Re: IML: Article I found

[Christopher H <imperial67@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Title: Re: IML: Article I found

Amusing article from St Louis there... He even explains that Imperial was its own brand correctly! But then he says:

> “As Eldorado was to Cadillac and the Mark series was to Lincoln (prior to 1961 and then further down the road), so was Imperial to Chrysler.”

Eldorado was never a separate marque, just a model. Nor were the Mark series: prior to 1961 they were the sole models of the Continental Division (like Imperial, this was another only-on-paper division that Ford was pretending to be separate from Lincoln for a few years, and the later Marks, which restarted at III, were sold under the model name “Contentinal Mark III” etc.). 

So pre-1961 Continental was like 1955-83 Imperial, not the Marks II-VI. Examples of the lineage (corporation : brand : model): 

> Ford Motor Co : Continental Division : Mark II  (note no mention of Lincoln Division needed)
> Chrysler Corp : Imperial Division : Crown  (note no mention of Chrysler-Plymouth Division needed)
> General Motors : Cadillac : Eldorado

Oh, well. Cute article. Flawed logic. 

Chris in LA


On 6/24/06 7:04 AM, ajl at alacaria@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

> > I found an article on the Imperial. 
>
>
> http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/autos/columnists.nsf/oldcarcolumn/story/0E36BA5F6D8846F6862570D2006C55F2?OpenDocument