The Forward Look Network | ||
| ||
1959 Plymouth Fury mint green and iceberg white San Francisco Craigslist Moderators: ronbo97 Jump to page : 1 Now viewing page 1 [50 messages per page] | View previous thread :: View next thread |
Forward Look Swap Meet -> For Sale - EBAY, CRAIGSLIST & OTHER FINDS | Message format |
Suddenlyits1960! |
| ||
Extreme Veteran Posts: 403 Location: California | https://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/cto/d/orange-1959-plymouth-sport-fu... 1959 Plymouth Sport 2 door Fury, equipped with it's numbers matching factory rebuild 318 engine and pushbutton torque flight auto transmission with 2k miles since done, power steering and brakes, new dual exhaust, air shocks, gas tank, solid rust free Calif car, bought new in San Fernando Plymouth dealership, laser straight body original floors and trunk pan, and finished in factory colors Iceberg White over Mint Green. Accessory are dual sport mirrors, fender skirts, dual antennas, floor matts. New white wall tires. All new factory interior done in the right pattern colors, front bucket swivel seats cover in clear plastic. Runs very nice, ( Extremely Rare and Desired American Classic ). | ||
Suddenlyits1960! |
| ||
Extreme Veteran Posts: 403 Location: California | Again with the fender skirts. | ||
Paul Hettick |
| ||
Elite Veteran Posts: 705 Location: California | Skirts knock 10 grand off the value. | ||
Powerflite |
| ||
Expert 5K+ Posts: 9684 Location: So. Cal | Seeing that he only wants $1 for it, that may just put it right in my price range! | ||
56D500boy |
| ||
Expert 5K+ Posts: 9912 Location: Lower Mainland BC | . The Fury asks "Do these skirts make my ass look big? Huge?" Answer: A resounding Yes!!. | ||
1960fury |
| ||
Expert 5K+ Posts: 7410 Location: northern germany | 56D500boy - 2020-10-07 4:08 PM . The Fury asks "Do these skirts make my ass look big? Huge?" Answer: A resounding Yes!! ...and thats a good thing! | ||
Viper Guy |
| ||
Expert Posts: 2003 Location: Branson, MO | Yeah, lose the skirts. And as for the 1959 model Plymouths, I prefer the standard Fury side trim to the Sport Fury - so much cleaner looking. | ||
firedome |
| ||
Expert Posts: 3155 Location: NY & VT | I say lose that toilet seat! Always thought that the gigantic round badge on the fin was weird too... very un-Exner like! Edited by firedome 2020-10-12 10:42 AM | ||
Suddenlyits1960! |
| ||
Extreme Veteran Posts: 403 Location: California | I agree Firedome. It destroys the look of the car and works against the sleek futuristic design theme. Why Exner put them on 59 and 60 Plymouth’s and Chrysler’s is beyond me. Edited by Suddenlyits1960! 2020-10-12 12:34 PM | ||
RDP |
| ||
Elite Veteran Posts: 1049 Location: PL / EU | firedome - 2020-10-12 4:40 PM I say lose that toilet seat! Always thought that the gigantic round badge on the fin was weird too... very un-Exner like! Very Exner! Sport Fury badge and the 300-series badge all starts with this Exner project: Body except the front end looks like more dramatic 59 Plymouth. Fin badge, toilet seat, the shape of the fins, roof (a1.jpg) Attachments ---------------- a1.jpg (78KB - 174 downloads) | ||
Suddenlyits1960! |
| ||
Extreme Veteran Posts: 403 Location: California | RDP - 2020-10-12 12:20 PM firedome - 2020-10-12 4:40 PM I say lose that toilet seat! Always thought that the gigantic round badge on the fin was weird too... very un-Exner like! Very Exner! Sport Fury badge and the 300-series badge all starts with this Exner project: Body except the front end looks like more dramatic 59 Plymouth. Fin badge, toilet seat, the shape of the fins, roof Virgil Exner was a brilliant designer,but continental kits don’t belong on these cars. Period. These were the cars of tomorrow. The spare tire is stored out of sight inside the trunk where it belongs. It doesn’t need to clutter up the outside of the car. I understand he had a love of “classic touches”,from earlier cars,but these cars were breaking the time barrier.they were visions of the future. The toilet seat/continental kit works against that design. | ||
RDP |
| ||
Elite Veteran Posts: 1049 Location: PL / EU | I understand, just wanted to say it's not un-Exner. That's all. It works for someone, not for another. This is just a personal opinion. Correctly, the 1959 models were done by William Schmidt, while Exner was recuperating from his heart attack. | ||
