The 1959 Cadillac models were certainly eye catching. Some people love them and some people hate them. Let's hear your opinion on this "landmark" design!

I personally love them, but love it or hate it, it's not only a Cadillac icon, but a significant American icon, and the defining symbol of the 1950's

On a purely objective basis, the design is pretty ugly. Kinda looks like a whale. However, I think they're stunningly beautiful because of the intent of the design.

Brian

I do love the '59, though I'm much more a fan of the '57-'58 models that came before it... especially the Eldorado Brougham. I just think the sheer height of the fins of the '59 made it a classic instantly. I do not think there is a more recognizable Cadillac than the '59 though.

Being a fan of the "less is more" school of thought, I'm naturally not a huge fan of something that excessive and gaudy, but given the era in which it was built, it's hard to argue with it's importance. It's the defining design of the '50s. I really like the 1959-60 Eldorado Broughams though...they were just as long and low as the other 59's, but much sharper and sleeker.

I personally love them, but love it or hate it, it's not only a Cadillac icon, but a significant American icon, and the defining symbol of the 1950'sI agree. Those towering fins perfectly capture 1950s American exuberance.

From purely a design standpoint, the fins on the 1960 Cadillac are more elegant and almost as tall. My personal choice after a 1960 convertible would be the four-window hardtop with the wraparound rear window.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3153/2765848157_a261aebeee_m.jpg
http://l.yimg.com/g/images/spaceball.gif
http://l.yimg.com/g/images/spaceball.gif

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3221/2765835605_58a99c947a_m.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1259/537425812_9bf6e1271d_m.jpg

The 1961-64 Cadillacs are better looking overall than the 1959, but not nearly as spectacular.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3248/3018024375_722d2cc327_m.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3138/3018023011_6094e1ceb2_m.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/34/69939071_4c71575524_m.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3566/3385994630_4c72f4c716_m.jpg

I love them. Especially the '59 Eldorado Biarritz convertible. That is one of my dream cars. Nothing carries quite the grandiose style that those cars do. The chrome alone on those cars probably weighs as much as a Kia Spectra.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3248/3018024375_722d2cc327_m.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3138/3018023011_6094e1ceb2_m.jpg


Pink Cadillacs have always seemed a little too kitschy to me (and yes, this is coming from someone who likes him some Escalades on 24"s), but that one is gorgeous!

Past: Loved them. By far my single most dream car to have/restore.

Current: Eh, looks really good as a classic, but what would I do with it? Buying a car just to look at dosen't do much for me anymore and I am not going to try and re-live the "glory" days of USA - a decade that not even my parents know. Desire to now own has pretty much dropped off the board.

Personally my favorite 50's Caddy of choice would be a '55 convertible, I like the styling. Then the '59. '60 is nice too. IMO '61-'63 was the oddball design, frontend didn't do much for the car, or Cadillac as a whole and lower tail fins? bleh. For '64 they went back to a '59-inspired design, atleast with the front.

I guess a "real world" classic Cadillac for me would be a '68 DeVille convertible. Even then I dunno what I'd do with it, other then the occasional cruise. Maybe build up the engine, but going "fast" in a straight line in a tanker really isn't my thing anymore.

Having lived through the 1950's I don't see the '59 Cadillac as an "icon" of the decade. I t was really a very conservative time, the decade of the "Grey Flannel" suit and a middle class that was just beginning to really hit the consumpyion wagon. The 1957 cars of all makes were really more in tune with the fifties' optimism new technological progress than the extreme vulgarity and tasteless ostentation of the 1959 Cadillacs. I had always thought that the "jewelled can opener" tailights and glassed bumper lights were the result of Harley Earl's swansong senility than an attempt to capture an age.

My Dad had a 1960 Sixty Special which was much more aesthetically pleasing ....... even if it did handle like it was on ice, even when it was on dry pavement. The sixties were a much more flamboyant decade with the middle class getting up a full head of steam!

Past: Loved them. By far my single most dream car to have/restore.

Current: Eh, looks really good as a classic, but what would I do with it? Buying a car just to look at dosen't do much for me anymore and I am not going to try and re-live the "glory" days of USA - a decade that not even my parents know. Desire to now own has pretty much dropped off the board.

