The Newyorker was almost twice the price of the Imperial, the purpose was to show you that you get similar performance in a car that costs as much as a Cadillac 62.
I went to one of these dealer sales schools back in '70s. They taught us to ask confirming questions like the ones on this film strip. "Can you see the difference?" "Wouldn't you say that, ....etc?" "Wouldn't you feel safer....?"
Marko Antonio One would have to be relatively well off in '57 for a Buick. Imperial competed with Cadillac and The Chrysler New Yorker competed with Buick. Buick was still a pretty high end line in the 1950s, A 1958 Buick Limited actually cost MORE then a 1958 Cadillac Series 62. They Plymouth buyers cross shopped Chevy and Ford, A Buck guy looked at Chrysler, Hi spec DeSotos or Hi Spec Mercurys.
@Marko Antonio You failed to notice the exclusion of the one fine quality auto that no manufacture would dare to compare, the Continental MK II ... .... crickets. 😎
Buick was a high line car but can not blame you younger kids for not knowing this. Buick was one step below Cadillac and some models were right with it or above in price and luxury.@@WAQWBrentwood
Dad had one,he bought it in Singapore and had it shipped to England. It was beautiful in two tone blue and it was right hand drive. We went camping in the Forrest of dean and the rear axle broke. For two weeks we had nothing to eat except spam, tinned tomatoes and peaches. Wonderful spam spam spam spam.
You laugh, but up until that point they had to build them high because the president of Chrysler at the time thought men should be able to wear their hats in the car.
Yes they were banned in the demolition derby's because they crushed everything and kept going. Imperials used bigger axles drive shafts and every other suspension part was extra heavy duty and only used exclusively on Imperials.
Oh what a hero. Geesh! You shouldn't be putting any good automobile out in a derby you imbecile, your the reason why they are lacking more and more everyday. But don't tell the fool that sugar is sweet, let him figure it out when the sugar is lacking at a shortage and price of it goes up by 7 marks.!
@@artdecotimes2942 when they were being wrecked in the derbies of the 70s and 80s nobody gave a shit about a 64 Imperial....most people still dont...don't be a tool....
Cool this is a real story about a Chrysler Imperial and Cadillacs. My family are all Farmers out of North Dakota and all of them Drive Cadillacs except one. He he had a Chrysler Imperial and would get ribbed about it from time to time. His answer was he liked it because it was the only car that could pull a tractor out of a Slough/swamp.
+ted marshall I disagree with that from personal experience. I know the Chrysler Imperial I rode in was a 1974 but the Imperial I rode in rode like a cloud and float like riding on air.
The look of the '57 Caddy is the least of my favorites of the 50's Caddys. The '55 is my favorite. As for suspension, I have owned and ridden in Mopars that had torsion bars suspension, and they feel like they hug the road better.
Yeah 57 looked too much like a bel air with lipstick, but the old mopar ass did cherry pick the lowest trip Cadillac to compare lol. Complete scam artists.
@@brettknoss486 the Packard suspension was much more sophisticated than the Mopar system. It essentially used fore-aft torsion bars as anti-sway bars to prevent dive and squat. In the Mopar the torsion bar simply replaces the coil or leaf spring. There's no performance difference, just packaging.
I grew up in the 12 Mile & Van Dyke area, and passed the Tech Center all the time. Interesting to see the Mound Rd gate as it was in 1956! And I'd know those railroad tracks anywhere...
I'll take a '57 Chrysler 300 C, thank you very much! Although I own an Imperial, I had several Cadillacs. They sure had character. But most bought them for the name rather than comparing them to the better engineered Imperial,
Very interesting and entertaining, including the comments. Thanks for digging this up and posting. As for me,I'll stick to my Packard-baker. (No Lincoln)🙂
This isn't a "film", it's a filmstrip. Way cheaper to make, way easier to show. And since this was only going to be relevant / useful for the 1957 model year, saving money on its production was smart.
@@MisterMikeTexas Subjective. And many out there find Caddy's tacked-on fins to be not as pretty as Mopar's integral ones (at least from '57-59, before the Imps got just as cartoony as the Caddys).
Back in the day, would have loved that Chrysler dual quad 392" Hemi engine in a '64 Chevelle convertible... candy apple red... white interior and top...
"This is something the luxury-type car owner appreciates; a really spacious, convenient to use luggage compartment." I think the segment of society called mobsters might also appreciate that...
