Keep in mind this filmstrip was created to show to Cadillac dealers / salesmen, so naturally the Caddy was sent from heaven while the Imperial was inferior trash to be criticized.
The reason why the Imperial did not have a parking position was its independent parking brake, a feature on all Chrysler vehicles until the push-buttons were discontinued in 1965 to the best of my knowledge.
The announcer says the Imperial looks just like a Dodge or a Plymouth? I think the Cadillac looks more like an Impala then the Imperial looks like a Dodge
The resemblance in 1958 was kind of amazing. You would think someone would've not wanted GM's most expensive car to look so much like its cheapest one!
Chrysler designers were 5 years ahead of production when Virgil Exner rolled out his 1960 lineup designs in 1954. Execs & board wanted to take the design lead from GM so they insisted the 1960 models be bumped up to 1957 (hence the "suddenly it's 1960" slogan). This left designers & engineers only 2 years (instead of 5) to get all-new Chrysler, DeSoto, Dodge, Plymouth and Imperial from drafting table to showrooms. The rush led to massive quality control issues on the line. Body engineers, angry that for the first time ever they had no design input (thanks to Exner's orders) deliberately sabotaged construction in the hopes that Exner's team would be blamed and they would be invited back to the design table (they weren't). Nevertheless, sales for 1957 were dynamite. Unfortunately, by 1958 the cars were already rotting out thanks to thin, low-grade, iron-rich steel. Rain water was leaking on driver's feet. Dealers were provided "kits" to seal leaks when angry customers showed up. But the word was out that Mopars were built like crap and sales for 1958 cratered. Although there was a recession that year, sales remained bad in 1959 and 1960, long after the economy rebounded. In the Spring of 1959, Exner's team presented designs for the 1962 model year to dealers--all of whom returned home very worried about the future. The '62 cars were the ugliest anyone had ever seen and they knew selling the cars would be near impossible. Predictably, in November of 1961, in response to disastrous sales and dealer demands, Virgil Exner was fired and then "retired" to a board position with no design authority. Ford's Elwood Engel was brought in to salvage the 1963 lineup and move Chrysler into mainstream territory again, which he did. But ChryCo never lived down its reputation for building stylish but shoddy cars. I owned a 1959 Plymouth Belvedere and it was built like a kiddie car - whisper thin metal, no sound deadening, rock-hard suspension and egg beater motor. The 3-speed transmission had a poor ratio that forced you to keep the motor at ridiculously high RPM's just to do 40mph. Shifting constantly slipped and the plastic trans buttons often popped out and landed on the floor, leaving you with no way of shifting the car until you could park somewhere and open up the dash. Still the 1957-59 Mopars looked great!
Interesting comments. Chrysler still had the stodgy flathead 6 through 1960. I'll stick with GM although i do like some Chrysler cars. I don't think the 62s looked all that bad. They were interesting, if nothing else.
I drive a 58 desoto, and it doesn't have whisper thin metal. It's about the thickness of a 55 gallon steel drum, I suppose. The engine dominated NASCAR and NHRA, so there's another thing. Ford and GM had push button transmissions at that time too, and Chrysler's torqflite transmission was the first of any company that didn't slip too much to be used in drag racing.Truthfully I find your whole story suspect.
@@nastybastardatlive What is your point? My story is "suspect" because Ford & GM had push button controls too? That has nothing to do with anything, since their mechanism was totally different. I owned three tailfin Mopars and they all looked great and all were all built like crap. My statements stand. If you don't like it, don't read it.
You'll notice that the speaker keeps referring to the competition as a "Chrysler Imperial". At this point, Imperial is a brand, just as Cadillac and Lincoln are brands. I don't think this is an accident. He wants to portray the competition as a step down in prestige.
Yes mate, I noticed that too. GM must have been scared of the Imperial, scared enough to make this video in the first place. I noticed they had no real constructive criticisms, if you have to talk about where the glove compartment is then you are scraping the bottom of the barrel. They were up against a much better car and they knew it.
That was the first thing that, instantly, I noticed; "he said, what?" Btw: I'll take one Imperial, please. Oh and, never, did I like the look of the 360-degree horn ring; nor, do I think there's a problem, with how the paint looks.
@@area51isreal71 Oh god yes. They were reaching BIG time to find anything truly bad w/the Imperial. I've owned several of both makes, plusold Lincolns. Imperial is more of a driver's car, and Imperial/ChryCos. are what I own now.
Worse than that, the cruciform frame doesn't adequately address structural rigidity issues. Next time you see an early '60s Coupe deVille, check out the base of the C-post. Simple torsion, especially when the front wheels are on uneven surfaces, like turning into a driveway, cause the body to twist at this critical juncture. All 3 of mine literally TORE from the minor twisting motions of the body that were not muted by the under-engineered frame.
The Chrysler reference has to be intentional, all automotive insiders knew of Chrysler's efforts to make Imperial a separate make. GM was reactive at this point because their 1957's were bloated and outdated not just compared to Chrysler but Ford as well. The Chrysler designs were truly a step ahead in the industry and GM took considerable notice, hence their immediate action to course correct on the 59 designs which by no surprise followed many of the '57 Chrysler themes. Sadly Chrysler rushed the 57's and they killed Chrysler's reputation for quality.