I guess a "real world" classic Cadillac for me would be a '68 DeVille convertible. Even then I dunno what I'd do with it, other then the occasional cruise. Maybe build up the engine, but going "fast" in a straight line in a tanker really isn't my thing anymore.Yeah, I guess you can't go wheeling in an old Caddy. Would be interesting to see how far you got, though. :histeric:

Owning a classic car is great fun (and I'd put your BMW in that category or close to it). By far, I get much more enjoyment out of driving Betty than just looking at her. And unlike many classic car owners, I drive mine -- nearly 75,000 miles in 10.5 years. Not just for cruising or to shows, either.

And it's pretty simple to do minor upgrades like a rear stabilizer bar and wider tires to improve the handling without hurting the ride. I have some of the best times driving over my favorite roller coaster roads. A tanker Betty is not.

1960 is my favorite year for Cadillacs between 1959 and 1964. I love those clean cut, razor sharp lines, especially the fins.

Yeah, I guess you can't go wheeling in an old Caddy. Would be interesting to see how far you got, though. :histeric:

Owning a classic car is great fun (and I'd put your BMW in that category or close to it). By far, I get much more enjoyment out of driving Betty than just looking at her. And unlike many classic car owners, I drive mine -- nearly 75,000 miles in 10.5 years. Not just for cruising or to shows, either.

And it's pretty simple to do minor upgrades like a rear stabilizer bar and wider tires to improve the handling without hurting the ride. I have some of the best times driving over my favorite roller coaster roads. A tanker Betty is not.

I had a feeling it was a matter of time before somebody mentioned something along those lines :)

So I waited to reply with an explanation. Yes, as you said, I too would consider the E30 to be darn near a "classic" Just give it a bit more time.

That is what I ment by the statement about the old Caddys, *personally* as much as I like 50's-70's Caddys, they just don't do much for me any more. I much prefer a vehicle that involves the driver - be it a Jeep or a BMW etc.. Yes, I could see myself cruzin in a '68 DeVille convertible, but honestly, I could see myself doing the same exact driving in my E30 convertible - getting 3x the gas mileage and with all the "modern" goodies I like in a package I actually prefer.

In a sense I have "locked" in my classic. The best part is, to me, she is still just as set to also be a daily driver or a cross-country roadtrip queen as any other car out there.

I owned my '79 Sedan DeVille d'Elegance for 2yrs, it was fun. Not "classic" in every sense, but still fun. I know towards the end I was thinking about selling it tho because I was getting bored with it.

I think what originally got me into cars and muscle cars of this era was growing up around my father and his buddies etc... It was what I knew. For someone my age to seek cars that my father drove when he was my age, would be like my father seeking out cars that were 20-30yrs older then him - cars from the 20s and 30s. How many middle aged folks nowadays are trying to restore a Model A or a 30's Ford/Chevy Coupe (non hotrod)? Nah, they are going after the cars that were popular when they were my age (part of the reason why the classic muscle car bubble is gonna burst in the future). Just as I would be interested in all the performance cars being produced right now, then trying to find that Saturn Sky Redline 30yrs from now to restore etc... Just as you picked up the Impala because it was a car you grew up with, much of the rest of the middle-aged folks into the classics are doing the same. That would be like me one day trying to restore an '88 Fiero Formula, '85 Bronco or '89 Fleetwood Brougham (that I owned for a breif time) - cars I grew up with.

Heck even Noelle is kinda pushing it in comparison, she is only 2yrs younger then I (down to the month!) That would be like my father fixing up a 1957 car when he was my age, instead he had his '68 GTO convertible that was his highschool car - that he still has, a car 13yrs newer then him.

Kinda went on a tangent there for a bit - almost made me feel like the old me! Ah well - thats all I ment was, as far as I am concerned, my BMW is my "classic" car. The Jeep is the daily driver/weekend warrior, but as far as materialistic items go, Noelle is my baby. (shes getting upset about being apart this long!) For me, a 50's or 60's Cadillac represents a time in America that I never even lived thru, that I personally don't really think were the "glory days" as often made out to be and were originally bought by people that did not share my style of work/living, actually the oppisite (same may be said about my BMW). Really, other then apperciating the classic cars from a design/styling perspective (which is totally fine in it's own right) in some cases, seeing the classics in current movies such as fast and furious etc... and maybe in some other cases; what the car did to the automotive world ala BMW 2002 etc... what is the main appeal of these cars to the younger generation that never lived anywhere near this time frame? Newer cars are safer, faster, turn better, stop better, more fuel efficent, more features etc...