One thing thats not mentioned during the wheel and tyre combination was chryslers saftey rim with the saftey bead that stops the tyre bead going into the rim center and coming off and no other car had this feature until 1965 and chrysler invented the safety rim about 1940.
@Christian Yes, the OHV V-8 engines were very nice... Especially the Chrysler products... Chhysler had the HEMISPHERICAL combustion chamber heads in several of their cars back then... Standard equipment in several cases...
I think when a car’s headlights are located within the grille, it tends to give the car more of an excited expression that could be of almost any expression, depending on how you look at it. And the Imperial’s tailfins are probably safer than the Cadillac’s, since they appear to be a bit lower, and if you look, closely, they actually look less pointy, as well. So yeah, I slightly prefer the Imperial’s design.
Notice the test Imperial has single headlights, not the dual lights touted earlier in the filmstrip. Duals were not legal in all states in 1957 so they made them with both.
Its a wonder anyone bought any Cadillacs that year with incredible Mopars right there to beat the tar out of them in every test! Even in 1957, it was simply MOPAR OR NO CAR.😁
This entire video made me laugh. "DING" Lowness is really great! "DING" Super soft tires are the best! "DING" Never drive a Caddy fast over bumps-ouch that ground really hurts! "DING" Super awesome professional mechanics in lab coats, that know everything about cars, bent over backwards to make sure the cars were tuned correctly! "DING" Look at the New Yorker move in these no action still shots! "DING" Don't worry, all the BS we have told you is true; the Caddy is no good at all. In fact, it is just a dressed up Buick. And remember, Lowness is really great!! "DING"........
Greetings from a very proud owner of a 1957 Chrysler Imperial Sedan from Switzerland. The Imperial is just great! The technique is quite advanced for this time.
"the going away look." "these men leaned over backward" "the front ends want to dive but the rear ends want to jump" "the amount of rear-end squat" "wouldn't you say there's a difference in squat?" A 1957 disco dance competition.
Great video. I miss being able to tell the difference in car makes. Now they all look like they came from the same design studio. When I was looking for my first car in the late 70's I had the opportunity to pick up a '64 Imperial for around $500. My dad vetoed the idea and wouldn't budge from his position. Never got a good reason. I then ended up driving a '46 Chevy pickup grandpa gave me.
LMAO corporate propaganda in it`s hey day. Reminds me of the ford and chevy truck competition. Same way politicians do trying to sell you their brand, one side or the other.
You could complain that paper cups can be sold with "propaganda," Handling is important to people who know how to drive, and it's an important consideration for them.
All kidding aside,the Imperial was the superior machine. It did not share several important parts even with the other full size MOPARS. Heavier suspension,heavier axles etc..
I'm getting a '57 Saratoga here soon the Lady and her husband bought it new in late '56. Can't wait to get it back on the road. I also know where there is an Imperial but oh does she need work.
This is a very convincing film. It makes you want to go out and buy... a Chrysler New Yorker! The Cadillac is already a behemoth, and yet they're bragging at 1:56 that the Imperial is 8 inches longer? WTF! (The Cadillac's wheelbase was actually half an inch longer. The Imperial's extra length was all in the rear overhang.) I do know that Cadillac was doing something right, something that Imperial and Lincoln could not easily duplicate, because year after year Cadillac consistently outsold both Lincoln and Imperial, often selling more than both rivals together. Clearly it wasn't just styling, though that was important. In 1957 the Imperial being 2.5 inches lower than the Cadillac was a big deal. Imperial arguably got a two year jump on Cadillac in 1957. I'm sure GM would hate to admit it, but Virgil Exner's "Forward Look" styling greatly influenced the styling direction of the entire industry. (But note that Imperial's "Continental" spare tire styling on the rear deck was a reinterpretation of FoMoCo's 1956 Continental Mark II. Cadillac declined to follow that particular folly.) And I don't think GM's engineering was enough better to make GM cars noticeably more reliable, though they were a bigger company and could afford to spend more on R&D. And it wasn't exclusive features. If one car company invented something that was a clear improvement, all the others would get something similar within a year or two. I suspect it was something more subtle: parts availability. GM had more parts stocked in its distribution warehouses and could get parts to dealers with less frequent backorders, thus noticeably faster, meaning GM cars had less downtime due to quicker repairs. In part they could afford to do this because more parts were shared between GM brands than either Ford or Chrysler. As noted in this film, the Cadillac 62 shared a platform with Buick. Imperial is claiming that their "exclusive" platform is somehow better, but the practical reality is that it was a rarely used platform and it didn't pay to stock a lot of parts for it in the regional warehouses. If your Imperial broke down, your car was inoperative and you were without transportation until they sent parts from the factory warehouse in Detroit. Ford and Chrysler also switched suppliers more frequently than GM, and often replacement parts were wrong and didn't fit and would have to be reordered. Different parts in the same model run also contributed to higher stocking costs for complete coverage, or alternatively excessive backorders due to incomplete coverage. Such delays were very noticeable because they greatly inconvenienced the customer.