Chrysler designers were 5 years ahead of production when Virgil Exner rolled out his 1960 lineup designs in 1954. Execs & board wanted to take the design lead from GM so they insisted the 1960 models be bumped up to 1957 (hence the "suddenly it's 1960" slogan). This left designers & engineers only 2 years (instead of 5) to get all-new Chrysler, DeSoto, Dodge, Plymouth and Imperial from drafting table to showrooms. The rush led to massive quality control issues on the line. Body engineers, angry that for the first time ever they had no design input (thanks to Exner's orders) deliberately sabotaged construction in the hopes that Exner's team would be blamed and they would be invited back to the design table (they weren't). Nevertheless, sales for 1957 were dynamite. Unfortunately, by 1958 the cars were already rotting out thanks to thin, low-grade, iron-rich steel. Rain water was leaking on driver's feet. Dealers were provided "kits" to seal leaks when angry customers showed up. But the word was out that Mopars were built like crap and sales for 1958 cratered. Although there was a recession that year, sales remained bad in 1959 and 1960, long after the economy rebounded. In the Spring of 1959, Exner's team presented designs for the 1962 model year to dealers--all of whom returned home very worried about the future. The '62 cars were the ugliest anyone had ever seen and they knew selling the cars would be near impossible. Predictably, in November of 1961, in response to disastrous sales and dealer demands, Virgil Exner was fired and then "retired" to a board position with no design authority. Ford's Elwood Engel was brought in to salvage the 1963 lineup and move Chrysler into mainstream territory again, which he did. But ChryCo never lived down its reputation for building stylish but shoddy cars. I owned a 1959 Plymouth Belvedere and it was built like a kiddie car - whisper thin metal, no sound deadening, rock-hard suspension and egg beater motor. The 3-speed transmission had a poor ratio that forced you to keep the motor at ridiculously high RPM's just to do 40mph. Shifting constantly slipped and the plastic trans buttons often popped out and landed on the floor, leaving you with no way of shifting the car until you could park somewhere and open up the dash. Still the 1957-59 Mopars were indeed handsome cars!
@@GLC2013 Love those crazy looking '62s! I have both a '62 Dodge & Plymouth B bodies. They really are amazing driving cars, and quite well put together by then. Though I heard about 5 or was it 9 Dodge dealers dropped out Dodges from their line-up!
@@UberLummox - Yeah, they don't look as bad over the distance of time, especially considering what new cars look like! I guess back then coming from the '57 & '58 lines they were quite a shock :)
@@GLC2013 Yep they were! Actually I don't consider the front of a '58 Imperial anything special looking at all. The '60 front end I thing is one of the best big car front ends of all time. That's one helluva cool looking floor model console tv in your pic!
@@UberLummox - I agree! When I was a kid, there was a '60 Imperial in the parking lot outside of K-Mart one day. They weren't classics then, just older cars. I drooled over the fins, the rocket-exhaust tail lights and floating gunsights. Interior was gorgeous, too!
@@TheOzthewiz Yes, not doubting that for a moment. The point I was trying to make was that the Cadillac add had to resort to nitpicking. McDonalds sell more burgers than anybody else too, but that doesn't mean they are better.
I think this film was shown to Cadillac salespeople, rather than the buying public. But I totally agree that if customers saw this, they very well might have bought an Imperial instead.
@@area51isreal71 All of these filmstrips from all manufacturers do the same thing, tout your cars innovations and slam the other guy's old design. When it comes to your old design vs. the other guys innovations, you tout your old design as tried and true and call the other guy's innovation as unproven.
This promo today seems like everyone wants or wished they had bought an Imperial over a Cadillac. Their promo was accurate - The slogan for 1957 models said "Suddenly, it's 1960!" The '58 Cads, while beautiful, looks very similar to the '55
That imperial is nice though. I honestly think i would pick that. Better handling, the Cadillac had that weak dangerous X frame. And Cadillac just kind of rested on its laurels. Of course I think we would all gladly take either one.
Cadillac and General Motors got their panties all twisted in a know when Chrysler introduced their all new 1957 model lineups. The president of GM had a Chrysler brochure in his hand, tossed it on the desk of his head body designer and told him, "Why don't you quit!". This is the primary reason that GM's all new 1958 bodies only lasted one model year. Chrysler's ground breaking designs forced GM to create the now famous 1959 Cadillac fins and of course the rest of their divisions as well.
@@TheItsmegp46 Yep, GM was concidered "The Styling Leader" in most years for good reason, with Harley Earl, then Bill Mitchell heading GM's Art & Color design dept. But in '57 at least, GM & FoMoCo got thrown for a loop.
@@TheItsmegp46 those designs are down several years in advance , they were still in the late 50s when the Chrysler head told the head designer to downsize as his info told him that GM and Chrysler were doing it . Virgil Exner tried to talk him out of it but he wouldn't budge and do the ill fated 1962 Plymouth came out to horrible reviews and the head blamed Exner and replaced him that 59 Cadillac was in design several years before and was planned around using Buick front doors
And how long did THAT fad last? Oh, don't forget the "highway Hi-Fi" that was available in Chrysler Products, another "fad" that fizzled like a nickel rocket!
@@kennethsouthard6042 Packard had ceased production after the 1958 model came out, under the design direction of Studebaker in South Bend, Indiana, and wasn't really a player in the "high-priced field" any longer after 1956 (the last of the true Packard designs and then they became "Packard-Bakers"). My '47 Super 8 is a marvelous car but it was from the 1941 redesign and already stale, and then CEO George Christopher wanted to kill off the Senior Packards by 1948. James Nance coming into the top position in 1952 was the second big blunder for the company and then the merger with Studebaker in 1954 sealed Packard's fate. This really gave the luxury market to Cadillac on a silver platter and they never recovered their once-golden reputation for exclusivity and craftmanship.
So basically Cadillac got nothing. Chrysler made one of these comparison videos at the proving grounds, and the Cadillac literally fell apart over the bumps. I'd take the imperial any day.
I've seen those videos but, they were highly rigged. It would have been impossible for the rear door to swing open like it did because, by then, all the cars were using Ford's new door lock design which would have prevented that from happening. Also, no one in their right mind would have taken bumps at such a high rate of speed in a luxury car. Chrysler rode too stiff, while Cadillac gave a truly luxurious ride.
Everyone here should watch "Comparison of 1958 Cars" Parts 1-4 with "Uncle" Tom McCahill. They really put all the makes (Big Three) through the tourture test. Guess who wins! : ) I love'em all. I've had'em all. My 1st. car at 14 yrs. old was a '58 Sedan Deville. Now I just own old Imperial/ChryCos., but would love another '69 Electra 225!