Again, for those that don't understand it, it would be like being into cars built 20-30yrs you were born, which for most here that were born in the 50's-60's, means we are talking cars built in the 20's-40's..... you don't see it much.

The tanker comment was actually a remark to myself in the past. At one point, I thought the coolest thing would be to build up an insane 500 and dump it in a '75 Coupe DeVille, to hell with handling, gas mileage or just about anything else. I wanted the biggest most badazz car with huge power to do burnouts at the light and race unsuspecting "fast" cars. Now I look back and think to myself "what was I thinking?" I mean, yeah, it would be "cool" and seeing a car like that would spark my interest, but is it something I'd really enjoy day after day? Thank my BMW for that - totally changed the way I look and feel about cars.

Part of it was just because this is what I grew up with. Nobody in my close family had an import at all, much less a BMW. Nobody was into wheelin or had off-road vehicles. My fathers Bronco was a stock 4x4, but that was for the NY winters. Still tho, I always liked that truck. Growing up it is just what I was used to, I didn't "get it" why other people in my high school class were into Hondas and VW etc... Go a few years later when I start to try out my own things and I was in for a world of surprise. It all started with the little Isuzu, which was such a shock because I wasn't expecting it. Skip to current times and "driver"/fun/involving vehicles like my BMW and Jeep have left me with a whole new type of vehicle enjoyment, and greatly killed off what I once thought was my favorite type of cars.

Perhaps the greatest thing that I admire about you (Gary) /Betty, is the fact that you actually drive the car. With the exception of very rare, one-off, or otherwise low production cars, I don't care about seeing a 100% restored car that is trailered or a factory original with 8 miles on the odometer. To me, that car either is not or never have lived its life. I'd rather see a car with many miles on it, original in many ways and possibly with the scars from over the years to show its been used, but still kept up in nice shape. Your car would be an example of that. You took it on a several hundred mile roadtrip across the state, to me that is really cool. Use it as it was made to be used.

I can see myself doing the same with my BMW in the future. As far as I am concerned, if it was perfectly fine as a daily driver when new, and still now, 20yrs later, then why wouldn't it be 20yrs from now, granted it can still be fueled/maintained etc...? She is not a garage queen and will be driven as long as we are both capable of driving. She isn't perfect either, has many dings/dents (bought her that way) but part of me says why bother fixing/repainting if I am just going to drive it anyway? Then I'd just get paranoid about it. Maybe sometime in the future if the paint goes bad, but for now, the imperfections add to her character.

What was this thread about?

Personally my favorite 50's Caddy of choice would be a '55 convertible.

Stop trying to win points with DreamMachine. :histeric:

Look at the words being used to describe the '59 model year's styling: excessive and gaudy, grandiose. Exactly why I love it. It's an over-the-top effort with larger than life tailfins.

If you're going to go over-the-top, you might as well shoot as high as you possibly can.

On a purely objective basis, the design is pretty ugly. Kinda looks like a whale. However, I think they're stunningly beautiful because of the intent of the design.

BrianThey are beautiful because of the "intent of the design"? I don't think I understand what that means.

Anyway, a '59 convertible would be a choice piece of transport. It's over the top but in a very cool way. :yup:

Perhaps the greatest thing that I admire about you (Gary) /Betty, is the fact that you actually drive the car. I don't care about seeing a 100% restored car that is trailered or a factory original with 8 miles on the odometer. To me, that car never lived its life. I'd rather see a car with many miles on it, original in many ways and possibly with the scars from over the years to show its been used, but still kept up in nice shape. Your car would be an example of that. You took it on a several hundred mile roadtrip across the state, to me that is really cool. Use it as it was made to be used.

I can see myself doing the same with my BMW in the future. As far as I am concerned, if it was perfectly fine as a daily driver when new, and still now, 20yrs later, then why wouldn't it be 20yrs from now, granted it can still be fueled/maintained etc...? She is not a garage queen and will be driven as long as we are both capable of driving.Thank you, Rick. I know you already enjoy the BMW, and I think that will continue to grow over time. It's a survivor, and I always respect that, even for makes that I don't particularly care for (Ford mostly). The pleasure truly is in the driving. Regardless of my strong nostalgia for the '64 Impala since it's where my love of cars began, I doubt I'd own one if it were a chore to drive. No fun in that.

I test drove a '78 Sedan de Ville d'Elegance back in February that was for sale, and I was tempted, but three cars in my driveway is plenty. Other than the pinkie twirling steering, it was a very nice car to drive; better than I expected.

