chrysler windsor - Jalopnik

posts about #chryslerwindsor more →
1940 Chrysler Windsor
Project Car Hell, Limo Edition: 1957 Chrysler or 1981 Ferrari?

Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.

Dsmvwl Admin Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×

Xelmon
12/06/09

In reply to 1940 Chrysler Windsor
Wow... What a beauty!
Reply

Xelmon was starred Xelmon was unstarred

DrLemming
12/06/09

In reply to 1940 Chrysler Windsor
Tonyola makes an interesting point below about the decline of Chrysler quality. By 1953-54 Chrysler's market share was falling as Ford continued to pour huge resources into trying to catch up to GM, and GM responded by going "Hollywood."

Once the premium-priced Buick started challenging the low-priced Plymouth for third place in sales, Chrysler management blamed its conservative approach to design. So Chrysler went Hollywood too. The 1955-56s were the first step in that direction. Encouraged by increased sales, Chrysler then sped the introduction of Exner's low-slung tailfins of glory. If I recall correctly, the 1957s were originally intended for 1959.

Chrysler was merely playing follow-the-leader. In that era pretty much everyone was focusing on glitz at the expense of quality. The Edsel was the pinnacle of this attitude -- it was a "fancy" but utterly crappy car.

Chrysler clearly didn't learn from Packard's ill-fated 1955s. The formerly conservative automaker introduced interesting innovations such as an"electric" torsion-level suspension, but they were pushed to market too fast -- and were riddled with quality-control problems.

Ironically, Packard might have lasted longer if it had offered an old-fashioned but higher-quality alternative to the crap that the Big Three pumped out in the mid-to-late 50s.
Reply

DrLemming was starred DrLemming was unstarred

Kirk Douglas
12/06/09

@DrLemming: I take offense to your remark about Edsels, I happen to own four. The build quality is very...uneven, but the cars themselves feature a lot of interesting mechanical goodies. That is not in reference to the god-awful pushbutton auto transmission, which rarely survives in most cars.

Look forward to seeing the hopeless basketcase '58 Edsel Pacer team at a Lemons event in the future.
Reply

DrLemming promoted this comment Kirk Douglas was starred Kirk Douglas was unstarred

DrLemming
12/07/09

@Kirk Douglas: No offense intended. I've never driven an Edsel but recall reading a road test that pretty much panned the car, e.g., lots of body shake. Build quality is part of what I was talking about.

Too many automakers at that time thought people would overlook quality issues if the styling was snazzy and the technology fresh. The public thought differently. By 1959 they had gotten so fed up with Detroit's fare that imports -- and the dowdy Rambler -- were selling like crazy.
Reply

DrLemming was starred DrLemming was unstarred

HoonThatFerrari
12/06/09

In reply to 1940 Chrysler Windsor
Great find, MM. This is definitely one of the coolest DOTS vehicles I've seen. Is it someone's daily driver, do you happen to know?
Reply

HoonThatFerrari was starred HoonThatFerrari was unstarred

Novaload
12/06/09

In reply to 1940 Chrysler Windsor
Now that is a nose on a car.
And those gauges could be framed and placed on a wall as a fine art work.
All the details, all the trim.
What a beauty!
Reply

Novaload was starred Novaload was unstarred

that ain't the way to have fun, son
12/06/09

In reply to 1940 Chrysler Windsor
Oh, man.

That is cool as hell.

I still can't wrap my head around a vehicle that large being only 3,200 lbs.
Reply

87CapriceEstate
12/06/09

My van weighs about that.
Reply

that ain't the way to have fun, son promoted this comment 87CapriceEstate was starred 87CapriceEstate was unstarred

that ain't the way to have fun, son
12/06/09

@87CapriceEstate:

Is it a Kei van?

