@@edwardpate6128 It was very reliable, as long a you didn't ruin it by shifting into Lo while going over 40, or shift from Lo to Drive under power, but it was not in the same league performance-wise as HydraMatic or Torqueflite.
I've always heard that compared to GM and Ford in the 50's and 60's, Mopar always was strong in the powertrain area but a step down in quality of everything else.
@@autochronicles8667 You mean the 57s were originally supposed to come out for 58? That is true. That's why the 57s were so bad - they were mass-produced prototypes. The 58s were better, but many people who got burned by their 57s weren't willing to take a chance on Chrysler products ever again.
Buick could be ordered with heavy duty springs and shocks. Using low range from a dead stop would have faster take off. BUT getting T-Boned in the Buick means you DIE
I was just 8 years old in 1963, but already an automotive Gearhead. Since the early 20s my family lived in Detroit, my mom's side of the family all worked at Chrysler' Corporation Highland Park headquarters. My dad's side all at the Ford Motor Company. The family all drove Chryslers, there were some Fords but never anything from GM. Back then it was Chrysler that was known for the best engineering and overall best designs. Virgil Exner's Forward Look may not have been for everyone, but it gave Chrysler the most modern looks. In my family, it was Chrysler Corporation all the way. Then Ford, but never GM. They knew.
@@jamesbosworth4191 Germans got a free ride ever since the end of WW2. Ralph Nader bashed the corvair because the front end would skid and possible cause a roll over. The VW was way worse. I know from experience.
"Have you ever noticed how similar the new Chrysler treatment is to the new Buick Riviera?" Uh... no... no I have not... just like every other sighted person living on planet Earth...
Unfortunately in 63' Chryslers were still using Virgil Exner's ugly ass styling. Can't even compare to that beautiful Buick Riviera classic. By 64' and 65 and 66' the Chrysler Imperial Crown was an absolute beauty, an elegeant Elwood Engle design who left Ford to work for Chry.
the prototypes looked better... and these were the plucked chickens... I wasn't a fan of the hanging head lights though. And the Riviera was a very expensive vehicle... They acknowledged it as above all these vehicles.
Some of Exner's early designs were pretty good. I think the 55 Chrysler C300 is a very nice looking automobile. I also liked the styling of his 58 Chrysler 300D hardtop. That said, something must have happened to him. He either got carried away and thought he could do no wrong or he just plain lost it. Because there are far more fugly designs from Exner than there are nice looking ones. IMO the 61 Plymouth is one of the worst looking cars ever designed. With the 61 Dodge Dart Phoenix running right behind. Don't even get me started on the mess that was the 1st generation Valiant. It didn't matter from what angle you viewed the car from it just didn't look right. The lines didn't flow together in any way shape or form. To me it looked like Exner must have told the guys " Hey you know all those mock-ups I had of all the stuff I didn't like. Bring all those and put them in this room for me. I'm going to do something with them". At least Chrysler finally saw the light and told him to step down. The fact that they replaced him with a designer who used to work for Ford pretty much says it all.
@@carlmontney7916 58' Chrysler looks like 4 eyed catfish from the front. The profile looks like the car is sagging in the middle like its carrying a ton of bricks behind the front seat as about to buckle under the weight..
His proposed S series Chryslers and DeSotos would have been very nice. All they would have had to do was to stretch them both in length and width, as they were smallish, but I bet they would have been solid hits, and would have kept the DeSoto alive as well, with NO ACCURSED FIRESWEEP!
![[Dealer Film] 1961 Ford Vs Chevy, Ford takes some good shots! Colorized](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/sQ0lRgJaw8M/mqdefault.jpg)
![[Dealer Film] 1961 Ford Vs Chevy, Ford takes some good shots! Colorized](/img/tr.png)
The Newport did have a neat looking interior 😊
We sure lived our 63 Saratoga, great car
The lineup at 4:25 shows just what a winner that year's Pontiac was on styling.
good spot... And i think that test was fairly realistic...
My parents bought a dark blue Star Chief sedan in 1963.
A very low key but classy car for the time.
The forgotten Chrysler-Buick war.
And look, the Chrysler costs more too! Bonus points 🤔👌
double the engine warranty of GM... damn
Chrysler because they have the torqueflite trans while Buick had the 2 speed auto trans.
The Dynaflow a pretty darn good transmission, especially these late ones, 63 was its final year.