God damn it! Car from 57 has adjustable defrosters! 50 years later and there are still cars where you can't see a thing because of steamed up windows...
I went through sales training at a Ford dealership in 1973. They used film strips and 33-1/3 records to do this type of training. Every time you heard the beep they would advance the film strip for a new picture. This went on for two weeks 6 days a week, after you were through you knew the wheel base, interior leg room, trunk cubic feet and all kinds of facts. Not just Ford, Mercury Lincoln but all the competition from GM and Chrysler products. You were expected to use these facts to help sale against the competition.
All you Caddy lovers should watch Jay Leno's Garage review of the 1958 Imperial here on TH-cam. The parts on the late 50's Imperials were substantially heavier duty than the rest of the Chryslers and anything that GM had. The Imperial weighed in around 5,600 lbs, so naturally the Chrysler was quicker. The 392 cu in Hemi was a far better engine than Cadillac's. I learned to drive in a '57 Crown Imperial and believe me when I say it rode and handled better than any other American car back then. I own a '56 Olds 98 which isn't nearly the car the Imperial was, but it fits in my garage. We had my dad's '57 Imperial in the garage with my uncle's '59 Caddy, and the Imperial was longer by several inches. The '59 Imperial was longer yet. The 1974 Olds Regency 98 was the longest standard production American car ever made. Anyway, you overpaid for your mushy, sloppy handling Caddy.
Don’t be gullible. This is an obvious Chrysler promotion. Who drives 30mph over railroad tracks on unpaved roads? Cadillac didn’t need to make a video to sell it’s cars. Any car maker can make another car maker look less impressive. Testing? Anybody alive today that was there for the testing of these 2 vehicles? Please chime in. Both cars are equally impressive as well as the Lincoln Continental. I’ve owned several of these cars. It comes down to personal preference… I prefer the 61-64 lincolns over the 61-64 cadillacs and Imperials. I prefer the 65-66 Imperials over the 65-66 Cadillacs and Lincolns. I prefer the 58-60 Cadillacs over the 58-60 Imperials and Lincolns. You get what I mean?
that is typical again. Information that is biased from the beginning. a mopar dealer does one "Who is better, advertising that has multiple errors. 1st coupe against 4 door. weight advantage chrysler! 2. imperial (luxury version) against cadillac series 62 (cheap model) instead of 1957 eldorado seville coupe. why, because eldorado is equally strong and has more luxury. including air suspension. 3. Thick tires against thin tires, who probably brakes better ??? but that still happens today. man can not believe anyone !!!
Annoying to read so many ignorant comments and so much trash talk. Of course this factory film was slanted in favor of the Imperial. No, a 57 Imperial is NOT a Chrysler, and no, the test didn't compare a top-of-the-line Chrysler or Imperial to a base Caddy. And even if it did, how would that affect the handling comparison? Yes, the Imperial actually did handle better; the Caddy was tuned for a soft, gentlemanly ride without regard to handling. No, you wouldn't deliberately run that fast over a railroad track, but doing it demonstrates the difference between the handling of the two cars. And sometimes you-know-what happens. A 57 Imperial would handle that kind of Oh-sheet situation better. But neither one is a sports car. In 57 the Caddy was a more conservatively styled car, but they made up for that in 59. On and on. As Isaac Asimov commented many years ago, we have a cult of ignorance in this country, nurtured by a false notion that "my ignorance is just as valid as your knowledge."
Chillax. I think everyone's comments here are good-natured and no one takes any of the information in the film too seriously. When car buffs get talking, there is bound to be some "cheering for the home team" and some exaggeration. I think we can all agree--and the film makes the same point repeatedly--these are both good cars with differences that were designed to appeal to certain kinds of buyers. Agree with your comments on the "engineering intent" of the Caddy vs. the Imperial; it was what is was and the film generally supports your point. You're absolutely right about Caddy catching up to Chrysler with crazy styling, those fins (and the grille) on the '59 being the ultimate example!!