Suddenlyits1960! |
| ||
Extreme Veteran Posts: 403 Location: California | RDP - 2020-10-12 1:41 PM I understand, just wanted to say it's not un-Exner. That's all. It works for someone, not for another. This is just a personal opinion. Correctly, the 1959 models were done by William Schmidt, while Exner was recuperating from his heart attack. Yep,you’re right. I have the Virgil Exner Visioneer book. “Ex” had a fondness for classic touches from motorings past. But those themes don’t integrate well with the “forward look” modern,sleek,Jet age philosophy. The “toilet seat” seems less out of place on the imperial,which was more ornate,but in my opinion detracts as a whole from the overall look they were trying to achieve. Especially the experimental one with the full blown continental kit. 1959 was an awkward model year. | ||
1960fury |
| ||
Expert 5K+ Posts: 7410 Location: northern germany | As I stated XX times before, Exner had little to do with the overall look of our beloved cars, it was the Chrysler brass who wanted big fins, large front and rear overhang, jet age americana styling, something "Ex" wasn't really into. I say our cars looked great despite of Exner. W/O Ex we wouldn't have toilet seats and we would have even lower, wheel hiding, typical 50s wheel cut outs and certainly a nicer, non-eastern-bloc looking compact car. Reportedly the only car Exner designed all by his self was the 60 Valiant. Need I say more? This info is from someone who worked in the design staff under Ex during the FL years. Edited by 1960fury 2020-10-12 5:12 PM | ||
Suddenlyits1960! |
| ||
Extreme Veteran Posts: 403 Location: California | In my opinion the 1960 valiant is a hideous car,the ugly duckling in a flock of swans. What was going through Chrysler’s minds when they brought that out to compete against the falcon and comet? My apologies to Mr. Exner but it’s hardly his finest work. The 60 valiant made the “ugliest cars of the 60’s list” https://www.automobilemag.com/news/ugliest-cars-of-the-1960s/ “It has been said that the Valiant—which, by the way, did not officially become a Plymouth until 1961; perhaps it took the dealers that long to stop retching—incorporated several design cues that master stylist Virgil Exner wanted to incorporate into several future Chrysler models. But then he had a heart attack, and while he was out sick his minions stuck them all on one car. From the front, the Valiant is merely dumpy, oddly-proportioned, and overly-adorned; it's when you see it from the back, with its bustle-back trunk, cat-eye taillights, and—my God, my God, why hast thou forsaken us?—faux Continental kit pressed into the trunk lid, that you realize the true horror of this design. And while you might not think such a thing is possible, the wagon is even uglier.” Edited by Suddenlyits1960! 2020-10-12 6:35 PM | ||
1960fury |
| ||
Expert 5K+ Posts: 7410 Location: northern germany | Suddenlyits1960! - 2020-10-12 6:29 PM In my opinion the 1960 valiant is a hideous car,the ugly duckling in a flock of swans. What was going through Chrysler’s minds when they brought that out to compete against the falcon and comet? My apologies to Mr. Exner but it’s hardly his finest work. I remember when I introduced my, back then, girlfriend and later a 61 Desoto driver to the FL world. When I told her reluctantly, that the 60 Valiant is a Chrysler product she laughed out loud thinking I was making a joke, after I showed her all the flamboyant jet age machines. She said you gotta be joking, this is an eastern bloc car! Yes, the 60 Valiant is not only ugly, it is, IMO, one of the ugliest cars of all time and.... pure Exner. Edited by 1960fury 2020-10-12 6:44 PM | ||
CaprockClassics |
| ||