@@edwardpate6128 It was very reliable, as long a you didn't ruin it by shifting into Lo while going over 40, or shift from Lo to Drive under power, but it was not in the same league performance-wise as HydraMatic or Torqueflite.
I think the 64 Chrysler rear deck design was an improvement over the 63..
I’m not a GM fan but I would prefer the Buick!
I've always heard that compared to GM and Ford in the 50's and 60's, Mopar always was strong in the powertrain area but a step down in quality of everything else.
they took a quality hit in 57... when they sold the most... and soured all the new people but the 57 cars were the 58's...
@@autochronicles8667 You mean the 57s were originally supposed to come out for 58? That is true. That's why the 57s were so bad - they were mass-produced prototypes. The 58s were better, but many people who got burned by their 57s weren't willing to take a chance on Chrysler products ever again.
Buick could be ordered with heavy duty springs and shocks. Using low range from a dead stop would have faster take off. BUT getting T-Boned in the Buick means you DIE
Debatable.
I was just 8 years old in 1963, but already an automotive Gearhead. Since the early 20s my family lived in Detroit, my mom's side of the family all worked at Chrysler' Corporation Highland Park headquarters. My dad's side all at the Ford Motor Company. The family all drove Chryslers, there were some Fords but never anything from GM. Back then it was Chrysler that was known for the best engineering and overall best designs. Virgil Exner's Forward Look may not have been for everyone, but it gave Chrysler the most modern looks. In my family, it was Chrysler Corporation all the way. Then Ford, but never GM. They knew.
I am a Buick lover, but not for the 61 - 64 models. I don't like that X member frame that lacks side rails.
uhg the x frame... a gm engineering failure.
@@autochronicles8667 It was, but in all fairness, the Mercedes used a similar frame, and you never here a peep about that.
@@jamesbosworth4191 Because they had more reinforcement in the rest of the frame and body...
@@tomservo56954 Like what?
@@jamesbosworth4191 Germans got a free ride ever since the end of WW2. Ralph Nader bashed the corvair because the front end would skid and possible cause a roll over. The VW was way worse. I know from experience.
"Have you ever noticed how similar the new Chrysler treatment is to the new Buick Riviera?" Uh... no... no I have not... just like every other sighted person living on planet Earth...
Too bad Chrysler is moving away from the sedan market. They are still needed.
Unfortunately in 63' Chryslers were still using Virgil Exner's ugly ass styling. Can't even compare to that beautiful Buick Riviera classic. By 64' and 65 and 66' the Chrysler Imperial Crown was an absolute beauty, an elegeant Elwood Engle design who left Ford to work for Chry.
the prototypes looked better... and these were the plucked chickens... I wasn't a fan of the hanging head lights though. And the Riviera was a very expensive vehicle... They acknowledged it as above all these vehicles.
Engel handled the 1963 Chrysler remodel...the Imperial had to wait for 1964
Some of Exner's early designs were pretty good. I think the 55 Chrysler C300 is a very nice looking automobile. I also liked the styling of his 58 Chrysler 300D hardtop.
That said, something must have happened to him. He either got carried away and thought he could do no wrong or he just plain lost it. Because there are far more fugly designs from Exner than there are nice looking ones.
IMO the 61 Plymouth is one of the worst looking cars ever designed. With the 61 Dodge Dart Phoenix running right behind. Don't even get me started on the mess that was the 1st generation Valiant. It didn't matter from what angle you viewed the car from it just didn't look right. The lines didn't flow together in any way shape or form.
To me it looked like Exner must have told the guys " Hey you know all those mock-ups I had of all the stuff I didn't like. Bring all those and put them in this room for me. I'm going to do something with them".
At least Chrysler finally saw the light and told him to step down. The fact that they replaced him with a designer who used to work for Ford pretty much says it all.
@@carlmontney7916 58' Chrysler looks like 4 eyed catfish from the front. The profile looks like the car is sagging in the middle like its carrying a ton of bricks behind the front seat as about to buckle under the weight..
@@carlmontney7916 Yeh...he definately came up with some ugly sh!t.
What the heck was Exner smoking when he designed these abominations?
these are plucked chicken designs but the Chrysler isn't bad... I actually kind of like it.
His proposed S series Chryslers and DeSotos would have been very nice. All they would have had to do was to stretch them both in length and width, as they were smallish, but I bet they would have been solid hits, and would have kept the DeSoto alive as well, with NO ACCURSED FIRESWEEP!