For some period of time I have been looking for a =
1959=20
Imperial FDHT and I had hoped to acquire one with a silvercrest roof. =
Last=20
month I traveled to Washington, D.C. and bought a car with a lot of =
potential.=20
The exterior is dark ruby with a black landau roof (plus the =
silvercrest). The=20
interior is (maybe "was" is a better term) red leather. The car =
has dual=20
A/C, electric windows, electric door locks, electric swivel front =
seats,=20
a beam changer and a number of other "goodies". From a distance =
it looks=20
gorgeous but as you get closer the "warts" begin to appear. Most =
disappointing=20
is the condition of the dash as some of the damage did not occur as a =
natural=20
outcome of aging. The glass speedometer is cracked, there is damage =
from=20
someone prying near the glovebox, a lot of corrosion has occurred, =
gauges=20
don't work,.... I am not sure how I will approach this problem but I =
do know=20
that there will be many other problems (actually I like the word =
"challenges"=20
better) to keep this one company.
The drive train appears to be in good shape ( I =
actually=20
drove the car!). Don't know if it has sure grip and I'm not sure what =
number=20
to look for on the assortment of numbers near the =
radiator.
I want to comment on Curves Ahead Transport (Tim =
and Kim=20
Kelly). They hauled the car from D.C. to Pembina, N.D. and I =
transported from=20
there to Dauphin, Manitoba, Canada (about another 300 miles). They =
picked the=20
car up when they said (Sunday), delivered it when they said =
(yesterday), were=20
courteous, helped me load it onto my trailer, and charged a fair price =
for=20
their service. I would not hesitate to recommend them. Why didn't they =
haul it=20
all the way? Two reasons 1) customs and 2) they are not licensed to =
haul in=20
Canada.
It is my intention to restore this car to a # 2 =
condition=20
(not 2.5 but 2.0) and I want to get it there in less than 12 =
months. It=20
is already in the restoration shop. Any advice with respect to long =
lead time=20
items ( or anything else)will be greatly appreciated. I now consider =
myself to=20
be in the "wart removal" mode.
Mel
Dauphin, =
Manitoba.
Subject: IML: Flightsweep Deck/ Benz 540K
Reply-To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
--0-1595800703-1051211940=:71809
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Hi All: Just my opinion... I think the Flightsweep rear deck has always been judged rather unfairly. Compared to the 'normal' AMERICAN STYLE Continental Kits of the '50's (which are very 'cool' and 'of the period,' but let's face it, very long, bulky and tacked-on), I guess Exner's answer may have seemed, to un-informed eyes, 'cheap' in it's simplicity. But there are a number of design precidents for spare tires fared into the rear d
eck - on EUROPEAN cars! The one that stays in my mind is the Mecedes 540 K Special Roadsters and Cabriolets of the late 1930's up. Those cars had a very similar look to the rear deck (albiet operational). There were SEVERAL European cars which used a similar theme - can't think of them offhand right now - that Exner incorporated into his early '50's show cars, and eventually, the late '50's Imperials. Is the Flightsweep any more 'eccentric' than the fake 'air intakes' on period Caddy's and Lincolns, or the 'dagmar' bumper guards on other '50's cars? No, it's just less commonly seen, and therefor
e, often misunderstood. I think the Flightsweep deck was an astute stylistic reference to a European-style trunk mounted spare - without resorting to the 'ungainly' extensions that, while charming, are really quite a 'pain' in practice from what I understand (trunk access? theft? PARKING...? Whew!). Just my two cents... Jim ByersWashington, DC1960 Le Baron Southampton
--0-1595800703-1051211940=:71809
Content-Type: text/html; charse
t=us-ascii
Hi All:
Just my opinion... I think the Flightsweep rear deck has always been judged rather unfairly. Compared to the 'normal' AMERICAN STYLE Continental Kits of the '50's (which are very 'cool' and 'of the period,' but let's face it, very long, bulky and tacked-on), I guess Exner's answer may have seemed, to un-informed eyes, 'cheap' in it's simplicity.