A bygone era, when designers/engineers still had a imagination, to be fair with that 30mph railroad track comparison, MOST people who slow down to BELOW 30mph before going over tracks where the road dipped-down on the other side.
Imperial never had it's own engine line separate from other Chrysler products, which led to it always being considered the top level Chrysler rather than it's own luxury make. This persisted even when Chrysler went unibody and Imperial remained body on frame. Due to middling sales they finally just merged it back into the Chrysler lineup. The 75 Imperial and the 76-78 New Yorker Brougham are the same cars.
This seemed to work for 1957....big jump in sales for Imperial, vs loss in sales for Cadillac. BUT......that was short-lived....they dropped by 57% in recession-year 1958, vs only 17% for Cadillac. So apparently they missed some things in the comparison: 1956 Sales: Cadillac 154,577, Imperial 10,684 1957 Sales: Cadillac 146,841, Imperial 37,583 1958 Sales: Cadillac 121,778, Imperial 16,133
I love this film....but one thing...it wasn't a Chrysler at this point, it was the Imperial Crown or the Imperial LeBaron, they weren't using the Chrysler name anymore, not since 1955
Train tracks do save lives, with the dragging of your new Cadillac bumpers.....Chrysler unfortunately does not offer this...lol.....thanks for posting video......miss these type of auto comparison .....
I love these old videos, but the Chryslers as tested weigh 4300 pounds, they used hardtops. The 62 series Cadillac sedan weighs 5000 to 5200 pounds. The Cadillac was carrying a hemi engine in the passenger seat! No wonder this Mopar test reigned supreme! 😂
And how do we know that the cadillac really crossed the tracks at 30 mph for sure when you use still photos? How do know that any of this isn’t bias when you use still photography?
The clip art is hilarious! The Chryslers have 30 cubic inches over Cadillac beginning in 1957 (392 vs. 365) and are using the first version of the three-speed torque converter while Cadillac is using the re-designed Jetaway Hydra-Matic--Cadillac won't get a larger engine until 1959 (390) and a new transmission until 1964.
TorqueFlite tranny has 5:1 (2 x 2.5:1) off the line compared to Hydramatic 4:1 as the video shows... but 30' out the TorqueFlite has dropped to 2:50:1 as the torque converter drops from 2:1 to 1:1... Whereas the HydraMatic is still at 4:1 until the shift into 2nd gear... TorqueFlite is 3 gears forward... HydraMatic is 4 gears forward... Chryslers have the bigger engine and would have been even quicker with a Hydramatic tranny!... I think Chrysler and Ford/Lincoln bought GM's/Old's/Cadillac's HydraMatic tranny earlier for their biggest luxury cars...
+orange70383 Many states had yet to make quad headlights legal during 1957. The proving grounds were presumably in a state where they were not yet legal.
They are comparing the base Cadillac with the top line Imperial. Chrysler quality was less than perfect even though the "forward look" styling was ahead of its time.
The Cadillac was tested in the cold, when the springs were stiffer and would cause the problems starting at TIME 4:37. The Imperial was tested in warmer weather, which was more sympathetic to spring action.
The narrator fails to address which vehicle would be most advantageous for enthusiastic 'doggers'. I suggest that in this respect, 'riding comfort' is a critical factor in weighing up the 'pros' and 'cons' of each vehicle, though it appears that the Chrysler absorbs more noise and vibration than the Cadillac. This in itself would be a significant 'plus' for many within the dogging community searching for 'the finest ride'. REPLY
The comparison is quite interesting, but what really mesmerizes me is the clarity of the voice and English of the narrator.
This makes me want to buy a new Yorker, not an imperial
Thats the point of this demonstration. 😏
The Newyorker was almost twice the price of the Imperial, the purpose was to show you that you get similar performance in a car that costs as much as a Cadillac 62.
I like the 1975 New Yorker
@Vegan Goy then why would they compere it to a car that costs less, but performs better?
Buy the 1979 Chrysler New Yorker
After listening to this, I really want an Imperial... Actually, even that NewYorker sounds interesting! Too bad i'm just 62 years too late :(
I went to one of these dealer sales schools back in '70s. They taught us to ask confirming questions like the ones on this film strip.
