Forever the optimist with this channel, it never fails to disappoint me with its ridiculous descriptions of cars made 70 years ago as not being able to compare with modern cars
The Hudson Pacemaker is BOXY?! Not streamlined like other cars of the 50s?! A design that is a relic of the past??? Wow, this commentator is most undoubtedly high...
The Hudson was slow and lack with minimal instrumentation 😂 at the same time showing a Hudson speeding turning tight corners and showing a gorgeous instrumentation panel.
This car actually exists to this day, but it was built in the 60s, and has nothing to do with Jay Leno or America. Other than that, your comment is completely legit
Watching the video of the Hudson, it seems to show what a great handling car it was and with the Hornet package, it was a performer also. I didn't like the video effects trying to make it look like old film, with modern cars in the background.
The Crowley was designed to be a compact economy car. It was never supposed to be a performance car. There were very few high speed highways in 1950. 50 mph was about as fast as you could legally go.
Shoot- I’d be happy to have a Hudson Pacemaker… it is a cool design. If one was too unhappy with it, you could swap the engine for something bigger. LOL
This feels like it could be a couple of minutes shorter. Remember how you were often given a minimum length for a paper in HS English, so resorted to restating the same information in multiple ways?
The Hudson pacemaker would have been a winner if they would have put a larger motor and a ragtop on it it would have found its audience. The Chevy 210 had the same type o 14:42 f problem a gutless plain jane
Another nonsense video! I could refute nearly all the comments about all the vehicles you have chosen, BUT, I'll stick to the Studebaker Scottsman. This car arrived at a time when many folks in the US were still cash strapped and trying to put their lives back together after WWII. My dad, a WWII vet was able to get enough $ together to get one of these new. It ran great, was reliable, and went everywhere it was pointed without issue for the six years we owned it. As kids we did not need a radio we would just sing! And your comment on power windows - you must be under 30! Power windows were unusual even in the Caddys and Lincolns of that time! Studebakers, Packards, Hudsons, Ramblers were very good cars that were produced by underfunded inovative small independent companies under constant attack from the Big 3 which was then coupled with the recession of 1958 that had a serious negative effect on the entire industry but on the indies in particular. I drove Studebaker products (a pickup and a Lark Cruiser) until 2004, (yes 2004!) when someone offered to trade me straight - my Stude truck for a brand new Ford PU. Should have kept the Stude truck!
You are so wrong and uninformed regarding the 1954 Mercury. I bought one in 1959 as a high-school sophomore in in Southern California, took it to Okinawa for 4 years then drove it from California to Michigan pulling a 14 ft travel tailer then sold it in 1966. Other than a little rust gathered in salt laden Okinawa, it only ever required normal maintenance. The car had no AC yet the clear roof did not make the interior too hot nor cause glare. If needed, there was a cloth head liner which stowed rolled up in a grove at the rear of the roof glass and could be unrolled and zipped in place to cover the glass underside. All in all a gorgeous and robust auto. It's flaw was that it was too expensive. They are very appreciated these days...just check out the 30k plus good examples bring.
Another bogus post by an uniformed child having no concept of cars and roads of the fifties. Every time you see an opinionated “expert” claiming the best, the weirdest, the worst, of any subject, you can be assured the individual posting them hasn’t seen the ball since kickoff.
Are you kidding in 1952 about the only popular cars that had power steering and power brakes were Cadillacs. The difference between a 210 and a Bel Aire was very minimal and that was basically upholstery and two tone paint. Showing a Nash sedan and then a street rodded Nash Cross country is bizarre to say the least. The cross country was kept in Nash’s lineup for several years. All of the cars except the Cross country were built and marketed as entry level economy models and then were knocked for it. The only reason Ibwatch this nonsense is to see just how dumb some people can be about cars.