Elite Veteran Posts: 629 Location: Lubbock, TX | 1960fury - 2020-10-12 4:09 PM As I stated XX times before, Exner had little to do with the overall look of our beloved cars, it was the Chrysler brass who wanted big fins, large front and rear overhang, jet age americana styling, something "Ex" wasn't really into. I say our cars looked great despite of Exner. W/O Ex we wouldn't have toilet seats and we would have even lower, wheel hiding, typical 50s wheel cut outs and certainly a nicer, non-eastern-bloc looking compact car. Reportedly the only car Exner designed all by his self was the 60 Valiant. Need I say more? This info is from someone who worked in the design staff under Ex during the FL years. I have to agree, these cars are special in their own way, but to put one person (Exner) up on a pedestal like he's the greatest jet-age designer of all time is ridiculous. I know I get a lot of flack in groups like these for saying it, but Ford and GM had countless Jet-Age/Futuristic styling touches too! Heck, Edsel had electronic pushbutton transmissions controlled from the STEERING WHEEL! How wild is that? Then you have the Olds F88 Futurama concept car which by itself was one of the coolest cars designed in the decade. etc.... ~Peter | ||
1960fury |
| ||
Expert 5K+ Posts: 7410 Location: northern germany | CaprockClassics - 2020-10-12 9:49 PM 1960fury - 2020-10-12 4:09 PM As I stated XX times before, Exner had little to do with the overall look of our beloved cars, it was the Chrysler brass who wanted big fins, large front and rear overhang, jet age americana styling, something "Ex" wasn't really into. I say our cars looked great despite of Exner. W/O Ex we wouldn't have toilet seats and we would have even lower, wheel hiding, typical 50s wheel cut outs and certainly a nicer, non-eastern-bloc looking compact car. Reportedly the only car Exner designed all by his self was the 60 Valiant. Need I say more? This info is from someone who worked in the design staff under Ex during the FL years. I have to agree, these cars are special in their own way, but to put one person (Exner) up on a pedestal like he's the greatest jet-age designer of all time is ridiculous. I know I get a lot of flack in groups like these for saying it, but Ford and GM had countless Jet-Age/Futuristic styling touches too! Heck, Edsel had electronic pushbutton transmissions controlled from the STEERING WHEEL! How wild is that? ~Peter I agree a 100% IIRC the phrase the retired Chrysler designer used was, the Chrysler brass wanted the "Ford look" or a "fordish" look, with the design features I mentioned above. Look at the 57 Lincoln for instance, or the Ford dream cars that beat (IMO) the Chrysler dream cars by far. Also Exner wanted the long hood, short deck look, that is anything but Forwardlook. Exner also wanted large wheel cut outs, very anti 50s/jet age, as shown on his creation, the 60 Valiant, a complete design disaster. Edited by 1960fury 2020-10-13 8:05 AM | ||
Suddenlyits1960! |
| ||
Extreme Veteran Posts: 403 Location: California | CaprockClassics - 2020-10-12 9:49 PM 1960fury - 2020-10-12 4:09 PM As I stated XX times before, Exner had little to do with the overall look of our beloved cars, it was the Chrysler brass who wanted big fins, large front and rear overhang, jet age americana styling, something "Ex" wasn't really into. I say our cars looked great despite of Exner. W/O Ex we wouldn't have toilet seats and we would have even lower, wheel hiding, typical 50s wheel cut outs and certainly a nicer, non-eastern-bloc looking compact car. Reportedly the only car Exner designed all by his self was the 60 Valiant. Need I say more? This info is from someone who worked in the design staff under Ex during the FL years. I have to agree, these cars are special in their own way, but to put one person (Exner) up on a pedestal like he's the greatest jet-age designer of all time is ridiculous. I know I get a lot of flack in groups like these for saying it, but Ford and GM had countless Jet-Age/Futuristic styling touches too! Heck, Edsel had electronic pushbutton transmissions controlled from the STEERING WHEEL! How wild is that? Then you have the Olds F88 Futurama concept car which by itself was one of the coolest cars designed in the decade. etc.... ~Peter Packard,Mercury,Rambler also had push button transmission selectors in addition to Edsels problematic electro-mechanical steering wheel mounted “tele-touch” drive. I certainly wouldn’t call an Edsel “futuristic” though,especially once you look past the dash and you see the exterior. They had no real fins,boxy rooflines (ford seemed to be obsessed with their “formal” rooflines) and the horse collar grille was so terrible it was widely ridiculed at the time. they were odd looking cars,and dogs compared to anything Chrysler had in 58. I do like the crazy boomerang tail