way all Imperials had either one of two self leveling suspensions. I like the air springs because they reduce unsprung weight. Those steel coil springs are very heavy. When the car needs new tires change the springs. That's how I maintained all my Lincoln's and never had an issue. I changed the air springs when I got tires whether they were still good or not.
If Darth Vader had a K car... I'd love to see a picture of that Imperial!
This was a higher level of luxury than the last Imperial sedan was before in 1975. Because in 1976 that Imperial was renamed the New Yorker. So when the Imperial returned to go above the New Yorker, it was a step up from what the inheritated from the previous Imperial sedan.
I absolutely HATED these due to the geriatric details. In the day, it was perfectly suited to 80 year-olds like my grandparents. And ONLY people in that demographic. My teenage self felt quite sure nobody but the oldest drivers would ever buy one.
But… I recognized its basic good shape and proportions, as did Bob Lutz, who largely modified it the way I would have to remove the geriatric details, and allow the shape to be clearer and better-expressed.
I still hate the car, but I appreciate the feature, your kind review of it, and Bob’s commentary on it. Always well worth watching- even when I don’t like the vehicle features.
It's interesting how Mr Iacocca's influence on Chrysler is talked about.
Lee Iacocca was CEO from the late 70s to his retirement in 1992. I believe that the K car development was well underway when he came on board. While he is credited with the K car ( and squeezing every possible variation out of that platform), it was also under his leadership that the remarkably different and visionary LH platform was launched in 1991.
My opinion is that Iacocca was a brilliant pitchman for the K car, making the best out of a very utilitarian but visually uninspiring design, while at the same time, allowing the designers come up with something completely different for the decade following his term as CEO.
Great vid, really enjoyed!!
My parents rented one of these once and drove to Las Vegas in it. They liked it but not enough to buy one. They were Lincoln people.
I can’t believe you didn’t mention the gauge cluster! That’s a digital speed readout with (what look like) vacuum fluorescent analog auxiliary gauges?
That's my kind of legroom in the back of that thing.
In late 1989 my Grandmother was looking to replace her 1986 Olds 98 Regency. On her short list was this Imperial, a Lincoln Town Car, and the new Deville (which got "fins" back in 1989...at least we thought that then with the new refreshed tall taillights). After driving all three, the Town Car was just too big. One of her mall-walking friends had a Dynasty, and the Imperial felt too much like a fancy Dynasty. I'll be honest...I told her the Imperial was nothing but a K-Car in a dress... She bought a beautiful 1989 ruby red over red leather Deville. No regrets on not getting the Imperial, as that Cadillac was a wonderful car that she loved and was trouble-free.
I had a blue 91 Impartial cloth seats
Does Lutz have any pictures of his Chrysler Imperial?
I liked the looks of these but thought the scale of these were too small. If somehow the R-bodies had lived longer and this design theme had been put atop of that body with a 318/torqueflite it may have been more of a success. Look how well the 5th Avenues sold in the 1980's.
I friggin love the R Body - what a shame its tenure was so brief.
@@JazzzRockFuzion Agreed! Just imagine how well an R-bodied Imperial would have sold in the mid-1980's. GM and Ford full-sized cars really took off sales wise in 1983 but obviously Chrysler didn't have a crystal ball. Even their M-body Fifth Avenues sold very well from 1983-1989. Good to see a fellow R-body fan out there.
I still have great hope for all of the American Chrysler brands to emerge as front runners in engineering again in this new era of automotive technology and possibly even gain their own independence by becoming a financial giant again as they were when Mercedes found them financially attractive in the early nineties. They could have the potential to spin off on their own and an Imperial as an offering would represent their financial might and a crowning accomplishment.
Chrysler needs to offer another authentic finely crafted Imperial with quality on a level that it was in the models produced between 1961-1968 to represent that the corporation is capable of producing exceptional engineering in its luxury divisions and that its engineering benefits are built into all of its products at every level.
If they don’t spin off they need to lead with Stellantis within Stellantis because the strongest Chrysler brands have been supporting the Fiat family of brand that were acquired in the merger. Chrysler’s engineering capabilities cannot be compromised as Mercedes forced them to be in their partnership.
Adam, I scrolled through your video list looking for any take on a first generation Lincoln LSC, around ‘88 or so and didn’t see one. Is that a car you might feature someday?
Gee would have loved to see a pic of Bob's car.
The Ultradrive predated the FWD Fifth Avenue by a year. It came out for 1989.
No picture of Bob Lutz's?! I wanna see!
Sure would have liked to SEE that modified imperial Bob used
I am a Mopar fan and have been for 50 years . However , this Imperial unlike my 1959 & 1967 with a torqueflite had a nasty habit , when decelerating, of downshifting with a slam bang that felt like someone had rear ended me. I never owned one of these but I did rent one.
There were a few of these for sale that I thought about buying this spring. I ended up not however because I was looking for something to take long trips with, and the fact that I've never even seen a 90s imperial in person before tells me that they must not be that reliable if they aren't on the road anymore. I ended up getting a cadillac fleetwood instead
I remember the "New YorKer", but I guess my brain pushed out all thoughts of Imperials after the 1983 Sinatra edition... (BTW, I sorta thought Bob had 1 of those.)
They should have put a longer trunk on that car, a la the mini-Cadillacs, but I always did love their Mark Cross interiors!
BTW, Bob isn't always right: I always loved my father's cars. If "It's not your father's Oldsmobile!" then I don't want it! LoL