BTW, Hoover and I took Betty on another road trip last weekend to Washington (across Puget Sound from Seattle) to see friends and attend a car show in Bremerton. Met LS1Mike there. Was about ~500 miles round trip, and Betty ran great. Considering it was in the 90s on the drive up, it was nice to have working A/C.

Stop trying to win points with DreamMachine. :histeric:

Look at the words being used to describe the '59 model year's styling: excessive and gaudy, grandiose. Exactly why I love it. It's an over-the-top effort with larger than life tailfins.

If you're going to go over-the-top, you might as well shoot as high as you possibly can.

lol, after I typed that I had a feeling someone would make a comment about that.

As such, I have been a member here since 2003, and have made the comment, several times about prefering the '55 Cadillac many years ago - I'm sure a search of my posts will bring it up, I'm not really interested in searching for it at the moment.

I just don't get off on old cars with tail fins,don't know why?Not a single Cadillac ever caught my eye untill the 04 V,don't know why.I think the best looking caddy so far is the XLR.

LOVE it. IMO it the best American design of all time. Any car that looks good in pink has to be a phenominal design. It IS Americana.

Now, another big question. Which classic convertible do you prefer?


http://1959cadillac.org/1959-Cadillac-Eldorado.jpg

http://image.hotrod.com/f/PlumSmuggler/7345576+w450+h338+cr0+re1+ar1/1963-lincoln-continental-finished-product-2007.jpg

Put me down for the Continental.

I just don't get off on old cars with tail fins,don't know why?Not a single Cadillac ever caught my eye untill the 04 V,don't know why.I think the best looking caddy so far is the XLR.

Possibly in part having to do with my previous long reply? Tho not applicable in every sense.

What sort of vehicles did you grow up around? What were you interested in when in your 20's? What do you look for in a vehicle?

Now, another big question. Which classic convertible do you prefer?


http://1959cadillac.org/1959-Cadillac-Eldorado.jpg

http://image.hotrod.com/f/PlumSmuggler/7345576+w450+h338+cr0+re1+ar1/1963-lincoln-continental-finished-product-2007.jpg

Put me down for the Continental.

Between the 2, I'd take the Eldo.

The Eldo's side trim did alot to clean up the look from the regular versions without the chrome rocker/wrap around trim and in place the mid-line aluninum/stainless strip that got wider as it went to the rear.

Eldo BY FAR

The only thing that makes the Conti cool is the suicide doors

Now, another big question. Which
http://image.hotrod.com/f/PlumSmuggler/7345576+w450+h338+cr0+re1+ar1/1963-lincoln-continental-finished-product-2007.jpg

Put me down for the Continental.

+1

I'm as big a Caddy fan as anyone, but the Conti is just too cool in a suave, swingin'-sixties sort of way. I can picture Frank Sinatra driving one on a floating cloud right now with Sammy riding shotgun and Dean lounging in the back :cool:

Possibly in part having to do with my previous long reply? Tho not applicable in every sense.

What sort of vehicles did you grow up around? What were you interested in when in your 20's? What do you look for in a vehicle?
I have a love for the A bodys, always have.But I have to admit early I preffered the Imports.Liked the MG's,Triumph's,my first fun car was a 280Z and loved it.Couldn't afford a vette at the time.Some of the sweetest old cars are running around here driven by old timers that just love to cruise.I always see performance first I guess,I owned the cream puff pickup of all time 20yrs ago,a 67Chevy with 13,000 miles on her.When it was all said and done,my memories are dried window rubber,am radio,single legger,no air conditioning and rusted rockers.I have to see function before art.:hmm:I think people who love the era love the cars.My wife goes googoo over antiques and old houses,I see old crap and endless repairs to plumbing and electrical.

Maybe I need to ride in one of these old boats and see what it feels like blasting down the highway before passing judgment?

+1

I'm as big a Caddy fan as anyone, but the Conti is just too cool in a suave, swingin'-sixties sort of way. I can picture Frank Sinatra driving one on a floating cloud right now with Sammy riding shotgun and Dean lounging in the back :cool:

Actually Sammy, Dean and Frank all drove Dual Ghias ..... they were pobably driven in the Continentals though.

As for me, I'd take the Continental convertible ... as long as I didn't have to drive the damn thing. If I had to drive it myself, please make mine a Jaguar 3.8S sedan or an E-type, in British Racing Green would fill the bill!