But there are a number of design precidents for spare tires fared into the rear deck - on EUROPEAN cars! The one that stays in my mind is the Mecedes 540 K Special Roadsters and Cabriolets of the late 1930's up. Those cars had a very similar look to the rear deck (albiet operational). There were SEVERAL European cars which used a similar theme - can't think of them offhand right now - that Exner incorporated into his early '50's show cars, and eventually, the late '50's Imperials.
Is the Flightsweep any more 'eccentric' than the fake 'air intakes' on period Caddy's and Lincolns, or the 'dagmar' bumper guards on other '50's cars? No, it's just less commonly seen, and therefore, often misunderstood. I think the Flightsweep deck was an astute stylistic reference to a European-style trunk mounted spare - without resorting to the 'ungainly' extensions that, while charming, are really quite a 'pain' in practice from what I understand (trunk access? theft? PARKING...? Whew!).
Just my two cents...
Jim Byers
Washington, DC
1960 Le Baron Southampton
--0-1595800703-1051211940=:71809--
|
|
|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~IML DIGEST~~~~~~~~~~~~~~MESSAGE SEPARATOR~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
|
|
From: Mad4cars@xxxxxxx
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 17:45:49 EDT
Subject: Re: IML: transporter sought
Reply-To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
--part1_1a3.13bdc67e.2bd9b50d_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Im in NYC wheres the car? Also AA Advantage is cheap so is Collector car Guy
--part1_1a3.13bdc67e.2bd9b50d_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Im in NYC wheres the car?=
Also AA Advantage is cheap so is Collector car Guy
--part1_1a3.13bdc67e.2bd9b50d_boundary--
|
|
|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~
~~~~IML DIGEST~~~~~~~~~~~~~~MESSAGE SEPARATOR~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
|
|
From: "Thomas A"
Subject: IML: removing dash pieces on a '66
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 18:17:31 -0400
Reply-To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I can't figure this one out my own, hopefully someone's done it. I'm trying
to remove the dash pad and the left most dash trim piece (the one
immediately to the left of the instrument cluster with the wood on it) on my
'66 convertible. I removed the 6 screws that hold the dash pad piece on but
it looks like I also have to remove that trim piece on the left to set it
free. It has to come out anyway to be re-woodgrained. How do I gain access
to the screws that I know must be in the back and how the heck does it come
out?? The right one was pretty easy once the glove box frame was removed.
Help appreciated, I'm stuck!
Tom
'66 Crown Convertible
'42 DeSoto Custom
_________________________________________________________________
|
|
|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~IML DIGEST~~~~~~~~~~~~~~MESSAGE SEPARATOR~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
|
|
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 20:15:38 -0400
From: Tim Hogan
Subject: Re: IML: transporter sought
Reply-To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--Boundary_(ID_K7CjKtjPX9w+/vSGqrpjkA)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Detroit, Mi area
----- Original Message -----
From: Mad4cars@xxxxxxx
To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2003 5:45 PM
Subject: Re: IML: transporter sought
Im in NYC wheres the car? Also AA Advantage is cheap so is Collector car Guy
--Boundary_(ID_K7CjKtjPX9w+/vSGqrpjkA)
Content-type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transf
er-encoding: 7BIT
Detroit, Mi area
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
----- Original Message -----
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">
From: Mad4cars@xxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2003 5:45
PM
Subject: Re: IML: transporter
sought
Im in NYC wheres the
car? Also AA Advantage is cheap so is Collector car Guy
--Boundary_(ID_K7CjKtjPX9w+/vSGqrpjkA)--
|
|
|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~IML DIGEST~~~~~~~~~~~~~~MESSAGE SEPARATOR~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
|
|
From: "Ted Blackington"
Subject: Re: IML: Flightsweep Deck/ Benz 540K