@@petercrowl9467 I think they're very handsome. A distinctive loop front bumper and that nice unbroken body line slanting down the sides. Very well balanced, perfectly proportioned, cohesive styling imo. Especially the 4dr. hdtp.
@@petercrowl9467 The one problem they had was they were usually seen in uninspiring light metallic colors from what I saw. Black or dark blue they had a real henchman's car look. : )
I would love an Electra 225, but, not the '69, but a '64.. imo, they are beautiful and the performance is fantastic! I lived next door to a guy, back in the 70s, that owned a '64 and that car was like a rocket! He let me drive it down the street (not very far, of course, I was only 14) and the power of that car was very impressive!
the Imperial was the better car, handled better too. the Cadillac was the follower those years and the Imperial was so much stronger too - that it was banned from demolition derbies because it always destroyed the other vehicles
I always find these videos quite entertaining! The '58 Cadillac was a much better looking vehicle as opposed to the Imperial! Thank you for the upload!
not really - even GM admitted their 1958 models were dogs, hence trashing the 1958's and radically redoing their entire fleet to try to catch Chrysler in 1959 - I think Harley Earl was held responsible for the 1958 GM fiascos and they worked on the 1959's while he was away w/o telling him
6:18 - I laughed scornfully at the phony demonstration of windshield distortion. In the view from the Imperial, the woman is placed directly in the area of maximum glass distortion, but she's carefully positioned totally OUTSIDE the Cadillac's similar spot. And the camera is also at a higher level on the inside so that the ceiling of the Caddy covers up what was probably even more pronounced waviness from the extreme windshield curvature. They also neglected to mention the knee-busting intrusion of this windshield styling into the driver's open door of the Cadillac.
As a GM guy (Buick, mostly) My heart says "Cadillac", But my head says "Imperial". If I had no preconceived loyalty in 1958, Imperial would win, for the drivetrain and suspension system ALONE. Plus it WAS more modern looking (for the time).
Cadillacs of that era truly were "The Standard of The World"! The interior build quality of the Cadillac was on another "level" compared to the Imperial. The Chrysler Products had (and STILL have) "slip shod" build quality!
What???? This is a slide show for a projector. This is the "film". That's what the "dings" at the end of each frame is, it's telling the person to move to the next frame. That's what they did in the 50s
When it came to ride and seating comfort, Cadillac gave its customers what they wanted, while Chrysler gave theirs a hard, stiff ride. Also, the Imperial took the turn signal stalk off their cars and replaced it with an awkward lever placed on the dashboard, where it was very difficult to use. The rearview mirrors in the Chrysler products were downright dangerous with rear seat occupants in the car. In order to get a nice ride from the Imperial, you were forced to go over 80 MPH on the highway whereas, with the Cadillac, the ride comfort peaked at 65-75 MPH.
Being that I was born in 1958 you would think I would want one. They were all ugly, not one of them was attractive. Recession made sales impossible that year. Now 58s are rare and bring top dollar. I will take an Eldorado Brougham most definitely from 1958. I have a 07 Chrysler 300 C with cloth roof and everything you can order on it. I have owned over 50 cars in my lifetime and my 70 Cadillac Coupe all black was the best then my 80 Coupe deVille.
GM says what they want to here, but their Cadillac and other cars during this time had no side collision protection. The X-Frame is a dangerous design. See 9:09 Chrysler had it right never mind to the frame having been around awhile. See 8:58 As far as the torsion bars go, Chrysler used these well into the 1960's so they had those right too.
Never written as fact. Everyone can like or dislike what they see. Myself and most of the buying people would agree they were ugly. Though I would never argue that their engineering of the drive train was poor. Excellent in my book. But styling needed a different team.
@@JBuddis :which, actually, he does. In his reply, he states, "myself and most of the buying public...". This infers factual knowledge-of which, being a subjective value-there can be none.
Everyone should see "Comparison of 1958 cars" Parts 1-4 with "Uncle" Tom McCahill here on YT. They really put the Big Three cars through the tourture test. Guess who comes out on top every time! ChryCo. was the Engineering Brand, and GM was known as the Styling Leader for great reasons (most years). I love'em all...I've had'em all. Now I just own old ChryCos., though would love to have another '69 Electra 225!
Ha Ha Ha...Where is the road test? Where is the acceleration and braking test? Perhaps because the Imperial kicks it's tri-five Chebby looking ancient ass?
I think that when you decide to buy a luxury car you have the age, the money and the sanity to decide which brand to buy. I do not think it's normal for this decision to be made based on which car has more acceleration, higher maximum speed, etc. On the other hand, if the Chrysler, De Soto, Dodge and Plymouth cars of 1957, 1958 and 1959 were so powerful and fast, why never ran a single car of these brands in NASCAR races, such as Darlington 500 mills; Orange Speedway and others. In these three years mentioned, only Oldsmobile, Pontiac, Chevrolet Ford and some Mercury cars ran and wo
Cadillacs of this year, in particular, were nothing but gussied-up Chevys because GM was scurrying around, trying to catch up to Chrysler's '57 knock-out blow with their updated Imperial models.
And nothings changed. when you know have an inferior product "smear" campaigning is the marketers "go to" tool, donst just apply to automobiles. As mentioned the other car companies had the same "promo" based marketing. The Imperial def the" modern looker", jump forward to 1964 & Lincoln would be the winner.
The Cadillac for 1958 was the final year styled under the oversight of Harley Earl. The very first industry design chief, he introduced the modern era of annual design changes and alterations, frequently, merely for the sake of change itself, with no benefit for the driver or owner. Harley Earl favored lots of chrome and a certain bloated, bulging look design appearance. By 1958, the look had become a bit dated, to say the least. Meanwhile over at Chrysler, Virgil Exner penned some of the most striking designs imaginable, especially for that era. 1957 through 1964 or so featured architectural and automotive forms that gave expression to the Atomic Age, Jet Age, Space Age elements of that era. Those 1957 Exner designs made everything else look obsolete instantly. Auto design shifted more frequently and extremely between 1957 and 1965 than at any other 8 year period. Those designs were truly remarkable and amazing, but sadly, as mentioned above, the quality problems were just off the graph. I was born in 1957 myself so I feel a distinct connection. In the lexicon of the era, those Exner designs were dreamy and out of this world. But we were a General Motors family. Buicks and Cadillacs in our garages.
