|
|
   
Location: Parts Unknown | Greg,
What do you mean by "road car examples" ?
I have defined my mission in ForwardLookdom as correcting the singlemost fatal flaw Mopar
committed when they kicked these cars out the door ... the construction design practices that
led them to fall apart. At least for a car like my DeSoto, if it weren't for the rust and fitment
issues, the overall design is as close to perfection as is possible, ... on a car that was revolutionary
and remains a zenith in automotive design. A PITA, for sure, but one that can be "unfukked"
and made right with the right tools and skillset.
It is too bad they did not have this dialed in from Day One. History would have been much
kinder to them in the ensuing years. I feel immensely grateful to have the cars I do. I love
the way they drive, and there is nothing like going down the road in that DeSoto with the top
down and those fins cutting inverted "V's" in your rear view mirror circles ! 
|
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 4043
Location: Connecticut | I think the key is what someone said earlier: It was left up to the dealership to finish the assembly/prep/panel alignment. Before releasing a car to the new owner, a dealership that cared about repeat sales would take a few days to ensure that all panels were aligned properly, inner fenders below the eyebrows and in the lower rear sections were sufficiently undercoated (the last 8 inches or so of the inner fender below the eyebrows was not undercoated for some reason. This is probably the key reason that the eyebrows rusted out prematurely). Also, keeping up to date on the technical service bulletins (I'm sure there were many in '57) allowed the dealer to make specified modifications to increase customer satisfaction. It would be great to read the article that Neil posted. However, some of the text is too small to read. A PDF scan would be a better way to make this available. Ron |
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 4043
Location: Connecticut | One good thing that comes from this hindsight is that when we do a restoration on a FL car, we are aware of the initial shortcomings and can put processes in place to remedy these issues. For example, before I replaced the rockers on my 58 Plymouth, I cold galvanized the inner metal to keep them from rusting again. Ron |
|
| |
|
Location: Parts Unknown | Wasn't the issue that Mother Mopar dumped this extra couple days of prep work on the dealer with
no compensation ?
Believe it or not, as much as we love these cars and think they are special (sick and deluded minds),
the dealers never saw them, or any other car, as anything but "product", to be moved out the door at
minimal expense and maximum profit. No different than selling pencils or lettuce. Only this time, the
corporation delivered the product in an unfinished condition and dumped the cost on the dealer.
I have no clue what dealer mark up was, but being a businessman myself, when a supplier dumps an
extra cost on me, it causes any number of results, none of them happy. All costing me either extra time,
out-of-pocket expense, or passed on cost to the client. If a dealer wants to move product and needs to
stay competitive with the guy selling Brand X across the street, taking on all that finish work could have
been a real killer.
|
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 3155
 
Location: NY & VT | It was all about "moving the iron". As noted smart dealers that wanted repeat business took extra pains where possible to ensure that a quality product was delivered to the customer. Unfortunately those dealers were the exception, not the rule. |
|
| |
|
Extreme Veteran
Posts: 524
Location: West Jordan | The simple fact is, some cars catch on and some don’t, people are fickle. The Mustang was not a good quality car, some left the factory with rust, I think they built in ways to make it rust, but it was very popular. I am becoming a fan of 50s-60s Mopar products, BUT, the 57’ Chevy is so good looking, better looking than any Mopar badge of the day, IMO. Yes the Mopar was probably better engineered and built, but just not as popular. But who cares, I grew up thinking everything non-muscle car sucked, true muscle cars, not mustangs and camaros, and Chevy ruled! Said so on my school folder! Over the years I have come to understand that they all have value and should be saved. But then again I may slump in to arrested development when I get around to building the Chevelle. |
|
| |
|
Expert 5K+
Posts: 7808
Location: Williams California | I've taken hundreds of these cars apart, and rarely have seen sufficient undercoating in the headlight brows, rockers and inner rockers had absolutely no protective coatings on their inner areas, doglegs were bare steel on the inside, station wagon roofs and quarter window filler panels were all minus coatings as well. Same with all floorboard underpinnings and supports. Driving any amount of miles on dirt roads or areas where the soil has high alkali content was recipe for future rust.
