Beautifully made, quality, reliability, timeless... the best of technology could offer. It's hard to believe that only 60 years before, cars weren't anywhere and even the races. Love them.
They really know how to sell these cars. These ads make ya really wanna drive them all! Beautiful, every last one a rolling monument to a better tomorrow.
@@larryjolicoeur7169 ... Please explain to me, Mr Larry, as to why, in your opinion The (They) were death traps. And in what way? #1. Also please tell me the year you were born? #2. What cars in that era did your father/uncle/godfather own? #3. What make, model, type of cars did you ride in? And which ones you liked the best? And in what color? Which ones you liked the least? #4. Even with no airbags i would take any Family Car of the 40's, 50's & 60's and probably walk away in any accident with a modern car. The modern car would crumble like an empty beer can and trap the occupants in there until the firemen arrive. Those old-time cars weighed approximately 2+ tons of well built steel. I felt very safe in my dad's old cars especially the 72 Chrysler New Yorker with the 440 cu. in. We could seat 3 adults comfortably in the front seats and 4 adults abreast in the back seat and our feet never even touched the back of the front seats.
@@sfopaladin2661 Hi Paladin, love your avatar. But with all due respect, the cars of the ‘50’s and ‘60’s were not as safe as newer cars. While, yes, newer cars crush “like a tin can”, they are designed intentionally with “crumple zones” which absorb impact and protect the passenger compartment. Now as for your dad’s ‘72 New Yorker, I’ll agree it was much safer than cars of one or 2 decades earlier. By the ‘70’s, car engineers were putting in more safety features and designing cars to absorb impacts much better. I had a ‘73 Newport Custom which was similar to your dad’s car (just a tad less fancy) and it was a good, solid, safe car. There are some good videos where they crashed some 1950’s and early ‘60’s cars into modern cars, and the crash dummies in the old cars were severely damaged. Hope that helps. BTW, all that said, I’d love to own one of those mid-50’s to late ‘60’s cars. They had style, and as you said, properly maintained, they’d last a long time since they had robust engines and simple drivetrains.
If I had the chance to order one of these cars today or even then, I would go with the 55' Chevy in a 2door H/T. I was a kid when these cars were still daily drivers on the roads and I liked them even then. Never cared for 50s Chrysler styling. Ironically the first car I ever bought with my own money was a 69' Ply Road Runner in the 1970s after HS graduation. Ironically again...my current car is a Chevy. 2017 Super Sport Camaro with a Manual trans.
@@briane173 It definitely wasn’t expensive to them but you do know minimum wage was 75¢ and yearly was 3300 the inflation and the gas shortage is what made prices go up
@@Math-xt6kh I'm well aware of both; I lived through it. I still have etched in my memory the time when we stopped at the gas station to fill our _motorhome._ My mom handed over $8 and I about fainted. "$8!? To fill a 25-gallon tank!? That's a king's ransom!" It's all relative to the value of $1 at the time. But I know of no one who doesn't pine for the day when a dollar bought a dollar's worth and not 10 cents.
@@briane173 Came back from the PI and gas was suddenly $1.19, it had been $0.25 when i left. I turned to my father and asked, "What the hell did you do when I was gone?" He just shrugged and continued to fill the tank. For the record, military pay does not (at the time) have a COL raise. He also sold my paid for '66 Mustang because "You can buy something better cheaper when you get back." I bought a brand new AMC Hornet Sportabout that had for the time great gas mileage, but even today at 71 i miss my Rustang.
Hi Jimmy, I’m 69 and I had one. Mine was only about 12 inches long and made of plastic. Yes, a model car. My uncle worked for Chrysler in Detroit and they had models of the 1963 Chrysler Turbine Car. Not the mid-50’s Plymouth seen in the video, as that one was an experimental turbine car prototype. You may recall the ‘63 version, however. The ‘63 Turbine Car was a longer production run, about 50 of them as I recall. Even the model was way kewl - it was molded in the exact same metallic copper color as the real ones and the roof was molded in black plastic to simulate the vinyl roof. Jay Leno owns one of the few ‘63 Chrysler Turbine Cars that weren’t destroyed intentionally by Chrysler. As for the mid ‘50’s Plymouth turbine cad shown in the video, that may be a one-off, or at most 2 or 3. Wikipedia has a good article describing the history of the Chrysler turbine cars and their development. It’s worth the read if you’re interested.