"Can you see the difference?"
"Wouldn't you say that, ....etc?"
"Wouldn't you feel safer....?"
This is called the "Yes-road". Basic sales technique
I still can't decide which one to buy. Are they still on sale?
Marko Antonio One would have to be relatively well off in '57 for a Buick. Imperial competed with Cadillac and The Chrysler New Yorker competed with Buick. Buick was still a pretty high end line in the 1950s, A 1958 Buick Limited actually cost MORE then a 1958 Cadillac Series 62. They Plymouth buyers cross shopped Chevy and Ford, A Buck guy looked at Chrysler, Hi spec DeSotos or Hi Spec Mercurys.
LMAO Me either.
@Marko Antonio
You failed to notice the exclusion of the one fine quality auto that no manufacture would dare to compare, the Continental MK II
... .... crickets. 😎
Buick was a high line car but can not blame you younger kids for not knowing this. Buick was one step below Cadillac and some models were right with it or above in price and luxury.@@WAQWBrentwood
@Marko Antonio most people had Fords chevys and Plymouths/dodges
I think I'll wait for the 58 Plymouth belvederes to roll out
🤣🤣🤣 Agreed! Ohhhh one of my Favorites 58 Plymouth.
Dad had one,he bought it in Singapore and had it shipped to England. It was beautiful in two tone blue and it was right hand drive. We went camping in the Forrest of dean and the rear axle broke. For two weeks we had nothing to eat except spam, tinned tomatoes and peaches. Wonderful spam spam spam spam.
The 1957 Imperial: It's got lowness!
Lowness! Such a wonderful advancement lol
You laugh, but up until that point they had to build them high because the president of Chrysler at the time thought men should be able to wear their hats in the car.
They don't allow Imperials at most destruction derbies. Especially of this era. That should tell you something about strength and build quailty.
Yes they were banned in the demolition derby's because they crushed everything and kept going. Imperials used bigger axles drive shafts and every other suspension part was extra heavy duty and only used exclusively on Imperials.
@@erics9754 They were full frame and braced like a convertible through the '66 model year as well.
that's why majority of them were destroyed in derbies, they were built like tanks.
Oh what a hero. Geesh! You shouldn't be putting any good automobile out in a derby you imbecile, your the reason why they are lacking more and more everyday. But don't tell the fool that sugar is sweet, let him figure it out when the sugar is lacking at a shortage and price of it goes up by 7 marks.!
@@artdecotimes2942 when they were being wrecked in the derbies of the 70s and 80s nobody gave a shit about a 64 Imperial....most people still dont...don't be a tool....
11 pm: "alright one last video and i go to bed"
3 am: "what the fuck am i doing here"
Imperial. When you need to get to the other side of the tracks in comfort. Because that's where all the easy girls lived.
Lol!!!
😂
🤣🤣
Cool this is a real story about a Chrysler Imperial and Cadillacs. My family are all Farmers out of North Dakota and all of them Drive Cadillacs except one. He he had a Chrysler Imperial and would get ribbed about it from time to time. His answer was he liked it because it was the only car that could pull a tractor out of a Slough/swamp.
The days when u used a car instead of a bloated expensive 2020 pickup
Lesson: If you're going off road, the Imperial is your car.
Agreed...The Imperial probably rides like a truck in comparison to the Cadillac. lol
+ted marshall I disagree with that from personal experience. I know the Chrysler Imperial I rode in was a 1974 but the Imperial I rode in rode like a cloud and float like riding on air.
Moon shiners always preferred Chryslers.
Actually rode much better than a Cadillac you obviously never rode in one LMAO>@@MegaTmarshall
...Or a Jeep. :-)
Chrysler always seemed to have the best engineering, across each of its brands. Really interesting film clip. I'd have bought an Imperial.
Chrysler had the best suspension but had worse rust out problems.
Imperial hands down...!!!
Wow ...memories ...when I was 17 my buddy drove the Desoto 59 and I a 56 Cadillac. Real steel
It's great to have a real human voice narrating this excellent video.
*Ding!*
When you hear the tone, turn to the next page.
@@HunterShows Thank you, I was wondering why.
Ding?
The look of the '57 Caddy is the least of my favorites of the 50's Caddys. The '55 is my favorite. As for suspension, I have owned and ridden in Mopars that had torsion bars suspension, and they feel like they hug the road better.