---John |
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 4043
Location: Connecticut | IMO, in the 50s, cars sold because of one or both of the following reasons: You were a 'Chrysler' (or F*rd or Ch*vy) family, meaning that you bought a Dodge because your Dad bought Dodges and his Dad bought Dodges, for example. The other reason is clever marketing. It's been a while since I watched the old non-Mopar ads, but IIRC the ads for F*rds and Ch*vys were way better than what Chrysler had to offer. The marketing for the 59 Dodge is awful. OTOH, the ads for VW were clever and funny. So even though quality-wise, VWs were far below any Mopar, they were popular and to this day, are remembered fondly. Ron |
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 2524
Location: Houston | I'll tell you one thing....even today you won't anyone who knocks a Slant 6 powered A body...unless they never owned one. |
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 3480
Location: Montreal, Canada | This interesting conversation reminds me of the 1959 warranty procedure manual for dealers that i have here. You can check out the document here:
http://www.forwardlook.net/forums/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=36073&...
|
|
| |
|
Extreme Veteran
Posts: 390
| In 1958 the General Manager of the Plymouth Division was quoted as saying:
In 1957 we built 700,000 cars and made 700,000 enemies.
Chrysler knew what they were doing in bringing the '57s out a year too early and paid the price for an enormously long time.
Management strikes again. |
|
| |
|
Extreme Veteran
Posts: 390
| GregCon - 2014-03-25 7:46 AM
They also drilled their own holes in a lot of places so they could squirt it in, then plugged the holes with plastic caps. We had a '66 Ford truck that had been Ziebarted, it even still had the helmet-head sticker on the window to prove it. Where they had applied the gooey tar, it never rusted. But it did rust in other places where they had not, such as the roof rail.
Then there were the guys who swore by coating the underside of their car every time they changed the oil, with the used motor oil. That took dedication, I suppose.
Ziebart's formulation has changed over the years. The original formula did a great job of protecting cars. The later versions - not as well.
Wax-oyl was another popular rust proofing/undercoating material applied in my part of the world.
As the poster from NB pointed out Krown is a very effective product. It's highly oily and never completely dries out.
Years ago I posed a question to a Chrysler engineer about using engine oil to help protect a car body. He just about leapt across the table at me at the suggestion of using used oil. Among other things it accumulates a high concentration of sulfuric acid, which at the time I didn't know. I've used new oil cut with varsol, but never used oil. |
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 2308
Location: The Bat Cave, Fairborn, OH | When I bought my 1958 De Soto in 1981, (it was an original southwestern car from New Mexico) I took it to my local Ziebart francise and had the entire car sprayed with thier product. The francise dealer refused to give me the standard rust out warranty "because the car was so old" but he did do the job. I have yet to experience any rust outs or deterioration in the body and it has been used on a daily basis over the years and not always garaged during cold weather. It's a very worthwhile product is Ziebart; at least it was in 1981.
Edited by 58 DESOTOS RULE 2014-03-27 10:58 AM
|
|
| |
|
Exner Expert 19,174 posts. Neil passed away 18 Sep 2015. You will be missed, Neil!
Posts: 19146
Location: bishop, ca | Let me just repeat what Kevin said, above, about the 1957 design/build quality:
In 1958 the General Manager of the Plymouth Division was quoted as saying:
In 1957 we built 700,000 cars and made 700,000 enemies.
Chrysler knew what they were doing in bringing the '57s out a year too early and paid the price for an enormously long time.
Management strikes again.
Edited by d500neil 2014-03-27 11:29 PM
|
|
| |
|
Extreme Veteran
Posts: 390
| OMG Neil just agreed with me.
I'm going out to buy a lottery ticket. |
|
| |
|
| "BUT, the 57’ Chevy is so good looking, better looking than any Mopar badge of the day"
It's Chevrolet as usual. Just take last years car, and make it even tackier! 
I've seen many far worse condition "non FL (GM....)" cars that get taken under someone's wing. Why? Because of the badge on the hood. This may get on someone's nerves here, but I'm not brand specific and never intend to be. Although, the Chrysler corporation had some of the best looking cars of the era. 
Edited by MoParMan57 2014-03-30 4:07 PM
|
|
| |
|
Expert 5K+
Posts: 7207
Location: Victoria, BC, on Vancouver Island, Canada | I can't see why so many people get hyped up over the 57 Chevy, sure it's a good looking car - perhaps the best looking out of 55-57 models, but..... it's higher, narrower and stodgier than a 57 Plymouth by far.
|
|
| |
|
Location: Sweden | Someone on here needs glasses for sure
It reminds me of the Trabant..