For 1957, it was expected cars would be allowed quad headlights. It was not fully approved by all states in time. Some mopars had some ambiguous styling, eg. wide buckets that could house two headlights but only had one. It partly explains the human eye, but some of it is just lighting.
Yes, and a lot of cars from that era seemed to have “eyes”. It was common for the sheet metal above the headlight to extend forward like an “eyebrow”. The biggest problem with that style cue was that that area trapped water - and salt in the snow belt - causing those areas to rust out. When I was a teen and couldn’t afford anything better, I had a second hand ‘59 Ford Galaxie in the early ‘70’s and that area above both sets of lights was totally gone!
Give me the 57 Chrysler line-up any day over those ugly old boxy 54 Chevys. Oldsmobility could turn into Deathmobility in a flash with no seatbelts! (Dad had a 56 Olds and we bounced all over the back seat while Mom held the new baby in her lap...I wonder how we survived :-)
no puedo creer que en este video haya tantos niños criticando todos estos grandes automoviles, vayan a llorar a otra parte y dejen admirar los autos de verdad.
@@billstetler6769Actually, it started with the ‘55 Chevy V8 and great looking Bel Air pillarless hardtops. And yes, by ‘57, Chevy had really replaced Ford as “the low-priced car to have” for young folks. Before ‘55, Chevys were stodgy looking and only had 6-cyl engines, so Ford was more popular with young people.
@@barrycuda3769 Hi Barry, I didn’t know that. Ford modernized their style for ‘57, so maybe that’s the reason. Like you, I preferred the ‘57 Chevy’s style over Ford’s. I’m pretty sure Ford outsold Chevy in ‘59. Chevy went with that squashed fin over sideways teardrop taillights look that wasn’t very popular. We had a ‘56 Bel Air when I was a little kid. The 2 speed Powerglide tranny crapped out in only 3 years and my old man was furious. Swore he’d never buy a Chevy again and bought a ‘59 Galaxie. And bought nothing but Fords until he died! (His ‘80 Granada was particularly crappy! 😝) BTW, Nice ‘Cuda in your avatar!
@@OldRustySteelelately, Iv'e been learning a bit about the Y block v8 that fords of that era had ,I'd always heard that they weren't well thought of, and it seems it's because of top end oil starvation, which made them unreliable. Whereas the small block Chevy engine ,starting in 1955 was of course the start of a legendary engine. I love the tri five Chevrolets, I Always fancied having a '55 2 door sedan, but the prices have gone crazy from what I've seen (I live in New Zealand). I like Chryslers mostly, but there are a lot of Fords I think are exquisitely styled ,too many to list really, but the '63 Galaxie is a stand out for me ,and their engines were great by that time. Old Mopars, Fords, and Chevies were all the best ever.
That '55 Chevrolet was one of the best looking most iconic cars ever made,was the styling cribbed from some kind of Ferrari ? (And the performance with the V8 and manual transmission was much improved over older Chevrolets) but I would rather have had the '55 Olds (risk that a few of them had problem piston pins and/or valve lifters?) I guess the first few months of production of the new Chevrolet V8 had a few teething problems also I don't like the "forward look" but I guess they sold like pancakes with their wind noise and water leaks
The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun. Ecclesiastes 1:9 KJV I think the bible was talking about cars
The two tone ‘59 Oldsmobile was an odd duck. Most cars had side moldings separating the color panels. Not this Olds-one color ended and another began, along the side panels. It looked cheap.
Engineering, quality of workmanship SUCKED -- and they were death traps, since seatbelts didn't exist back then. Nobody cared. Back then the US had a sizable middle class who could afford to buy a new model each and every year, which created a thriving used car market. Assuming these cars _had_ warranties, they rarely went past 3 years/30,000 miles, which was a further incentive to trade in every year. Not that people needed much incentive to trade up on a regular basis; these cars were status symbols and nobody wanted to be caught driving anything older than the current model year.
And they would still be building sh!t box gas guzzling land barges had the Asian manufacturers not kicked their azzes during the malaise era of the 1970s and 80s.