I'm amazed at how angry I got watching this. The Imperial was so much better than the Cadillac. They really we unfair here. I get that it's almost 70 years old and a selling tool for cadillac but, it really goes to show how scared of the imperial Cadillac was at the time. They were radically different cars
@@zacharygerhart8504 it just shows a total lack of intelligence. Thinks it’s funny. Low IQ Democrat voters are like that! No original thought or idea. They’re what they accuse others of being!! Sad, really!
Geez, even the Imperial videos of this era didn't imply the Cadillac was a death trap. This video makes it seem like you'll die once you're on the road with an Imperial.
I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be posting any comments on CZcams for everyone to read, until I did a grammar and spelling check, there Billy... just sayin' ... for the next time you want to leave a comment.
I'm a GM fan but the '58 Cadillac is a mess of horrible design compared to the imperial cleaner lines. I don't see what other people obviously saw in the cars of this era.
I consider both of these behemoths quite ugly and 1958 was a sharp, yet short-lived, recession year. This is what really killed the Edsel and gave to the rise of compacts.
of course, saying "quite ugly" is merely your opinion.. I'll take one of each only because I actually believe both cars are gorgeous, especially as compared to today's CRAP! again.. just my opinion.
That's definitely a matter of opinion. I like the 58 GM lineup but won't deny they had some design problems. They got obsolete real fast and few survive today. The 58 recession didn't help sales, either. 58s were OK if you took real good care of them and stayed away from the troublesome options, especially air suspension. But no one took care of them and didn't realize the pitfalls of some of the wacky options offered.
well now, if someone were to GIVE Me a '58 GM, I certainly wouldn't turn it down, especially if it were in pristine condition! I find the '58s to be gorgeous, especially with all that chrome on the Buicks and Olds !
@@hankaustin7091 I couldn't agree more. Some 58s in the GM lineup had a few design flaws, but they were overall good cars if you drove them properly and took care of them. That's something most people didn't do. 58 Buicks and Oldsmobiles are among the best looking cars offered, but their popularity faded fast. The 58 Cadillac Fleetwood 60 Special was another amazing car, but they're scarce as hen's teeth today. Just the chrome on those cars is probably worth about 10 grand today.
Cadillac talks shit about the design of the Imperial. That's hilarious since it was the surprise introduction of the Chrysler Finmobiles in '57 that panicked GM Corporate and would ultimately result in batwing Impalas in 1959 and Caddies with tailfins so tall they were a threat to airliners on final approach
This video makes me want to buy an Imperial.
rofl lacquer is superior... the x frame was flimsy but superior also? GM was spreading all kinds of lies
I had a '57 Imperial, and it was a great car.
And I bet you felt there wasn't a point in driving anywhere simply because you had already arrived
We get it already...Cadillac, a gift from the gods...Imperial, evil and you will roast in hell if you drive one. Good grief.
Lol yep
this was a rebuttle to the Roy Ross videos Chrysler was putting out.... They were scared shitless in 58... Chrysler stole market share from them in 57
Keep in mind this filmstrip was created to show to Cadillac dealers / salesmen, so naturally the Caddy was sent from heaven while the Imperial was inferior trash to be criticized.
The reason why the Imperial did not have a parking position was its independent parking brake, a feature on all Chrysler vehicles until the push-buttons were discontinued in 1965 to the best of my knowledge.
Until today
The announcer says the Imperial looks just like a Dodge or a Plymouth? I think the Cadillac looks more like an Impala then the Imperial looks like a Dodge
True!! In 58 all GM cars look nearly identical in the front!
The resemblance in 1958 was kind of amazing. You would think someone would've not wanted GM's most expensive car to look so much like its cheapest one!
Chrysler designers were 5 years ahead of production when Virgil Exner rolled out his 1960 lineup designs in 1954. Execs & board wanted to take the design lead from GM so they insisted the 1960 models be bumped up to 1957 (hence the "suddenly it's 1960" slogan). This left designers & engineers only 2 years (instead of 5) to get all-new Chrysler, DeSoto, Dodge, Plymouth and Imperial from drafting table to showrooms. The rush led to massive quality control issues on the line. Body engineers, angry that for the first time ever they had no design input (thanks to Exner's orders) deliberately sabotaged construction in the hopes that Exner's team would be blamed and they would be invited back to the design table (they weren't). Nevertheless, sales for 1957 were dynamite. Unfortunately, by 1958 the cars were already rotting out thanks to thin, low-grade, iron-rich steel. Rain water was leaking on driver's feet. Dealers were provided "kits" to seal leaks when angry customers showed up. But the word was out that Mopars were built like crap and sales for 1958 cratered. Although there was a recession that year, sales remained bad in 1959 and 1960, long after the economy rebounded. In the Spring of 1959, Exner's team presented designs for the 1962 model year to dealers--all of whom returned home very worried about the future. The '62 cars were the ugliest anyone had ever seen and they knew selling the cars would be near impossible. Predictably, in November of 1961, in response to disastrous sales and dealer demands, Virgil Exner was fired and then "retired" to a board position with no design authority. Ford's Elwood Engel was brought in to salvage the 1963 lineup and move Chrysler into mainstream territory again, which he did. But ChryCo never lived down its reputation for building stylish but shoddy cars. I owned a 1959 Plymouth Belvedere and it was built like a kiddie car - whisper thin metal, no sound deadening, rock-hard suspension and egg beater motor. The 3-speed transmission had a poor ratio that forced you to keep the motor at ridiculously high RPM's just to do 40mph. Shifting constantly slipped and the plastic trans buttons often popped out and landed on the floor, leaving you with no way of shifting the car until you could park somewhere and open up the dash. Still the 1957-59 Mopars looked great!