Edited by henricthornsund 2014-03-30 4:50 PM
 (image.jpg)
Attachments
----------------
 image.jpg (30KB - 175 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 2312
Location: Arizona | The mania over the 57 chevies has always eluded me too. They are ok but hardly breathtaking. |
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 1384
Location: Ocala, Florida | rushpowersystems - 2014-03-26 12:27 PM
The simple fact is, some cars catch on and some don’t, people are fickle. The Mustang was not a good quality car, some left the factory with rust, I think they built in ways to make it rust, but it was very popular. I am becoming a fan of 50s-60s Mopar products, BUT, the 57’ Chevy is so good looking, better looking than any Mopar badge of the day, IMO. Yes the Mopar was probably better engineered and built, but just not as popular. But who cares, I grew up thinking everything non-muscle car sucked, true muscle cars, not mustangs and camaros, and Chevy ruled! Said so on my school folder! Over the years I have come to understand that they all have value and should be saved. But then again I may slump in to arrested development when I get around to building the Chevelle.
Not saying this sarcastically just interested. What do you like about the 57 Chevrolet that makes you think its the best looking car? I must not be seeing something about it as I think it is the ugliest car of the 50s. The 59 Buick however makes me think GM did have some good ideas.
Edited by The Chrysler Kid 2014-03-30 7:03 PM
|
|
| |
|
Expert 5K+
Posts: 8443
Location: Perth Australia | Personally, I love and would love to have a 57 chevy, but if someone offered a swap for my fury (both cars in the same condition), I would decline.
Why? As much as I do like the 57 chev, when you go to a car show, there are always at least a few of them, I have not seen another 60 plymouth yet, just mine (I know there are some out there), so the fury is better (to me) for the "different" factor.
If there was a sudden influx of 60 plymouths here, I would have to sell it and find something else (not that I was looking for one to start with)
|
|
| |
|
Regular
Posts: 94
Location: New Zealand | If the 57 Chrysler products influenced the 59 GM products did they have build quality issues when rushing theirs to market |
|
| |
|
| Yes. The early 1959 GM cars were about as disastrous as some of the 1957 cars. They rusted, they never ran right, seats ripped, hubcaps never stayed on, etc.
First class lemons.
Yet, many of those examples have been saved simply because of who made it.  |
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 1508
Location: new york | Gran Pa's 55 Plymouth and Dads 56 Plymouth were great quality built cars My aunts 57 Sports sedan was not as well built! But even with its rust issues
and crappy interior, it had style better than anything on the road ! Clean lines , and was running great with 100thousand miles when she sold it it in 1965
Replaced by a Dodge dart a frumpy small sedan but it really lasted.Chrysler learned (At least for a while)1950's cars all had rust issues Chevys ,Caddys, Fords all
they did not engineer like today.But back than you wanted a new car every year(Style wise) not the same cars for 15 years like today. We are different today!
HAPPY MOTORING! Victor. |
|
| |
|
| ttotired - 2014-03-30 7:09 PM
Personally, I love and would love to have a 57 chevy, but if someone offered a swap for my fury (both cars in the same condition), I would decline.
Why? As much as I do like the 57 chev, when you go to a car show, there are always at least a few of them, I have not seen another 60 plymouth yet, just mine (I know there are some out there), so the fury is better (to me) for the "different" factor.
If there was a sudden influx of 60 plymouths here, I would have to sell it and find something else (not that I was looking for one to start with)
I have always liked the Exner era cars for their keen styling. Not because they are different or uncommon. The 1957 Chevrolet was just last years model dressed up a bit. Take the 1957 Desoto for instance (minus the large browed Firesweeps). The sleek, crisp fins are crafted beautifully to the sweeping roofline, and that fantastic V shaped window pillar. All the angles are groomed and the trim gives the impression of forward motion. I'll take a respectable GM car which I like, and compare it. Take the 1958 Oldsmobile for instance, one of the best GM cars (in my eyes). The entire design is pretty decent, although next to a 1957 Desoto? Then things change.
The side trim is tacky, the hubcaps overdone, the rear end (cool as it is) isn't very crisp and clean, the roofline looks dumpy. All things considered, I still like it. Same said with the 1959 Cadillac, one of the tackiest, bulbous, and unclean cars to ever come out of GM's doors.