lights used on the Bermuda wagons though. The impact of Chrysler’s “Forward Look” designs on the industry can’t be overstated. Chrysler really broke the time barrier with the 1957 cars and were truly in a world of their own. We’ve all heard the famous story of Harley Earl tossing a 57 Plymouth brochure on the desk of Chevys head of exterior design and asking him “why don’t you just quit”. It took General Motors until 1959 to catch up to chrysler. That’s when GM made its best cars and and got serious about fins and the future,creating cars with sleek low bodies and space age,thin airy rooflines.. I’ve seen the Oldsmobile f-88 concept car. Its a neat car but it looks like a corvette not something from the Jetsons. A better example would have been GM’s futuristic 1959 Firebird 3 concept car. Now that was something George Jetson would drive! Ford also had their “FX- Atmos” concept car that dates back to 1954,but the problem with Ford is that they were very conservative and never seemed to put anything wildly futuristic into production. Were there other cars with “Jet age” futuristic styling touches? Of course,that was the big thing back then,but chrysler was the first automaker to do more than simply flirt with futurism and take it seriously. They even changed their corporate logo to the two boomerangs to reflect their commitment to their “forward look” design philosophy. Yes,there are beautiful cars by other makes. Id love to own a 1959 Buick 2dr Ht one day,I think the 1957 Lincoln Capri and Premier is stunning and 1960 Starliner is cool and I’d take a 1957 Ford Fairlane over a 57 Chevy any day. But the Chrysler forward look cars are,as you put it,special cars. ----- Edited by Suddenlyits1960! 2020-10-13 1:57 PM | ||
Powerflite |
| ||
Expert 5K+ Posts: 9684 Location: So. Cal | Suddenlyits1960! - 2020-10-12 3:29 PM In my opinion the 1960 valiant is a hideous car,the ugly duckling in a flock of swans. What was going through Chrysler’s minds when they brought that out to compete against the falcon and comet? My apologies to Mr. Exner but it’s hardly his finest work. The 60 valiant made the “ugliest cars of the 60’s list” https://www.automobilemag.com/news/ugliest-cars-of-the-1960s/ “It has been said that the Valiant—which, by the way, did not officially become a Plymouth until 1961; perhaps it took the dealers that long to stop retching—incorporated several design cues that master stylist Virgil Exner wanted to incorporate into several future Chrysler models. But then he had a heart attack, and while he was out sick his minions stuck them all on one car. From the front, the Valiant is merely dumpy, oddly-proportioned, and overly-adorned; it's when you see it from the back, with its bustle-back trunk, cat-eye taillights, and—my God, my God, why hast thou forsaken us?—faux Continental kit pressed into the trunk lid, that you realize the true horror of this design. And while you might not think such a thing is possible, the wagon is even uglier.” I completely disagree with the article's ending statement about the wagon, and most people do as well. The worst part of the '60 Valiant was the rear decklid design and it's fake continental kit. It earned the car the nick-name "Frog-mobile". But eliminate that frog rear end, and the car looks a whole lot better. So the wagons are actually quite good looking in comparison to the frumpy coupes. This is reflected in their prices as well. A '60 Valiant coupe could be purchased today for a song, but the wagons sell for a lot more. The extended bump at the front fenders wasn't a great idea, similar to the bump on a '61 Fury, but they are too big on the Valiant and seem to dominate the front end design. However, the sweeping bump around the rear wheel is actually quite good looking, how it ties into the tail lights in the back and gives the car a sense of power & motion. And that design was stolen to some degree by Chevrolet for use on the '62-'65 Nova to great effect. Imitation is the greatest form of compliment. Cat-eye tail lights and the Lancer rocket couterparts were good choices too. Very cool designs. 1962 Valiants removed the cat-eyes, and they are not appreciated nearly as much as the '60-'61 versions because of that. All-in-all, change that frumpy frog-like trunk slope and reduce the size of the fender bumps, and we could have had a nice looking car with unique, cool body lines. (60Valiant Wagon.jpg) Attachments ---------------- 60Valiant Wagon.jpg (58KB - 164 downloads) | ||