Interesting comments. Chrysler still had the stodgy flathead 6 through 1960. I'll stick with GM although i do like some Chrysler cars. I don't think the 62s looked all that bad. They were interesting, if nothing else.
@@1940limited Didn't the slant 6 come out in 60, with the Valiant?
@@MisterMikeTexas 1961.
I drive a 58 desoto, and it doesn't have whisper thin metal. It's about the thickness of a 55 gallon steel drum, I suppose. The engine dominated NASCAR and NHRA, so there's another thing. Ford and GM had push button transmissions at that time too, and Chrysler's torqflite transmission was the first of any company that didn't slip too much to be used in drag racing.Truthfully I find your whole story suspect.
@@nastybastardatlive What is your point? My story is "suspect" because Ford & GM had push button controls too? That has nothing to do with anything, since their mechanism was totally different. I owned three tailfin Mopars and they all looked great and all were all built like crap. My statements stand. If you don't like it, don't read it.
Yeah, that X frame went down as such a wonderful idea!!!
Side impact collisions were worse with the X frame. We know what a disaster air suspension was.
@@1940limited both garbage ideas
I love 'em both, I'll take one each!!
Imperial has more sleek and linear design which seems more futuristic
Not to mention it's engineering advantages, chryslers of this era always were ahead in that department.
You'll notice that the speaker keeps referring to the competition as a "Chrysler Imperial". At this point, Imperial is a brand, just as Cadillac and Lincoln are brands. I don't think this is an accident. He wants to portray the competition as a step down in prestige.
They were a step down. Cadillac owned it!
Yes mate, I noticed that too. GM must have been scared of the Imperial, scared enough to make this video in the first place. I noticed they had no real constructive criticisms, if you have to talk about where the glove compartment is then you are scraping the bottom of the barrel. They were up against a much better car and they knew it.
That was the first thing that, instantly, I noticed; "he said, what?" Btw: I'll take one Imperial, please. Oh and, never, did I like the look of the 360-degree horn ring; nor, do I think there's a problem, with how the paint looks.
@@area51isreal71 Oh god yes. They were reaching BIG time to find anything truly bad w/the Imperial. I've owned several of both makes, plusold Lincolns. Imperial is more of a driver's car, and Imperial/ChryCos. are what I own now.
UberLummox have you ever owned a mid-60's Lincoln Continental? If so how did it compare?
The Cadillacs "X" frame is more dangerous then the Corvair. The "X" frame leaves the car with no protection in a "T bone" collusions.
Worse than that, the cruciform frame doesn't adequately address structural rigidity issues. Next time you see an early '60s Coupe deVille, check out the base of the C-post. Simple torsion, especially when the front wheels are on uneven surfaces, like turning into a driveway, cause the body to twist at this critical juncture. All 3 of mine literally TORE from the minor twisting motions of the body that were not muted by the under-engineered frame.
@@bobtepedino5661 yes the x frame was a VERY bad mistake
Yes! They were unsafe and not as stiff. The Imperial used somewhat of a unibody
I get the impression they want you to buy based on the sales tactic, this is our best car ever…….until next year. Then you should buy a another one!
The Chrysler reference has to be intentional, all automotive insiders knew of Chrysler's efforts to make Imperial a separate make. GM was reactive at this point because their 1957's were bloated and outdated not just compared to Chrysler but Ford as well. The Chrysler designs were truly a step ahead in the industry and GM took considerable notice, hence their immediate action to course correct on the 59 designs which by no surprise followed many of the '57 Chrysler themes. Sadly Chrysler rushed the 57's and they killed Chrysler's reputation for quality.
Chrysler designers were 5 years ahead of production when Virgil Exner rolled out his 1960 lineup designs in 1954. Execs & board wanted to take the design lead from GM so they insisted the 1960 models be bumped up to 1957 (hence the "suddenly it's 1960" slogan). This left designers & engineers only 2 years (instead of 5) to get all-new Chrysler, DeSoto, Dodge, Plymouth and Imperial from drafting table to showrooms. The rush led to massive quality control issues on the line. Body engineers, angry that for the first time ever they had no design input (thanks to Exner's orders) deliberately sabotaged construction in the hopes that Exner's team would be blamed and they would be invited back to the design table (they weren't). Nevertheless, sales for 1957 were dynamite. Unfortunately, by 1958 the cars were already rotting out thanks to thin, low-grade, iron-rich steel. Rain water was leaking on driver's feet. Dealers were provided "kits" to seal leaks when angry customers showed up. But the word was out that Mopars were built like crap and sales for 1958 cratered. Although there was a recession that year, sales remained bad in 1959 and 1960, long after the economy rebounded. In the Spring of 1959, Exner's team presented designs for the 1962 model year to dealers--all of whom returned home very worried about the future. The '62 cars were the ugliest anyone had ever seen and they knew selling the cars would be near impossible. Predictably, in November of 1961, in response to disastrous sales and dealer demands, Virgil Exner was fired and then "retired" to a board position with no design authority. Ford's Elwood Engel was brought in to salvage the 1963 lineup and move Chrysler into mainstream territory again, which he did. But ChryCo never lived down its reputation for building stylish but shoddy cars. I owned a 1959 Plymouth Belvedere and it was built like a kiddie car - whisper thin metal, no sound deadening, rock-hard suspension and egg beater motor. The 3-speed transmission had a poor ratio that forced you to keep the motor at ridiculously high RPM's just to do 40mph. Shifting constantly slipped and the plastic trans buttons often popped out and landed on the floor, leaving you with no way of shifting the car until you could park somewhere and open up the dash. Still the 1957-59 Mopars were indeed handsome cars!