You could keep the Crossley, I would not fit in it. But all other cars? If you don't want them, I do! Exactly my taste! No useless pling-pling, lovely body works, for me one of the best eras in the whole history. But you moan always about the wrong treasures. You've got no clue at all...
Forever the optimist with this channel, it never fails to disappoint me with its ridiculous descriptions of cars made 70 years ago as not being able to compare with modern cars
The Hudson Pacemaker is BOXY?! Not streamlined like other cars of the 50s?! A design that is a relic of the past??? Wow, this commentator is most undoubtedly high...
Compared to other cars during this period it looks fantastic, so something is off about what he is saying.
I was saying the same thing. The Hudson’s were so smooth and flowing, there is absolutely not one boxy section on that car!
The Hudson was slow and lack with minimal instrumentation 😂 at the same time showing a Hudson speeding turning tight corners and showing a gorgeous instrumentation panel.
Saying that the Hudson was underpowered and barely able to keep up with 50s traffic and then showing it on the racetrack is at best confusing.
Ahhhhh that thumbnail. You got me.😂😂
That Crossley reminds of the cute Suzuki Jimny of 2024. Slow, underpowered, impractical and a beast when there's wind.
Photoshopped non existent car in the thumbnail, and Jay Leno has nothing to do with your channel.
This car actually exists to this day, but it was built in the 60s, and has nothing to do with Jay Leno or America. Other than that, your comment is completely legit
Re Crosley SS: inflationary (uuuh Greedy petrocos?) gas prices definitely helped Japanese autocos redefine market into "microcars"
Using Leno as clickbait.
@@arthursmith5252‘don’t recommend this channel’ button is getting clicked
@@mkfldargfv if you say that car exists then what is it? That’s AI garbage. Prove me wrong.
Going too say this mercury sun valley you should show at least one picture of it
Practicality and efficiency, are two sides of the same coin, you can't separate the two.
This reminds me of a skit fr9m Jeff Dunham when he bought a Yugo. “Yugo, It’s really not that bad”
Watching the video of the Hudson, it seems to show what a great handling car it was and with the Hornet package, it was a performer also. I didn't like the video effects trying to make it look like old film, with modern cars in the background.
The Crowley was designed to be a compact economy car. It was never supposed to be a performance car. There were very few high speed highways in 1950. 50 mph was about as fast as you could legally go.
You made me sit through a whole video to see a car that doesn't exist
Why don’t you just show the car models that you are discussing
The sweet spot was when you had enough expired license plates to keep up with the floorboard patches needed.
When you tell us about the Sun Valley shouldn't you show us a Sun Valley? I really wanted to see the main feature of the model: The Roof.
Shoot- I’d be happy to have a Hudson Pacemaker… it is a cool design. If one was too unhappy with it, you could swap the engine for something bigger. LOL
This feels like it could be a couple of minutes shorter. Remember how you were often given a minimum length for a paper in HS English, so resorted to restating the same information in multiple ways?
The makers of this video have no idea what they are talking about. Was it made by a couple of twelve year olds?
Nonsense, you need to stop car videos until you learn more about them…🤷🏼♀️
Fire the AI Script writer in this channel. Its like a bad Monty Python sketch for abuse.
I clicked on this expecting to see the car in the thumbnail. According to the other comments, I was terribly naive.
The Pacemaker. Huh. The perfect name forba vehicle whose appearance, abilities, and value made it wind up on life support itself!
What is Jay Leno leaning on in your thumbnail?
Opinions are like noses and assholes, everybody's got them, unfortunately even the people that make these videos 😮😅
The 51 hudson is cool looking not like the bubble cars of today !😊
And you could also mow your lawn with it and use it to get from hole to hole on the golf course other than that the crosley was a great car.
Ohh i fell in love with the Crowsley
@ 14:39, I was unaware that Chevy made a car 53 feet long.
The Hudson pacemaker would have been a winner if they would have put a larger motor and a ragtop on it it would have found its audience. The Chevy 210 had the same type o 14:42 f problem a gutless plain jane
Another nonsense video!