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 20:30:20 -0400
Reply-To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C30AA0.53380050
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello Jim-
I agree about the criticism of the flightsweep rear deck treatment being =
unfairly judged. Much of the praise or damning of automotive style comes =
from our media, where self=3Dstyled "experts" tell us what is good or bad=
. The masses who read this
stuff treat it as gospel, and thus expressions=
such as "toilet-seat" are born to describe the suggestion of a continent=
al tire. I have noticed a lot of young auto magazine writers disparage th=
e cars of the fifties with derogatory descriptions of their features- the=
y are ignorant, and puffed up with their own sense of self importance. I=
f it ain't a Volvo, it ain't no good attitude. =20
I never understood how they could have raised the '57 Chevy to near cult =
status- the car wasn't that great a seller when new, just a warmed over v=
ersion of the '55. But they did, and the masses followed their lead-accou=
nting for the astronomical prices on these cars. The Imperials stand as o=
ne of the greatest under rated autos ever built-ask the man who owns one!=
! I like some stylings better than others, but all of the cars are well e=
ngineered and far ahead of the competition. =20
=
Ted Blackington
cebuisle@xxxxxxx 55 sedan, 65 convert.
----- Original Message -----
From:
Imps Rule
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2003 3:38 PM
To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: IML: Flightsweep Deck/ Benz 540K
Hi All:
Just my opinion... I think the Flightsweep rear deck has always been jud=
ged rather unfairly. Compared to the 'normal' AMERICAN STYLE Continental=
Kits of the '50's (which are very 'cool' and 'of the period,' but let's =
face it, very long, bulky and tacked-on), I guess Exner's answer may have=
seemed, to un-informed eyes, 'cheap' in it's simplicity.
But there are a number of design precidents for spare tires fared into th=
e rear deck - on EUROPEAN cars! The one that stays in my mind is the Mec=
edes 540 K Special Roadsters and Cabriolets of the late 1930's up. Those=
cars had a very similar look to the rear deck (albiet operational). The=
re were SEVERAL European cars which used a similar theme - can't think of=
them offhand right now - that Exner incorporated into his early '50's sh=
ow cars, and eventually, the late '50's Imperials. =20<
BR>
Is the Flightsweep any more 'eccentric' than the fake 'air intakes' on pe=
riod Caddy's and Lincolns, or the 'dagmar' bumper guards on other '50's c=
ars? No, it's just less commonly seen, and therefore, often misunderstoo=
d. I think the Flightsweep deck was an astute stylistic reference to a E=
uropean-style trunk mounted spare - without resorting to the 'ungainly' e=
xtensions that, while charming, are really quite a 'pain' in practice fro=
m what I understand (trunk access? theft? PARKING...? Whew!).
Just my two cents...
Jim Byers
Washington, DC
1960 Le Baron Southampton
------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C30AA0.53380050
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello Jim-V>
I agree about the criticism of the flightsweep =
rear deck treatment being unfairly judged. Much of the praise or damning =
of automotive style comes from our media, where self=3Dstyled "experts" t=
ell us what is good or bad. The masses who read this stuff treat it as go=
spel, and thus expressions such as "toilet-seat" are born to describe the=
suggestion of a continental tire. I have noticed a lot of young auto mag=
azine writers disparage the cars of the fifties with derogatory descripti=
ons of their features- they are ignorant, and puffed up with their own se=
nse of self importance. If it ain't a Volvo, it ain't no good attit=
ude.
I never understood how they could have=
raised the '57 Chevy to near cult status- the car wasn't that great a se=
ller when new, just a warmed over version of the '55. But they did, and t=
he masses followed their lead-accounting for the astronomical prices on t=
hese cars. The Imperials stand as one of the greatest under rated autos e=
ver built-ask the man who owns one!! I like some stylings better than oth=
ers, but all of the cars are well engineered and far ahead of the competi=
tion.
&=
=== message truncated ===