What about Packards, the shared torsion bar was supposed to be stiffer on corners, and softer over bumps.
Yeah 57 looked too much like a bel air with lipstick, but the old mopar ass did cherry pick the lowest trip Cadillac to compare lol. Complete scam artists.
@@brettknoss486 the Packard suspension was much more sophisticated than the Mopar system. It essentially used fore-aft torsion bars as anti-sway bars to prevent dive and squat. In the Mopar the torsion bar simply replaces the coil or leaf spring. There's no performance difference, just packaging.
@@theeoddments960 If you've ever driven a '57 Mopar vs a '57 Caddy (I have) you'd know the handling claim is no scam. The Caddy wallowed like cow.
Im sold! I'm putting in an order for a 57 Chrysler Imperial, built to my specifications from the Chrysler Corporation. 😊
I grew up in the 12 Mile & Van Dyke area, and passed the Tech Center all the time. Interesting to see the Mound Rd gate as it was in 1956! And I'd know those railroad tracks anywhere...
I grew up near there as well, but couldn't place the tracks thanks for pointing those out.
wow...I am going to get the new Imperial !
kansascitycomputers l'll wait for the 1959 models to roll out of the assembly lines before I get mine.
I like the New Yorker better.
I think is even better than the Imperial.
kansascitycomputers
Me three.
kansascitycomputers yes me to
I'll take a '57 Chrysler 300 C, thank you very much! Although I own an Imperial, I had several Cadillacs. They sure had character. But most bought them for the name rather than comparing them to the better engineered Imperial,
Growing up , we had a '57 Imperial , And a '57 300C ! Both excellent cars .
"Now let's consider rust proofing..."
Naaahhhh neither of the companies even coated the panels under the rear windshield until like 1980 something
Great piece!!! I dream of the '57 & '58 Chrysler 300's & New Yorkers... Great cars, with AWESOME engines!!!
I hear you! 😊
Esos eran carros hermosos, hojala y los empresarios sacaran esos modelos nuevamente saludos desde el Estado de Hidalgo Mexico
Ándele!
Imperial was its own make by 1957. Calling it a Chrysler Imperial would've been like calling the 62 a "General Motors Cadillac".
GENERAL MOTORS CHEVROLET
Or the all new Ford Lincoln.
Well it obviously didn't have enough recognition.
Buick Cadillac.
@@MisterMikeTexas that's more like it
As a owner fo 57 caddy I like it and cornering isnt a much of a concern . It still rides like a flying cloud
I loved my great-grandmother's 58; the Crysler products always looked bizarre!
Very interesting and entertaining, including the comments. Thanks for digging this up and posting.
As for me,I'll stick to my Packard-baker. (No Lincoln)🙂
Wow, besides the automotive flashback, the filmstrip one was a real trip as well.
I got to say I am thinking Chrysler built the nicer car that year.
I haven't seen a "ding" change the slide film since grade school. But they never had cool cars ether! Two pluses!
This isn't a "film", it's a filmstrip. Way cheaper to make, way easier to show. And since this was only going to be relevant / useful for the 1957 model year, saving money on its production was smart.
I like Cadillacs style more for this year
But the handling is incomparable
lol i got the joke
The 1960 Cadillac looks better than all 3 of these cars!
In college, my brother and I owned a '57 Caddy. It was a great car. Imperials were not popular.
@@MisterMikeTexas Subjective. And many out there find Caddy's tacked-on fins to be not as pretty as Mopar's integral ones (at least from '57-59, before the Imps got just as cartoony as the Caddys).
that's the time when a Chrysler could properly rival a Cadillac, and now they're just too far gone.
Tianze Li who, cadillac?
Back in the day, would have loved that Chrysler dual quad 392" Hemi engine in a '64 Chevelle convertible... candy apple red... white interior and top...
@Terry Melvin - Sounds like some serious fun!
Rival? Don't you mean far exceed, hands down!
The Chrysler 300 with the HEMI is a bad ass car
The Cadillac is ugly. It looks like an overgrown bulgy bathtub. The Imperial is longer more stylish and sleeker looking.
"This is something the luxury-type car owner appreciates; a really spacious, convenient to use luggage compartment." I think the segment of society called mobsters might also appreciate that...
Oh lord that ding sound !!
1:53 It's like Dora The Explorer
But about cars, for adults, and in 50's...
Owned new 1969 and 1981 Imperial by Chrysler.