I don't like them because they're different, I like them because they have taste. Like the ads proclaimed, "For the man who wants a little bit more." |
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 1740
Location: Alaska | I think it was Neil that mentioned Chrysler's problems with building the 57 line, all new designs and body fitting. I remember seeing an article about GMs problems with their 59 car line, at first they were not even sure they could even produce those rear quarter panels with the double creases in steel. BTW, I don't even like the looks of the 58-59 cheevy. I have to agree with most of you that the 57 cheevy is not bad looking but does not compare to the looks of the 57 forward Looks. |
|
| |
|
| old mopar guy - 2014-03-30 8:21 PM
Gran Pa's 55 Plymouth and Dads 56 Plymouth were great quality built cars My aunts 57 Sports sedan was not as well built! But even with its rust issues
and crappy interior, it had style better than anything on the road ! Clean lines , and was running great with 100thousand miles when she sold it it in 1965
Replaced by a Dodge dart a frumpy small sedan but it really lasted.Chrysler learned (At least for a while)1950's cars all had rust issues Chevys ,Caddys, Fords all
they did not engineer like today.But back than you wanted a new car every year(Style wise) not the same cars for 15 years like today. We are different today!
HAPPY MOTORING! Victor.
I've heard mixed reviews about the FL cars. A distant family member has very sour feelings about her husband's ex-car. It was one of the early 1957 DeSotos. Her exact words? "That was the biggest lemon we ever owned" I don't believe they owned it a full year.
A few months ago, while hunting for furniture for my room, I managed to get in a conversation with the lady at the desk. Once the topic of "my favorite car" came about, and I told her I liked DeSotos, her face glowed warmly. She recalled her uncle's car quite fondly, and said he loved it dearly. It was also a 1958 or 1959, she stated. Cases like these, as mentioned countless times, are a minority. Most of these wonderful examples of engineering and taste were dumped once they were "uncool".
Even more reason as to why "stylish" and "in" things are overrated.
|
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 3155
Location: NY & VT | '57 Chevy is a box with fins.. imo the most overrated design of all 50s cars vis a vis popularity. That said, mechanically, they were excellent. |
|
| |
|
Location: Parts Unknown | I find the headlights and nacelles to be grossly oversized for the overall proportions of the
car (57 Chevy).
Had Mopar NOT pounded the 57-and-later designs down the throats of America, the 57 Chevy
would look perfectly fine as part of the continuum between 55 and 60 car designs. We only
question it because someone DID offer a sleek and swoopy alternative.
Personally, I think a 57 Chevy looks a lot like a 56 Dodge for overall proportions and general
shape, ... a shape I like. It's just that by 57, the whole scene had changed again.
Never mind the legions of nauseating drones that think they are the ONLY car built in the 50's.
The same crew who think Elvis was President and rock-n-roll was the only music. Yeah ...
|
|
| |
|
Extreme Veteran
Posts: 524
Location: West Jordan | Nope, horse is not dead yet, keep beating it. You know like in the 80’s when Michael Jackson was president and pop was the only music. Yawn……………….. |
|
| |
|
Regular
Posts: 88
Location: Puyallup, Washington | MoParMan57 - 2014-03-30 8:21 PM
Yes. The early 1959 GM cars were about as disastrous as some of the 1957 cars. They rusted, they never ran right, seats ripped, hubcaps never stayed on, etc.
First class lemons.
Yet, many of those examples have been saved simply because of who made it. :stressed:
I own a '59 GM car, and have been involved with various '59 GM forums for years. The comments about '59 GM's being disastrous, first-class lemons? I'm dumbfounded, because I have never once heard any indication of widespread quality issues with the '59 GM cars.
I'm not suggesting that the '59 GM's were any better than the Chrysler products by '59, but I am amazed by the high, apparent survival rates of some of the GM cars from this era.
|
|
| |
|
Exner Expert 19,174 posts. Neil passed away 18 Sep 2015. You will be missed, Neil!
Posts: 19146
Location: bishop, ca | Not only that, they could learn things (in a good way; not Re: Chris-the-car).