Not everyone, my Dad purchased a demonstrator, it was a 1955 Ford Customline wagon with a V8, 292 cu. in. with a a Ford-O-Matic transmission that for our family of 9, Mom, Dad and 7 of us children. We had That very same car until it went completely underwater during hurricane Betsy on September 9th 1965. Our next car was a 1966 Ford Galaxie 500 4door hardtop. My Father was a WW2 vet who was a blue collar worker. Same applied to the other families in the town we grew up in. I don’t know what would make anyone think that everyday run of the mill families could buy new cars like they were nothing more than a carton of milk but trust me, they couldn’t!
@@jimcarney7174 Mmyyeeaahh, I grew up in SoCal. 'Nuff said. That certainly wasn't the case for everybody, but in the circles we ran with that was pretty much the trend. And I won't say we were a cross-section of America in the 60s; my dad was a developer and he changed cars like you and I change underwear, because he typically would write them off -- register with the S-corp and accelerate the depreciation. But in SoCal back then it was pretty typical to cycle model years every year, and ironically, that was done most by those WWII vets! My great uncle made that a staple of his personal finance management -- every year, give the dealer $1,000 and trade in the current car for a brand new one -- _every_ year. I thought it was nuts but hey, that's just what he did. That might've worked in the 60s but not today. I just sold my 2002 Ford Ranger after owning it for 14 years. Bought my other car the same time and still have it, and why not? It's only got 128k on it and I've taken very good care of it. As long as car prices are what they are in 2024 I'm not going into mountains of debt for a new one. My 15 y/o crossover is more than adequate.
Very inferior and old fashion designs with rear wheel drive, drum brakes all around, stiff rear axle, diagonal tyres, leaf springs at the rear with no load correction that sinks the car considerably with just a couple of passengers at the rear and very inaccurate ball steering......Really "low cost"!
Кино
![California 1950s, Driving Wilshire Blvd in color [60fps, Remastered] w/sound design added](/img/1.gif)
417 color combinations! You’re lucky these days if you can get some thing, other than silver, white or black
For sure! I had to go to 3 different dealers to find my Red Hyundai Santa Fe hybrid limited. Black and gray no problem!
Beautifully made, quality, reliability, timeless... the best of technology could offer. It's hard to believe that only 60 years before, cars weren't anywhere and even the races.
Love them.
Excellent vid, love the actual vintage commercials, hard to believe 70 years ago. Thanks for sharing 👍🏽
Beautiful cars!
Tubeless tires in 1954!? Amazing!
Tubeless tyres were invented by Michelin brothers in the late 30. It wasn't until 50's when they could made them as "standard".
Am I imagining things or is that Florence Henderson singing in the Olds commercial? Sure looks and sounds like her.
Dats FloHe
Marsha would have been the bun in oven when this was filmed…
@@homeandacre Marsha was born in 56.
No! You're right! That's her! I recognized her right on the spot! 😅
Wow the first pullout
They really know how to sell these cars. These ads make ya really wanna drive them all! Beautiful, every last one a rolling monument to a better tomorrow.
Now these were great cars. Modest styling, sturdy and built to last 10+ yrs at a minimum. Properly maintained they would never wear out.
The were death traps
@@larryjolicoeur7169 ... Please explain to me, Mr Larry, as to why, in your opinion The (They) were death traps. And in what way?
#1. Also please tell me the year you were born?
#2. What cars in that era did your father/uncle/godfather own?
#3. What make, model, type of cars did you ride in? And which ones you liked the best? And in what color? Which ones you liked the least?
#4. Even with no airbags i would take any Family Car of the 40's, 50's & 60's and probably walk away in any accident with a modern car. The modern car would crumble like an empty beer can and trap the occupants in there until the firemen arrive.
Those old-time cars weighed approximately 2+ tons of well built steel.
I felt very safe in my dad's old cars especially the 72 Chrysler New Yorker with the 440 cu. in. We could seat 3 adults comfortably in the front seats and 4 adults abreast in the back seat and our feet never even touched the back of the front seats.
@@sfopaladin2661 Hi Paladin, love your avatar.