@@GLC2013 Love those crazy looking '62s! I have both a '62 Dodge & Plymouth B bodies.
They really are amazing driving cars, and quite well put together by then.
Though I heard about 5 or was it 9 Dodge dealers dropped out Dodges from their line-up!
@@UberLummox - Yeah, they don't look as bad over the distance of time, especially considering what new cars look like! I guess back then coming from the '57 & '58 lines they were quite a shock :)
@@GLC2013 Yep they were! Actually I don't consider the front of a '58 Imperial anything special looking at all. The '60 front end I thing is one of the best big car front ends of all time. That's one helluva cool looking floor model console tv in your pic!
@@UberLummox - I agree! When I was a kid, there was a '60 Imperial in the parking lot outside of K-Mart one day. They weren't classics then, just older cars. I drooled over the fins, the rocket-exhaust tail lights and floating gunsights. Interior was gorgeous, too!
Well that effort from Cadillac probably helped to sell more Imperials.
NOPE! Cadillac outsold Imperial !
@@TheOzthewiz Yes, not doubting that for a moment. The point I was trying to make was that the Cadillac add had to resort to nitpicking. McDonalds sell more burgers than anybody else too, but that doesn't mean they are better.
I think this film was shown to Cadillac salespeople, rather than the buying public. But I totally agree that if customers saw this, they very well might have bought an Imperial instead.
@@area51isreal71 All of these filmstrips from all manufacturers do the same thing, tout your cars innovations and slam the other guy's old design. When it comes to your old design vs. the other guys innovations, you tout your old design as tried and true and call the other guy's innovation as unproven.
All I'm saying is 392 Hemi and Torqueflight.
This promo today seems like everyone wants or wished they had bought an Imperial over a Cadillac. Their promo was accurate - The slogan for 1957 models said "Suddenly, it's 1960!" The '58 Cads, while beautiful, looks very similar to the '55
One thing I do like is Imperial's use of full instrumentation whereas Cadillac went to idiot lights in 1951. Or was it 1950?
MoPar traditionally was good for that! My aun'ts BASE MODEL1992 Plymouth Sundance had full instruments!
@@jamesslick4790 It's interesting how auto manufacturers went back and forth with that. Today you're lucky to get a gas gauge.
That imperial is nice though. I honestly think i would pick that. Better handling, the Cadillac had that weak dangerous X frame. And Cadillac just kind of rested on its laurels. Of course I think we would all gladly take either one.
Funny how Cadillac copied the Imperial for 1959 .....especially in body style and fins!
Yep
Among other things.... Imperial had swivel front seats ....
Cadillac and General Motors got their panties all twisted in a know when Chrysler introduced their all new 1957 model lineups. The president of GM had a Chrysler brochure in his hand, tossed it on the desk of his head body designer and told him, "Why don't you quit!". This is the primary reason that GM's all new 1958 bodies only lasted one model year. Chrysler's ground breaking designs forced GM to create the now famous 1959 Cadillac fins and of course the rest of their divisions as well.
@@TheItsmegp46 Interesting story! Thanks!
@@TheItsmegp46 Yep, GM was concidered "The Styling Leader" in most years for good reason, with Harley Earl, then Bill Mitchell heading GM's Art & Color design dept.
But in '57 at least, GM & FoMoCo got thrown for a loop.
@@TheItsmegp46 those designs are down several years in advance , they were still in the late 50s when the Chrysler head told the head designer to downsize as his info told him that GM and Chrysler were doing it . Virgil Exner tried to talk him out of it but he wouldn't budge and do the ill fated 1962 Plymouth came out to horrible reviews and the head blamed Exner and replaced him
that 59 Cadillac was in design several years before and was planned around using Buick front doors
And how long did THAT fad last? Oh, don't forget the "highway Hi-Fi" that was available in Chrysler Products, another "fad" that fizzled like a nickel rocket!
In my book, Mopar beat G.M. every time.
well.. I don't know about EVERY time.. but certainly a good majority of the time, to be sure!
Except in sales numbers!
@@TheOzthewiz I think in this era Cadillac outsold both Imperial and Lincoln combined, probably Packard too.
@@kennethsouthard6042 Packard had ceased production after the 1958 model came out, under the design direction of Studebaker in South Bend, Indiana, and wasn't really a player in the "high-priced field" any longer after 1956 (the last of the true Packard designs and then they became "Packard-Bakers"). My '47 Super 8 is a marvelous car but it was from the 1941 redesign and already stale, and then CEO George Christopher wanted to kill off the Senior Packards by 1948. James Nance coming into the top position in 1952 was the second big blunder for the company and then the merger with Studebaker in 1954 sealed Packard's fate. This really gave the luxury market to Cadillac on a silver platter and they never recovered their once-golden reputation for exclusivity and craftmanship.
So basically Cadillac got nothing. Chrysler made one of these comparison videos at the proving grounds, and the Cadillac literally fell apart over the bumps. I'd take the imperial any day.
I've seen those videos but, they were highly rigged. It would have been impossible for the rear door to swing open like it did because, by then, all the cars were using Ford's new door lock design which would have prevented that from happening. Also, no one in their right mind would have taken bumps at such a high rate of speed in a luxury car. Chrysler rode too stiff, while Cadillac gave a truly luxurious ride.
Imperial was doing well in sales at this time and GM took notice on this one. At least Imperial had its own body and trim.
my uncle traded in his 53 Cadillac on a 58 Imperial, a real nice one, but that was traded in on a 61 Cadillac
When I was a kid in the sixty's my dad had a 58 continental we use to call it the Cadillac killer
Everyone here should watch "Comparison of 1958 Cars" Parts 1-4 with "Uncle" Tom McCahill.
They really put all the makes (Big Three) through the tourture test. Guess who wins! : )
I love'em all. I've had'em all. My 1st. car at 14 yrs. old was a '58 Sedan Deville.
Now I just own old Imperial/ChryCos., but would love another '69 Electra 225!