Back in '74-75, After a (seemingly, then-) old guy got off work as the manager of a corner liquor/convenience store
manager, at around 11:30 PM, he'd drive me in his 59 Biscayne 2-dr sedan over to an L.A. Flamenco dive, for the Late
Show, there, and some libations.
Anyway, he assured me that: "The car knows the way" to that club.
It did, too. We never got lost.
|
|
| |
|
Location: Parts Unknown | I would suggest that the downfall of the 59 GM cars was only their styling against a public
dislike for the fins. Mechanically and rust-wise, I never knew them to be sub par cars. All
finned cars suffered a strong general dislike from 1962 to at least the early 80's, and it was
a slow time in coming even after 1985.
|
|
| |
|
Expert 5K+
Posts: 5006
| firedome - 2014-03-31 10:15 AM
'57 Chevy is a box with fins.. imo the most overrated design of all 50s cars vis a vis popularity. That said, mechanically, they were excellent.
57 Chevies are everywhere... boring and lame.
Bulldogs have prettier faces also.
They are a dime a dozen also it seems... go to a car show and you see 5 of them... and 57 chevy posts... blech...
Its like any complete line renovate, i mean this whole line was new in 57 wasnt it? And 94 models!!??? wtf... and the dealers wanted freshened lines every year?
5 lines and how many models under each is insane(Chrysler, Plymouth, Dodge, Imperial, Desoto) * 5 * 3+? Nutso, no car company would ever dream of trying to pull that off nowdays not to mention the custom options that were available.
|
|
| |
|
Expert 5K+
Posts: 8443
Location: Perth Australia | As this is turning into a 57 chev thread
This is the car that got me into fins (at least hooked me, always liked fins though)
The car comes from an Australian film called "Running On Empty", an early 80s, rather B grade movie, but full of great cars and very bad music
I saw christine after this movie, but its the chev that is my inspiration, how this car looks is pretty much what I want to do to my plymouth.
Only reason I am not doing this to chev, is, as said before, to many of them around
 (running on empty 57 1.jpg)
Attachments
----------------
running on empty 57 1.jpg (243KB - 878 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Expert 5K+
Posts: 5006
| its got a bit of an overbite
http://rack.1.mshcdn.com/media/ZgkyMDEyLzEyLzExL2Q2L3R1bmFjaGV3ZWVu...
Edited by mikes2nd 2014-04-17 9:45 PM
|
|
| |
|
Extreme Veteran
Posts: 594
Location: Melbourne, Australia | Classic Aussie Car fillum - "Running on empty" bad acting, nudity and the Mopar cops it in the end !!!! (like all good car films) Colin |
|
| |
|
Exner Expert 19,174 posts. Neil passed away 18 Sep 2015. You will be missed, Neil!
Posts: 19146
Location: bishop, ca | Apparently not everyone knows why Chubbies are known as being Belly Button cars.
|
|
| |
|
Expert 5K+
Posts: 8947
Location: WHEELING,WV.>>>HOME OF WWVA | this is exactly like my first car . 235 six , stick , coral rose/white . 47k miles . 1967 , 495$ -----------------------------------------------later
 (P1120252-225-Chevrolet-1957-Bel-Air-FI-2-Dr.-Sedan-VC57K180258_1200.jpg)
Attachments
----------------
P1120252-225-Chevrolet-1957-Bel-Air-FI-2-Dr.-Sedan-VC57K180258_1200.jpg (66KB - 444 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 3155
Location: NY & VT | Bet that one ain't $495! '57 Chebbie prices are insane... add 2 zeros maybe. Pretty nice example. |
|
| |
|
Extreme Veteran
Posts: 499
Location: A proud Canadian | Does anyone have any actual photos of the "Q" for quality sticker that was put in windows of all Chrysler cars for 57? How long did this campaign last, and where on the windshield were these stickers placed? I have seen early ads for this campaign in 1957-58 in readers digest magazine. But, never seen an actual photo of the sticker and its placement on a Canadian built Forward Look. |
|
| |
|
Location: Sweden | Think he meant that it was $495 in '67 |
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 3155
Location: NY & VT | D'uh... I was being sarcastic, referring to what one that nice might go for now... sarcasm doesn't come across too well on the 'net.
Edited by firedome 2014-04-19 4:02 PM
|
|
| |
|
Location: Sweden | I Know, Roger:) If i had not forgot the smiley you would have known, too. |
|
| |
1957 quality control problems
