RE: IML: Opinions on Convertibles from 67/68, ( was: silent directional
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: IML: Opinions on Convertibles from 67/68, ( was: silent directional signa...



I’d have the 67 yet, if only I didn’t live where you HAVE to drive at least 75 on the main roads, and 65 here on our country two lane roads in the boonies of the high desert area – driving slower will get you a nasty bang in the backside!  I’ve sold all 5 of my convertibles in the last few years, because of this problem. I feel a convertible is an ideal car if you can find a 40-50 MPH road to drive it on, hopefully one with good scenery.  Scenery we have but 40-50 will get you killed our here, and quickly!  I held onto the 48 Packard convertible until just this year, but when I realized I wasn’t comfortable driving it anymore, it was time to let it go too.  It would go 75 easily, but it wasn’t designed for that, and didn’t feel comfortable.

 

As for the bulletproof drive train of the Imperial convertibles, anything from 59-68 is basically the same: rock solid reliable – pick the one that turns you on and search for it!  The 413 is every bit as great an engine as the 440, and the cast iron 727 is just as good as the aluminum one – there isn’t much to sway your judgment as to which is the more reliable car.

 

There is nothing inherently wrong with the 57/58 cars either, except that the brakes are somewhat compromised by the smaller drum size – the first stop is fine, but the fade problem is made worse by smaller wheels and drums.  I drove a 57 New Yorker Convertible for years in LA traffic in the early 60s – and that was my only worry.   That 392 Hemi coupled with the Torqueflite transmission would bring a smile to my face every time I hit the loud pedal!

 

To Jack I have to say, you have a 56, which is my personal all time favorite year of the Imperials – cherish it and drive it!  Too bad they made only one convertible!


Dick Benjamin

 


From: mailing-list-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:mailing-list-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of YBSHORE@xxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, September 01, 2006 4:45 PM
To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: IML: Opinions on Convertibles from 67/68, ( was: silent directional signa...

 

Dick,

 

    Thank you for the very informative insight.  Having now owned a '56 Imperial for a couple of years and in turn developing these PHENOMONEL connections via this site and the people who support the movement that is Imperialism, I am now committed more than ever to staying in the Chrysler arena and in turn fulfilling a kid's dream of a monstrously powerful, luxurious convertible that I can/will rely on (wish I knew you in '04!!) and which will compliment my sedan.

 

    Thanks for your time and ALL the time you give to we "newbies".

 

Respectfully,

 

ybshore/Jack

 

1956 Imperial Sedan w/354 pushbutton three speed

1955 New Yorker Deluxe w/331 spoon lever two speed

19?? Imperial Convertible with 440 and 727



Home Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network


Copyright © The Forward Look Network. All rights reserved.

Opinions expressed in posts reflect the views of their respective authors.
This site contains affiliate links for which we may be compensated.