Really? I'm from the past and thought the 69 Electra was particularly...uninspiring...from the styling standpoint.
@@petercrowl9467 I think they're very handsome. A distinctive loop front bumper and that nice unbroken body line slanting down the sides. Very well balanced, perfectly proportioned, cohesive styling imo. Especially the 4dr. hdtp.
@@petercrowl9467 The one problem they had was they were usually seen in uninspiring light metallic colors from what I saw. Black or dark blue they had a real henchman's car look. : )
I would love an Electra 225, but, not the '69, but a '64.. imo, they are beautiful and the performance is fantastic! I lived next door to a guy, back in the 70s, that owned a '64 and that car was like a rocket! He let me drive it down the street (not very far, of course, I was only 14) and the power of that car was very impressive!
the Imperial was the better car, handled better too. the Cadillac was the follower those years
and the Imperial was so much stronger too - that it was banned from demolition derbies because it always destroyed the other vehicles
I always find these videos quite entertaining! The '58 Cadillac was a much better looking vehicle as opposed to the Imperial! Thank you for the upload!
not really - even GM admitted their 1958 models were dogs, hence trashing the 1958's and radically redoing their entire fleet to try to catch Chrysler in 1959 - I think Harley Earl was held responsible for the 1958 GM fiascos and they worked on the 1959's while he was away w/o telling him
The Cadillac was WAY BETTER built than the Imperial. If you look closely at the interior shots, you'll see what I mean.
This is an exercise in exaggeration for sure
GM mastered fake news in 1958
6:18 - I laughed scornfully at the phony demonstration of windshield distortion. In the view from the Imperial, the woman is placed directly in the area of maximum glass distortion, but she's carefully positioned totally OUTSIDE the Cadillac's similar spot. And the camera is also at a higher level on the inside so that the ceiling of the Caddy covers up what was probably even more pronounced waviness from the extreme windshield curvature. They also neglected to mention the knee-busting intrusion of this windshield styling into the driver's open door of the Cadillac.
I would choose Cadillac
Please, Tell me What car do you prefer.
Cadillac, but Imperial had some features I like: Full instrumentation and electric wipers.
As a GM guy (Buick, mostly) My heart says "Cadillac", But my head says "Imperial". If I had no preconceived loyalty in 1958, Imperial would win, for the drivetrain and suspension system ALONE. Plus it WAS more modern looking (for the time).
scott i agree with you...i like both...but here the caddy is a saggie aggy in the assend
Cadillacs of that era truly were "The Standard of The World"! The interior build quality of the Cadillac was on another "level" compared to the Imperial. The Chrysler Products had (and STILL have) "slip shod" build quality!
Where do you live?
Give me the Imperial's frame any day over that X frame
I actually owned a '58 Cadillac "Series 62" and a '66 Imperial Crown...NO COMPARISON...THE IMPERIAL WAS TONS BETTER!
Motordom's Masterpiece.
I like the Fleetwood 60 Special myself.
Can someone explain to me why we are shown a cut from freeze frames, and not the film itself?
What???? This is a slide show for a projector. This is the "film". That's what the "dings" at the end of each frame is, it's telling the person to move to the next frame. That's what they did in the 50s
The Imperial had a Hemi (last year of the original version)
Imperial all the way. Chrysler put money into substance and engineering. GM did flash because it's what shallow people see.
When it came to ride and seating comfort, Cadillac gave its customers what they wanted, while Chrysler gave theirs a hard, stiff ride. Also, the Imperial took the turn signal stalk off their cars and replaced it with an awkward lever placed on the dashboard, where it was very difficult to use. The rearview mirrors in the Chrysler products were downright dangerous with rear seat occupants in the car. In order to get a nice ride from the Imperial, you were forced to go over 80 MPH on the highway whereas, with the Cadillac, the ride comfort peaked at 65-75 MPH.
Lincoln was king of ride comfort
@@1983jblack In some areas, Lincoln had an edge over Cadillac, and, vice versa. Cadillac was a better handling car.
Being that I was born in 1958 you would think I would want one. They were all ugly, not one of them was attractive. Recession made sales impossible that year. Now 58s are rare and bring top dollar. I will take an Eldorado Brougham most definitely from 1958. I have a 07 Chrysler 300 C with cloth roof and everything you can order on it. I have owned over 50 cars in my lifetime and my 70 Cadillac Coupe all black was the best then my 80 Coupe deVille.
I was born in 58 also. My choice would be a 68 - 70 Caddy. Best years.
GM says what they want to here, but their Cadillac and other cars during this time had no side collision protection. The X-Frame is a dangerous design. See 9:09 Chrysler had it right never mind to the frame having been around awhile. See 8:58 As far as the torsion bars go, Chrysler used these well into the 1960's so they had those right too.
But, Chrysler corp were butt ugly!
That is a subjective opinion. Don't try to paddle it out as a factual statement.
Never written as fact. Everyone can like or dislike what they see. Myself and most of the buying people would agree they were ugly. Though I would never argue that their engineering of the drive train was poor. Excellent in my book. But styling needed a different team.
@@JBuddis :which, actually, he does. In his reply, he states, "myself and most of the buying public...". This infers factual knowledge-of which, being a subjective value-there can be none.
Everyone should see "Comparison of 1958 cars" Parts 1-4 with "Uncle" Tom McCahill here on YT. They really put the Big Three cars through the tourture test. Guess who comes out on top every time! ChryCo. was the Engineering Brand, and GM was known as the Styling Leader for great reasons (most years). I love'em all...I've had'em all. Now I just own old ChryCos., though would love to have another '69 Electra 225!
I’d have gone with the imperial for its 392 hemi
Ha Ha Ha...Where is the road test? Where is the acceleration and braking test? Perhaps because the Imperial kicks it's tri-five Chebby looking ancient ass?
I think that when you decide to buy a luxury car you have the age, the money and the sanity to decide which brand to buy. I do not think it's normal for this decision to be made based on which car has more acceleration, higher maximum speed, etc.