Hell, even my '67 A-108 passenger van weighed 3,900. Though that might have been with two 100 lb. bench seats in the rear, too. Glass ain't light, either.
Reply

MushyHeirloom
12/06/09

@that ain't the way to have fun, son: Crazy stuff - it's got an additional foot-plus of wheelbase over my 240, yet it weighs barely more (and the 240 isn't that heavy by modern standards)... It's certainly more stylish, too.
Reply

MushyHeirloom was starred MushyHeirloom was unstarred

87CapriceEstate
12/06/09

No, it's a 16 foot long 95 Voyager.
Reply

Edited by 87CapriceEstate at 12/06/09 2:14 PM 87CapriceEstate was starred 87CapriceEstate was unstarred

tonyola
12/06/09

In reply to 1940 Chrysler Windsor
It might be hard to believe after decades of K-cars, Sebrings, LeBarons, and other dross, but there was a time when Chryslers were the solidest, most indestructible machines on the road. Not exciting, not glamorous, but conservative, substantial, and upper class. Even Buicks of the era seemed Hollywood by comparison. It all ended with the beautifully-styled but horribly-built and rust-prone 1957 cars - since then, Chrysler made some great and exciting machines but they also had an endless (and ultimately unsuccessful) struggle in trying to rebuild a tarnished reputation for quality.
Reply

tonyola was starred tonyola was unstarred

FairmontGT
12/06/09

@tonyola: I remember a 90-100 MPH ride to Hershey in a '48 Saratoga. Not enough o's in the word smooth to describe how that car rides.
Reply

tonyola promoted this comment FairmontGT was starred FairmontGT was unstarred

CJinSD
12/06/09

@tonyola: The Valiant was a quality product.
Reply

tonyola promoted this comment CJinSD was starred CJinSD was unstarred

tonyola
12/06/09

@CJinSD: The Valiants (and Darts) were durable products, but not necessarily quality. The drivetrains and suspensions were unbreakable. However, the bodies were prone to rust and the quality of assembly could be patchy - the interior of my '75 Duster was downright shoddy, and I've seen plenty of other Valiants and Darts from the early '60s on with slapdash fit and finish.
Reply

Edited by tonyola at 12/06/09 1:17 PM tonyola was starred tonyola was unstarred

Van Sarockin, rogue trebuchet
12/06/09

In reply to 1940 Chrysler Windsor
Very nice, and a great writeup. But as for personal comfort, there were wing windows and personally adjustable footwell vents. Can't complain about the improvements to tires, though.
Reply

Paul Y. can't get in the club; gotta parking lot pimp
12/06/09

@Van Sarockin, rogue trebuchet: Brakes, too. Modern brakes kick ass and prevent dashboard-eating.
Reply

AmishJohn
12/06/09

@Paul Y. can't get in the club; gotta parking lot pimp: Ah, but if you have to eat dash, what a luscious Deco buffet you'll be served...
Reply

AmishJohn was starred AmishJohn was unstarred

Van Sarockin, rogue trebuchet
12/06/09

@Paul Y. can't get in the club; gotta parking lot pimp: I've almost sent a toolbox through the windshield from abrupt braking. Single master cylinder and four wheel drums, but newer than this pre-pentastar. But your brakes can never be too good, not grabby, just good.
Reply

MushyHeirloom
12/06/09

@Van Sarockin, rogue trebuchet: As someone who's broken a windshield from the inside, yes, it's very possible.

I'll take some nice vent windows, though. I've always got the driver's window down a crack.
Reply

MushyHeirloom was starred MushyHeirloom was unstarred

Public Hotdog
12/06/09

@Van Sarockin, rogue trebuchet: "personally adjustable footwell vents"?

You mean a crotch cooler.
Reply

Van Sarockin, rogue trebuchet promoted this comment Public Hotdog was starred Public Hotdog was unstarred

Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion

#chryslerwindsor

Jalopnik

SUBSCRIBE TO Jalopnik

1940 Chrysler Windsor

Project Car Hell, Limo Edition: 1957 Chrysler or 1981 Ferrari?

Login

Reset Password

Register

Submit Your Comment