But with all due respect, the cars of the ‘50’s and ‘60’s were not as safe as newer cars. While, yes, newer cars crush “like a tin can”, they are designed intentionally with “crumple zones” which absorb impact and protect the passenger compartment.
Now as for your dad’s ‘72 New Yorker, I’ll agree it was much safer than cars of one or 2 decades earlier. By the ‘70’s, car engineers were putting in more safety features and designing cars to absorb impacts much better. I had a ‘73 Newport Custom which was similar to your dad’s car (just a tad less fancy) and it was a good, solid, safe car.
There are some good videos where they crashed some 1950’s and early ‘60’s cars into modern cars, and the crash dummies in the old cars were severely damaged.
Hope that helps.
BTW, all that said, I’d love to own one of those mid-50’s to late ‘60’s cars. They had style, and as you said, properly maintained, they’d last a long time since they had robust engines and simple drivetrains.
If I had the chance to order one of these cars today or even then, I would go with the 55' Chevy in a 2door H/T. I was a kid when these cars were still daily drivers on the roads and I liked them even then. Never cared for 50s Chrysler styling. Ironically the first car I ever bought with my own money was a 69' Ply Road Runner in the 1970s after HS graduation. Ironically again...my current car is a Chevy. 2017 Super Sport Camaro with a Manual trans.
V 8 engine probably got “gas savings” of 4 mpg 😅👌🏽
Nobody cared because gas was $0.20 per gallon back then.
@@briane173 It definitely wasn’t expensive to them but you do know minimum wage was 75¢ and yearly was 3300 the inflation and the gas shortage is what made prices go up
@@Math-xt6kh I'm well aware of both; I lived through it. I still have etched in my memory the time when we stopped at the gas station to fill our _motorhome._ My mom handed over $8 and I about fainted. "$8!? To fill a 25-gallon tank!? That's a king's ransom!" It's all relative to the value of $1 at the time. But I know of no one who doesn't pine for the day when a dollar bought a dollar's worth and not 10 cents.
@@briane173 Came back from the PI and gas was suddenly $1.19, it had been $0.25 when i left. I turned to my father and asked, "What the hell did you do when I was gone?" He just shrugged and continued to fill the tank. For the record, military pay does not (at the time) have a COL raise. He also sold my paid for '66 Mustang because "You can buy something better cheaper when you get back." I bought a brand new AMC Hornet Sportabout that had for the time great gas mileage, but even today at 71 i miss my Rustang.
Cars back then were like art work
"Fuel economy" my tail! That '58 Oldsmobile can pass everything but a gas station.
Place yourself in the context. 12 cents a gallon back then.
@@FURY1958 More like 25-30 cents a gallon back then.
@@WAL_DC-6B 12 cents per gallon in 1955
Anti dive engineering....lol.... you mean better shocks ?.... lol. Love the old commercials.
No they don't
6:04 I’m 56 years old and have never heard of this turbine powered car!
Hi Jimmy, I’m 69 and I had one. Mine was only about 12 inches long and made of plastic. Yes, a model car. My uncle worked for Chrysler in Detroit and they had models of the 1963 Chrysler Turbine Car. Not the mid-50’s Plymouth seen in the video, as that one was an experimental turbine car prototype. You may recall the ‘63 version, however. The ‘63 Turbine Car was a longer production run, about 50 of them as I recall. Even the model was way kewl - it was molded in the exact same metallic copper color as the real ones and the roof was molded in black plastic to simulate the vinyl roof. Jay Leno owns one of the few ‘63 Chrysler Turbine Cars that weren’t destroyed intentionally by Chrysler. As for the mid ‘50’s Plymouth turbine cad shown in the video, that may be a one-off, or at most 2 or 3.
Wikipedia has a good article describing the history of the Chrysler turbine cars and their development. It’s worth the read if you’re interested.
Leno did a "Jay Leno Garage" episode on his that's worth watching.
@@jrcrawford4Thanks, JR! I’ve seen that episode, and you’re right. It’s definitely worth watching!
Well there weren't that many and they ended up crushing most of them.