I could refute nearly all the comments about all the vehicles you have chosen, BUT,
I'll stick to the Studebaker Scottsman.
This car arrived at a time when many folks in the US were still cash strapped and trying to put their lives back together after WWII.
My dad, a WWII vet was able to get enough $ together to get one of these new. It ran great, was reliable, and went everywhere it was pointed without issue for the six years we owned it.
As kids we did not need a radio we would just sing!
And your comment on power windows - you must be under 30! Power windows were unusual even in the Caddys and Lincolns of that time!
Studebakers, Packards, Hudsons, Ramblers were very good cars that were produced by underfunded inovative small independent companies under constant attack from the Big 3 which was then coupled with the recession of 1958 that had a serious negative effect on the entire industry but on the indies in particular.
I drove Studebaker products (a pickup and a Lark Cruiser) until 2004, (yes 2004!) when someone offered to trade me straight - my Stude truck for a brand new Ford PU. Should have kept the Stude truck!
You are so wrong and uninformed regarding the 1954 Mercury. I bought one in 1959 as a high-school sophomore in in Southern California, took it to Okinawa for 4 years then drove it from California to Michigan pulling a 14 ft travel tailer then sold it in 1966. Other than a little rust gathered in salt laden Okinawa, it only ever required normal maintenance. The car had no AC yet the clear roof did not make the interior too hot nor cause glare. If needed, there was a cloth head liner which stowed rolled up in a grove at the rear of the roof glass and could be unrolled and zipped in place to cover the glass underside. All in all a gorgeous and robust auto. It's flaw was that it was too expensive. They are very appreciated these days...just check out the 30k plus good examples bring.
Hudson was a racing car well built ero dynamics Pacemaker/Hornet
This is total bull$hit.👎👎👎
kinda dig that crosley ss
Another bogus post by an uniformed child having no concept of cars and roads of the fifties. Every time you see an opinionated “expert” claiming the best, the weirdest, the worst, of any subject, you can be assured the individual posting them hasn’t seen the ball since kickoff.
Really, the Crosley filled the niche for a lot of poor people!
Are you kidding in 1952 about the only popular cars that had power steering and power brakes were Cadillacs. The difference between a 210 and a Bel Aire was very minimal and that was basically upholstery and two tone paint. Showing a Nash sedan and then a street rodded Nash Cross country is bizarre to say the least. The cross country was kept in Nash’s lineup for several years. All of the cars except the Cross country were built and marketed as entry level economy models and then were knocked for it. The only reason Ibwatch this nonsense is to see just how dumb some people can be about cars.
It's too bad that the videos aren't coordinated with the commentary. The comments are excellent.
And the videographers have to stop doing jumping jacks while filming.
you show hot rods ,custom cars, and rotted out junk but no proper restored cars. Thats not the way we saw them when they were new.
the Scotsman looked like a 55 Chevy I think it looked all right
What's with the "shaker cam"? We can see these cars are recorded in the modern era. Lose the cheesy camera trickery.
get your facts straight
Once i figured out this AI generated you lost me.
You could keep the Crossley, I would not fit in it. But all other cars? If you don't want them, I do! Exactly my taste! No useless pling-pling, lovely body works, for me one of the best eras in the whole history. But you moan always about the wrong treasures. You've got no clue at all...
thumbed down for thumbnail clickbait :/
I never liked the Nash there cars were ugly
Don't make anymore videos shots of customized cars while you are critiquing the manufactures just doesn't work .
Blah, Blah, Blah. They must be paid by the word. Each segment is twice as long as it needs to be, repeating pointless points over and over.
Narration is ai?
hii
ypu use Jay Leno, who is nowhere inthe video and a vehicle that is never seen FALSE ADVERTISING
you have no clue a bout cares same on you duamy ,,,,,,,
AI gone wrong! Trash
This channel is not worth watching