RDP |
| ||
Elite Veteran Posts: 1049 Location: PL / EU | 1960 Valiant styling fits better with 1962 cars. Not mine, but interesting: (x.JPG) Attachments ---------------- x.JPG (72KB - 172 downloads) | ||
Suddenlyits1960! |
| ||
Extreme Veteran Posts: 403 Location: California | Powerflite - 2020-10-13 12:16 PM Suddenlyits1960! - 2020-10-12 3:29 PM In my opinion the 1960 valiant is a hideous car,the ugly duckling in a flock of swans. What was going through Chrysler’s minds when they brought that out to compete against the falcon and comet? My apologies to Mr. Exner but it’s hardly his finest work. The 60 valiant made the “ugliest cars of the 60’s list” https://www.automobilemag.com/news/ugliest-cars-of-the-1960s/ “It has been said that the Valiant—which, by the way, did not officially become a Plymouth until 1961; perhaps it took the dealers that long to stop retching—incorporated several design cues that master stylist Virgil Exner wanted to incorporate into several future Chrysler models. But then he had a heart attack, and while he was out sick his minions stuck them all on one car. From the front, the Valiant is merely dumpy, oddly-proportioned, and overly-adorned; it's when you see it from the back, with its bustle-back trunk, cat-eye taillights, and—my God, my God, why hast thou forsaken us?—faux Continental kit pressed into the trunk lid, that you realize the true horror of this design. And while you might not think such a thing is possible, the wagon is even uglier.” I completely disagree with the article's ending statement about the wagon, and most people do as well. The worst part of the '60 Valiant was the rear decklid design and it's fake continental kit. It earned the car the nick-name "Frog-mobile". But eliminate that frog rear end, and the car looks a whole lot better. So the wagons are actually quite good looking in comparison to the frumpy coupes. This is reflected in their prices as well. A '60 Valiant coupe could be purchased today for a song, but the wagons sell for a lot more. The extended bump at the front fenders wasn't a great idea, similar to the bump on a '61 Fury, but they are too big on the Valiant and seem to dominate the front end design. However, the sweeping bump around the rear wheel is actually quite good looking, how it ties into the tail lights in the back and gives the car a sense of power & motion. And that design was stolen to some degree by Chevrolet for use on the '62-'65 Nova to great effect. Imitation is the greatest form of compliment. Cat-eye tail lights and the Lancer rocket couterparts were good choices too. Very cool designs. 1962 Valiants removed the cat-eyes, and they are not appreciated nearly as much as the '60-'61 versions because of that. All-in-all, change that frumpy frog-like trunk slope and reduce the size of the fender bumps, and we could have had a nice looking car with unique, cool body lines. I’d have to agree with you. The wagon looks much better than the sedan. I do like the cat eye tail lights too,but think the 1960-1961 Comets look a million times better | ||
Powerflite |
| ||
Expert 5K+ Posts: 9684 Location: So. Cal | I don't think the Ford/Mercury cars were much better looking than the Valiant/Lancer. In fact, I think the Lancer was probably better looking. I don't really care for the Ford design until around 1963-1964. But the GM compact offerings from '61-'62, once they moved away from the corvair, were probably the design winners IMO. Cars like the Olds F-85, Buick Special, Pontiac Tempest & Chevy Nova compacts in those years were quite good looking. | ||
1960fury |
| ||
Expert 5K+ Posts: 7410 Location: northern germany | Yes, the 60 Valiant taillights are the only thing that like about them too, I bought a set to use em as tailight, or backup light bezels for a Kustom. The 60/61 Comets are just beautiful. I even added a picture to my mid century board on Pinterest. (comet1.jpg) Attachments ---------------- comet1.jpg (133KB - 162 downloads) | ||
Jump to page : 1 Now viewing page 1 [50 messages per page] |
Search this forum Printer friendly version E-mail a link to this thread |
(Delete all cookies set by this site) | |