I'd take the Eldorado over the Lincoln without even a second thought:cool2:

Not a fan of older Lincoln's at all... to blocky and boring (IMHO). The Cadillac just oozes style and grace... even if it isn't a particularly graceful design.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Cadillac-Series-62-Coupe_W0QQitemZ330346977932QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUS_C ars_Trucks?hash=item4cea36da8c&_trksid=p4506.c0.m245&_trkparms=65%3A7|39%3A1
I'm sorry, but you can't tell me that that's not bad @$$. With all the work done to it, it probably handles at least decent, rides good, and move out surprisingly well.

Oh, BTW Rick, when I was at the car show yesterday I took a pick of an E30 for you. I figured you would enjoy it.

Howard Roark did not design the '59

Blech.

-Chris

Howard Roark did not design the '59

Blech.

-Chris

LOL! I think I'm one of about three here who got that reference.

If Howard Roark was an automotive designer back then, he would have come up with the '61 Continental, '66 Toronado and '67 Eldorado. Three cars that were definitely ahead of their time and extremely controversial amongst the public.

I love it, but that's no surprise to those that know me on these boards.

http://smatarese.com/forum/59fleetwood.jpg

http://smatarese.com/forum/000_0049.JPG

I want one..... black '59 hearse....

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Cadillac-Series-62-Coupe_W0QQitemZ330346977932QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUS_C ars_Trucks?hash=item4cea36da8c&_trksid=p4506.c0.m245&_trkparms=65%3A7|39%3A1
I'm sorry, but you can't tell me that that's not bad @$$. With all the work done to it, it probably handles at least decent, rides good, and move out surprisingly well.That is one amazing ride. Too bad I don't have an extra $90k to put into a car. Cadillac's should always have Chevy motors in them. :thumbsup:

^ As we've learned from the CTS-V. I have a Caddy like that in my area that was made into a yellow Batmobile looking thing, if its still there next time I drive by I'll snap a pic.

I used to not like it at all (I was 8 when it was introduced and growing up with them all around, just thought it too big). I have since re-evaluated my position and have accepted it as an iconic American design worthy of the accolades it receives.

http://smatarese.com/forum/000_0049.JPG


:drool:

http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w52/jdinmaui/Jeep008.jpg

http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w52/jdinmaui/Jeep007.jpg

http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w52/jdinmaui/Jeep010.jpg

http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w52/jdinmaui/Jeep009.jpg

The dash and interior in that yellow one is just awful and really dated, looks like they shoved the digital dash and steering wheel out of an 1986 Seville in there.


As far as the 1959 design goes, I love it. Its way over the top, but it really keeps its proportions, its a really well balanced design. Some other cars of that era tried gaudy and over the top, but they just couldn't make it look elegant, instead their cars looked like goofy cross eyed monsters.

For example 1959 Lincoln and 1959 Dodge:
http://www.tocmp.com/pix/Lincoln/images/part2/59Lincoln02-or.jpg
http://carphotos.cardomain.com/ride_images/2/3716/2061/21788530004_large.jpg

http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w52/jdinmaui/Jeep008.jpg

http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w52/jdinmaui/Jeep007.jpg

http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w52/jdinmaui/Jeep010.jpg

http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w52/jdinmaui/Jeep009.jpg

GAH! IMO All of those changes, atleast in part, ruined the car. Something like these Caddys I'd like to either see exactly as it was originally intended, or if modified then follow the "could be stock" plan, maybe lower it a tad, engine swap etc... but otherwise let it look how it was.... or an all out rat rod completed in flat black and dechromed.

I instantly recognized that steering wheel, heck the whole column.... wonder if it also came out of an '89 Olds 88.

http://memimage.cardomain.com/ride_images/1/1471/2781/3676390053_large.jpg

1960 was SUCH a better year for Cadillac IMO.

http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/atthebaraz/1960%20Fleetwood/CIMG6968.jpg

http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/atthebaraz/1960%20Fleetwood/CIMG6982.jpg

http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/atthebaraz/1960%20Fleetwood/CIMG6963.jpg

I MUCH prefer the clean cut lines to the over the top '59s.

1960 is my favorite year for Cadillacs between 1959 and 1964. I love those clean cut, razor sharp lines, especially the fins.

^That.