Is it me or the Chrysler have human eyes at 3:49 lol
It's not you, I'm waitin for em to blink! 👀
For 1957, it was expected cars would be allowed quad headlights. It was not fully approved by all states in time. Some mopars had some ambiguous styling, eg. wide buckets that could house two headlights but only had one. It partly explains the human eye, but some of it is just lighting.
For sure, and a big smile too . . . . JohnShinn nailed it! lol
Yes, and a lot of cars from that era seemed to have “eyes”. It was common for the sheet metal above the headlight to extend forward like an “eyebrow”.
The biggest problem with that style cue was that that area trapped water - and salt in the snow belt - causing those areas to rust out. When I was a teen and couldn’t afford anything better, I had a second hand ‘59 Ford Galaxie in the early ‘70’s and that area above both sets of lights was totally gone!
Did not see my favorite that my mom and dad had when i was a kid. 1958 plymouth. It was the star of chrysler corp. Forward look.😊
The 1958 Plymouth Blumpkin.
It wasn't until 1974 when the Japanese car maker Namboo introduced the 75 Namboo Bukakke.
No that's absolutely incorrect. the '67 Cuckold Poontang arrived in the U.S. before the '75 Bukakke. Get your facts straight.
Florence Henderson.
By the end of this video I'd be willing to buy 10 New Motoramic Chevrolets if they'd just stop that earworm theme music.
Whats new? EVERYTHING!
Give me the 57 Chrysler line-up any day over those ugly old boxy 54 Chevys. Oldsmobility could turn into Deathmobility in a flash with no seatbelts! (Dad had a 56 Olds and we bounced all over the back seat while Mom held the new baby in her lap...I wonder how we survived :-)
no puedo creer que en este video haya tantos niños criticando todos estos grandes automoviles, vayan a llorar a otra parte y dejen admirar los autos de verdad.
Wonderfuld
Just $1200.00 for your brand new Oldsmobile
Too bad this video didn’t mention the iconic 55 Chevy.
Interesting they say 'valve in head' instead of 'overhead cam'.
It's not the same
"sensational economy" hahaha I can imagine
Why do they not show more convertibles?
Chevy's at the time were "old peoples" cars. Young bought Fords.
The 57 Chevy v8 changed it all
@@billstetler6769Actually, it started with the ‘55 Chevy V8 and great looking Bel Air pillarless hardtops. And yes, by ‘57, Chevy had really replaced Ford as “the low-priced car to have” for young folks. Before ‘55, Chevys were stodgy looking and only had 6-cyl engines, so Ford was more popular with young people.
I'd have a '57 Chevrolet over a same year Ford ,but I thought I'd heard that the Ford had the most sales by far for that year,for some reason.
@@barrycuda3769 Hi Barry, I didn’t know that. Ford modernized their style for ‘57, so maybe that’s the reason. Like you, I preferred the ‘57 Chevy’s style over Ford’s.
I’m pretty sure Ford outsold Chevy in ‘59. Chevy went with that squashed fin over sideways teardrop taillights look that wasn’t very popular.
We had a ‘56 Bel Air when I was a little kid. The 2 speed Powerglide tranny crapped out in only 3 years and my old man was furious. Swore he’d never buy a Chevy again and bought a ‘59 Galaxie. And bought nothing but Fords until he died! (His ‘80 Granada was particularly crappy! 😝)
BTW, Nice ‘Cuda in your avatar!
@@OldRustySteelelately, Iv'e been learning a bit about the Y block v8 that fords of that era had ,I'd always heard that they weren't well thought of, and it seems it's because of top end oil starvation, which made them unreliable. Whereas the small block Chevy engine ,starting in 1955 was of course the start of a legendary engine. I love the tri five Chevrolets, I Always fancied having a '55 2 door sedan, but the prices have gone crazy from what I've seen (I live in New Zealand). I like Chryslers mostly, but there are a lot of Fords I think are exquisitely styled ,too many to list really, but the '63 Galaxie is a stand out for me ,and their engines were great by that time. Old Mopars, Fords, and Chevies were all the best ever.
"It's NEW"
😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍
In 58' I was a toddler we had 55' Olds Rocket 88. Never liked the 58' Olds styling.