On the other hand, if the Chrysler, De Soto, Dodge and Plymouth cars of 1957, 1958 and 1959 were so powerful and fast, why never ran a single car of these brands in NASCAR races, such as Darlington 500 mills; Orange Speedway and others. In these three years mentioned, only Oldsmobile, Pontiac, Chevrolet Ford and some Mercury cars ran and wo
The front end looks like a Chevy.
Cadillacs of this year, in particular, were nothing but gussied-up Chevys because GM was scurrying around, trying to catch up to Chrysler's '57 knock-out blow with their updated Imperial models.
Why wouldn't it? It is after all, a GM product.
I WAS BORN IN 1957
MY MOM & DAD. PURCHASED 1958 CADILLAC CONVERTABLE WHITE /RED INTERIOR FROM OUR UNCLE .IN 1959
WHAT A RIDE
WHAT A BEAUTY .
More than a bit heavy handed. Over the top language. "Motordom's Masterpiece" Sheesh!
Many were given Imperials as a gift and almost all committed suicide.
This trashes Imperial more than promoting Cadillac..
Sales pitch.
Whoa there
And nothings changed. when you know have an inferior product "smear" campaigning is the marketers "go to" tool, donst just apply to automobiles. As mentioned the other car companies had the same "promo" based marketing. The Imperial def the" modern looker", jump forward to 1964 & Lincoln would be the winner.
Yep
The Cadillac for 1958 was the final year styled under the oversight of Harley Earl. The very first industry design chief, he introduced the modern era of annual design changes and alterations, frequently, merely for the sake of change itself, with no benefit for the driver or owner. Harley Earl favored lots of chrome and a certain bloated, bulging look design appearance. By 1958, the look had become a bit dated, to say the least.
Meanwhile over at Chrysler, Virgil Exner penned some of the most striking designs imaginable, especially for that era. 1957 through 1964 or so featured architectural and automotive forms that gave expression to the Atomic Age, Jet Age, Space Age elements of that era. Those 1957 Exner designs made everything else look obsolete instantly. Auto design shifted more frequently and extremely between 1957 and 1965 than at any other 8 year period. Those designs were truly remarkable and amazing, but sadly, as mentioned above, the quality problems were just off the graph. I was born in 1957 myself so I feel a distinct connection. In the lexicon of the era, those Exner designs were dreamy and out of this world. But we were a General Motors family. Buicks and Cadillacs in our garages.
I'm amazed at how angry I got watching this. The Imperial was so much better than the Cadillac. They really we unfair here. I get that it's almost 70 years old and a selling tool for cadillac but, it really goes to show how scared of the imperial Cadillac was at the time. They were radically different cars
Hilarious! He’s like a Republican trying to spin trumps crimes 🤣 all his comments are totally subjective
@EVP Kiernan one million thumbs up for you EVP! exactly right, and well said!
It may be that some of the spokesman’s comments are subjective, however, I don’t understand how this relates to politics in any way.
@@zacharygerhart8504 it just shows a total lack of intelligence. Thinks it’s funny. Low IQ Democrat voters are like that! No original thought or idea. They’re what they accuse others of being!! Sad, really!
Clearly Cadillac Rules 🏆 🤗
NO !!!
Geez, even the Imperial videos of this era didn't imply the Cadillac was a death trap. This video makes it seem like you'll die once you're on the road with an Imperial.
Oh, and at 8:40 mins I have a different opinion as to what 'clear, unrestricted view' means.
gm was scared sh*tless in 1957 about the new mopars... wentt full lies
Everyone on here is trashing the Cadillac cause their jealous that their choise isn't superior to it!
"they're" and "choice"...please use better grammar, people will take you seriouser...
I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be posting any comments on CZcams for everyone to read, until I did a grammar and spelling check, there Billy... just sayin' ... for the next time you want to leave a comment.
@@jeffputz4266 perhaps “more seriously” ..
People in glass houses…..
I'm a GM fan but the '58 Cadillac is a mess of horrible design compared to the imperial cleaner lines. I don't see what other people obviously saw in the cars of this era.
Wow!! That’s an aggressive film. No political correctness then
which makes it one fantastic video!
Hank Austin Agree 100%
I consider both of these behemoths quite ugly and 1958 was a sharp, yet short-lived, recession year. This is what really killed the Edsel and gave to the rise of compacts.
of course, saying "quite ugly" is merely your opinion.. I'll take one of each only because I actually believe both cars are gorgeous, especially as compared to today's CRAP! again.. just my opinion.
I THINK the "imports" had something to do with it.
The 1958 GM cars are all pigs.
No there not!,
That's definitely a matter of opinion. I like the 58 GM lineup but won't deny they had some design problems. They got obsolete real fast and few survive today. The 58 recession didn't help sales, either. 58s were OK if you took real good care of them and stayed away from the troublesome options, especially air suspension. But no one took care of them and didn't realize the pitfalls of some of the wacky options offered.
well now, if someone were to GIVE Me a '58 GM, I certainly wouldn't turn it down, especially if it were in pristine condition! I find the '58s to be gorgeous, especially with all that chrome on the Buicks and Olds !
@@hankaustin7091 I couldn't agree more. Some 58s in the GM lineup had a few design flaws, but they were overall good cars if you drove them properly and took care of them. That's something most people didn't do. 58 Buicks and Oldsmobiles are among the best looking cars offered, but their popularity faded fast. The 58 Cadillac Fleetwood 60 Special was another amazing car, but they're scarce as hen's teeth today. Just the chrome on those cars is probably worth about 10 grand today.
@@1940limited You're absolutely right about the worth of the Cadillac chrome, to be sure!
Cadillac talks shit about the design of the Imperial. That's hilarious since it was the surprise introduction of the Chrysler Finmobiles in '57 that panicked GM Corporate and would ultimately result in batwing Impalas in 1959 and Caddies with tailfins so tall they were a threat to airliners on final approach