Hi all - i have a 59 caddie convertible - series 62, with no seatbelts.... the information in a flyer in the glove box says that the seatbelts were an option for that year. anyone know if the there are places to bolt the seat belts in or is this something where drilling holes will be required (both front and back seats)

As far as the 1959 design goes, I love it. Its way over the top, but it really keeps its proportions, its a really well balanced design. Some other cars of that era tried gaudy and over the top, but they just couldn't make it look elegant, instead their cars looked like goofy cross eyed monsters.

For example 1959 Lincoln and 1959 Dodge:
http://www.tocmp.com/pix/Lincoln/images/part2/59Lincoln02-or.jpg
http://carphotos.cardomain.com/ride_images/2/3716/2061/21788530004_large.jpgI agree, the '59 Lincoln is just ugliness in motion but the Dodge was not a bad looking ride!

Hi all - i have a 59 caddie convertible - series 62, with no seatbelts.... the information in a flyer in the glove box says that the seatbelts were an option for that year. anyone know if the there are places to bolt the seat belts in or is this something where drilling holes will be required (both front and back seats)

I expect you'd have to drill, although there may be locating divets moulded into the sheet metal.

Now, another big question. Which classic convertible do you prefer?


http://1959cadillac.org/1959-Cadillac-Eldorado.jpg

http://image.hotrod.com/f/PlumSmuggler/7345576+w450+h338+cr0+re1+ar1/1963-lincoln-continental-finished-product-2007.jpg

Put me down for the Continental.
The '59 Cadillac for me.

I have always liked them... 30 years ago, 20 years ago, 10 years ago and now. The '59 Cads have a better ride than the '59 Lincolns and were more reliable.

And the '59 Cads were well-built cars with a very good engine (the 390). That fact is overlooked a lot because of many people only notice the huge tailfins. The '59 Cads have great big fins and lots of chrome... a big plus for me!

That is what I ment by the statement about the old Caddys, *personally* as much as I like 50's-70's Caddys, they just don't do much for me any more. I much prefer a vehicle that involves the driver - be it a Jeep or a BMW etc.. Yes, I could see myself cruzin in a '68 DeVille convertible, but honestly, I could see myself doing the same exact driving in my E30 convertible - getting 3x the gas mileage and with all the "modern" goodies I like in a package I actually prefer.

I really enjoy driving my '60s and '70s Cadillacs. My '69 Fleetwood Brougham has a feel to it you just can't find in new cars. It is big and does not try to hide that fact. It is fun to drive. Especially since some mods were done to it (dual exhaust, shift kit, 3.21:1 rear axle replacing the original 2.94s). I timed 40-60 mph in 3.7 seconds which probably equals many new cars. It has thick, plush and soft leather seats, unlike those stiff, hard seats found on most new cars.

My '76 Fleetwood 75 limousine is also fun to drive. I've owned it for 10 years now and I am still amazed by the ride. You just won't find as smooth a ride with a Cadillac limousine as you will on a BMW or Audi or whatever. There is no comparison in such things as interior roominess and the big-car feel and soft seats.



I think what originally got me into cars and muscle cars of this era was growing up around my father and his buddies etc... It was what I knew. For someone my age to seek cars that my father drove when he was my age, would be like my father seeking out cars that were 20-30yrs older then him - cars from the 20s and 30s. How many middle aged folks nowadays are trying to restore a Model A or a 30's Ford/Chevy Coupe (non hotrod)? Nah, they are going after the cars that were popular when they were my age (part of the reason why the classic muscle car bubble is gonna burst in the future). Just as I would be interested in all the performance cars being produced right now, then trying to find that Saturn Sky Redline 30yrs from now to restore etc... Just as you picked up the Impala because it was a car you grew up with, much of the rest of the middle-aged folks into the classics are doing the same. That would be like me one day trying to restore an '88 Fiero Formula, '85 Bronco or '89 Fleetwood Brougham (that I owned for a breif time) - cars I grew up with.

Heck even Noelle is kinda pushing it in comparison, she is only 2yrs younger then I (down to the month!) That would be like my father fixing up a 1957 car when he was my age, instead he had his '68 GTO convertible that was his highschool car -

The age of a car in relation to my age makes no difference at all. My favorite years for cars is 1969. The fact that I was 8 years old at the time does not affect my preference for cars at all. If I liked something such as a 1948 Pontiac or 1949 Cadillac, again, the fact that the car was around long before I was born would not matter to me one bit. I would buy what I like!