My Late Uncle Jim had a 1958 Oldsmobile they were really nice cars
الله يبارك امريكا
كيف الحال بدون أمريكا. ؟
That '55 Chevrolet was one of the best looking most iconic cars ever made,was the styling cribbed from some kind of Ferrari ? (And the performance with the V8 and manual transmission was much improved over older Chevrolets)
but I would rather have had the '55 Olds (risk that a few of them had problem piston pins and/or valve lifters?) I guess the first few months of production of the new Chevrolet V8 had a few teething problems also
I don't like the "forward look" but I guess they sold like pancakes with their wind noise and water leaks
How many times do they manage to squeeze in the word NEW?
must have been pre dinah shore !
What happen to all the fords ?
Where’s the Fed-Ex truck?
Who needs seat belts
What happened to the turbine engine idea?
Problem with turbines is they are noisy and THIRSTY. Never really a good idea.
There was no color tv in the 50s.
Theaters with big screen, color commercials.
First color tv tests started in 1955
Maybe so but tv shows started showing up in color around 1966
No seat belts whatsoever......!
That first car has somehow maintained its ugly after 70 yrs
Its not ugly but the color was a bit boring
Chevy bel air
The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun. Ecclesiastes 1:9 KJV I think the bible was talking about cars
The 59' Olds was ugly.
So were all 1959 GM cars.
The two tone ‘59 Oldsmobile was an odd duck. Most cars had side moldings separating the color panels. Not this Olds-one color ended and another began, along the side panels. It looked cheap.
Engineering, quality of workmanship SUCKED -- and they were death traps, since seatbelts didn't exist back then. Nobody cared. Back then the US had a sizable middle class who could afford to buy a new model each and every year, which created a thriving used car market. Assuming these cars _had_ warranties, they rarely went past 3 years/30,000 miles, which was a further incentive to trade in every year. Not that people needed much incentive to trade up on a regular basis; these cars were status symbols and nobody wanted to be caught driving anything older than the current model year.
And they would still be building sh!t box gas guzzling land barges had the Asian manufacturers not kicked their azzes during the malaise era of the 1970s and 80s.
Cold, hard truth.
Not everyone, my Dad purchased a demonstrator, it was a 1955 Ford Customline wagon with a V8, 292 cu. in. with a a Ford-O-Matic transmission that for our family of 9, Mom, Dad and 7 of us children. We had That very same car until it went completely underwater during hurricane Betsy on September 9th 1965. Our next car was a 1966 Ford Galaxie 500 4door hardtop. My Father was a WW2 vet who was a blue collar worker. Same applied to the other families in the town we grew up in. I don’t know what would make anyone think that everyday run of the mill families could buy new cars like they were nothing more than a carton of milk but trust me, they couldn’t!
@@jimcarney7174 Mmyyeeaahh, I grew up in SoCal. 'Nuff said. That certainly wasn't the case for everybody, but in the circles we ran with that was pretty much the trend.
And I won't say we were a cross-section of America in the 60s; my dad was a developer and he changed cars like you and I change underwear, because he typically would write them off -- register with the S-corp and accelerate the depreciation. But in SoCal back then it was pretty typical to cycle model years every year, and ironically, that was done most by those WWII vets! My great uncle made that a staple of his personal finance management -- every year, give the dealer $1,000 and trade in the current car for a brand new one -- _every_ year. I thought it was nuts but hey, that's just what he did.
That might've worked in the 60s but not today. I just sold my 2002 Ford Ranger after owning it for 14 years. Bought my other car the same time and still have it, and why not? It's only got 128k on it and I've taken very good care of it. As long as car prices are what they are in 2024 I'm not going into mountains of debt for a new one. My 15 y/o crossover is more than adequate.
Yup...those were the good old days!
Very inferior and old fashion designs with rear wheel drive, drum brakes all around, stiff rear axle, diagonal tyres, leaf springs at the rear with no load correction that sinks the car considerably with just a couple of passengers at the rear and very inaccurate ball steering......Really "low cost"!
What did you need fins for? I never understood the need for fins. 1961 couldn’t get here fast enough to suit me! 👎🤮
Ignorant. Put yourself into the time context if you can... and then, you'll know why to those fins.
It was the rocket age
Terrible cars and terrible commercials!
Terrible that you was born with an empty skull. 😂