IML: '57 Build quality, the lingering affects, and the policies of the major brands upon the little guys...

["Wm. R. Ulman" <twolaneblacktop@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

There were many more factors involved in the 50’s besides the build quality issue that affected trade-in values.  Too much to list here right now, but in a nut shell:

 

GM & Ford and possibly even Ma MoPar all manipulated the used car market to their own advantage.  The big boys squeezed the little, or weaker makes out of business by just not giving anything for them in trade-in values.

 

If you traded your ’53 Kaiser in for a new ’56 Chevy, you got pennies on the dollar.  That had the effect of making Kaiser, and many other makes undesirable to purchase new.  If you were trading in your ’53 Chevy at the same day and time, you got much more in trade in value.  This held true even if you were trading in a Ford at a Chevy dealer.  The small, old, weak brands were holding on to dear life, and the big 3 squeezed them dry. 

 

A few of the smaller, but not lesser makes consolidated in a last gasp attempt to stay viable and in the market.  Packard, Nash, Studebaker, and maybe a few others I can’t speak with authority on, but others may.  That is also how we got AMC, or Ameican Motors Corp.  Which actually was a mix of several smaller or squeezed brands?  I know it had Nash as the main unit of AMC, but possibly Packard too, although I think Packard and Studebaker merged to form one company.  Please correct me if I’m wrong, I know not the exact lineage.

 

Off to work all have a great week!

 

Wm. R. Ulman

Seattle, WA 

twolaneblacktop@xxxxxxxxxxx

 

-----Original Message-----
 
Sent: Monday, April 04, 2005 6:16 AM
To: OIC-Rainbows@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [OIC-Rainbows] Mild '57 Bashing

 

I have to agree with Jeff; '57 was a year of flawed beauty. My father's '57 Plymouth lasted until 1963--it's the only car he ever had for less than seven years, and that includes his truly awful '80 Olds Omega X-body!

I think people shied away from Mopars because serious problems cropped up after the short warranty period. My father's Plymouth had a broken torsion bar within a few months, letting go on Lake Shore Drive in Chicago. You only subject your customers with that kind of problem once because they will stay away from your product. My father's never owned another Chrysler product since. And after the Olds Omega, he's never bought another GM product.

Chrysler's big rebound really came when they extended the warranty in the mid-1960s. While styling may have been a factor, too, I think lingering build quality concerns made '60-'62 such a dire period for Chrysler and Imperial. If your '57 is worth nothing at trade-in time in '60 or '61, would YOU buy another Imperial, or switch to Cadillac, where resale value was relatively high?

E