Both good cars. 👍
this video is sooo unbelievable great! love it! BIG thanks for uploading and sharing this! ;)
Hmmm...neither car offered a mast and sail that other boats came with:)
D Filice That's messed up! 😂🤣
While I like the comfort of a full size car, I've only owned coupes & convertibles. I have a Challenger now.💕
its Imperial for me
Josh Davis Lol.
I still want a 1968 Chrysler Newport Custom. 440 engine. I learned how to drive this car. Loved it
One thing thats not mentioned during the wheel and tyre combination was chryslers saftey rim with the saftey bead that stops the tyre bead going into the rim center and coming off and no other car had this feature until 1965 and chrysler invented the safety rim about 1940.
I had both a 57 and 59 Saratoga, both great cars with balls.
Well, speaking as someone who has ridden in a 57 Caddie, they have managed to pick out it's flaws nicely.
I wish most cars still came with V8's.
Most Cadillacs do, but the 3.6 has been a good engine.
It’s really not necessary anymore,
Take a look at horsepower and torque and compare those. Although you can get a Chrysler with a v8 if you like.
no you don't.
@Christian Yes, the OHV V-8 engines were very nice... Especially the Chrysler products... Chhysler had the HEMISPHERICAL combustion chamber heads in several of their cars back then... Standard equipment in several cases...
This isn't even a competition. Everything about the Imperial makes the Cadillac look like a recycled hold-over from 1951.
I think when a car’s headlights are located within the grille, it tends to give the car more of an excited expression that could be of almost any expression, depending on how you look at it. And the Imperial’s tailfins are probably safer than the Cadillac’s, since they appear to be a bit lower, and if you look, closely, they actually look less pointy, as well. So yeah, I slightly prefer the Imperial’s design.
I have a total of 8 headlights
@@goldenboy5500 What years, makes and models are they from?
@@Dinosorable 2023 Hyundai Santa Cruz Limited
@@goldenboy5500 Was hoping you were gonna say Family Truckster.
The only problem with Imperial is that other Chrysler products had a propensity for going out at night without you and murdering your enemies.
Yes, but the smell of a new one was the best smell in the world, other than ...
ESPECIALLY those "Furies" , they were buh, buh, buh, bad to the bone!
Notice the test Imperial has single headlights, not the dual lights touted earlier in the filmstrip. Duals were not legal in all states in 1957 so they made them with both.
Apparently the Caddy was tested in the dead of winter on icy roads. No dust on the railroad track photos, and the snow is clearly visible.
Its a wonder anyone bought any Cadillacs that year with incredible Mopars right there to beat the tar out of them in every test! Even in 1957, it was simply MOPAR OR NO CAR.😁
Mark C If I could, I'd give you 100 Likes! 👍🏼😉
This video is rather biased... WOULDN'T YOU SAY??? lmao this slideshow...thing.... is hilarious
This entire video made me laugh. "DING" Lowness is really great! "DING" Super soft tires are the best! "DING" Never drive a Caddy fast over bumps-ouch that ground really hurts! "DING" Super awesome professional mechanics in lab coats, that know everything about cars, bent over backwards to make sure the cars were tuned correctly! "DING" Look at the New Yorker move in these no action still shots! "DING" Don't worry, all the BS we have told you is true; the Caddy is no good at all. In fact, it is just a dressed up Buick. And remember, Lowness is really great!! "DING"........
Greetings from a very proud owner of a 1957 Chrysler Imperial Sedan from Switzerland. The Imperial is just great! The technique is quite advanced for this time.
"the going away look."
"these men leaned over backward"
"the front ends want to dive but the rear ends want to jump"
"the amount of rear-end squat"
"wouldn't you say there's a difference in squat?"
A 1957 disco dance competition.
Great video. I miss being able to tell the difference in car makes. Now they all look like they came from the same design studio.
When I was looking for my first car in the late 70's I had the opportunity to pick up a '64 Imperial for around $500. My dad vetoed the idea and wouldn't budge from his position. Never got a good reason. I then ended up driving a '46 Chevy pickup grandpa gave me.
That was the reason... To keep that '46 Chevy P/U in the family... Those were cool trucks!!! One of the first post-war vehicles!!!
The first car that I bought was a 1971 Pinto, which came with an exploding gas tank as standard equipment!
LMAO corporate propaganda in it`s hey day. Reminds me of the ford and chevy truck competition. Same way politicians do trying to sell you their brand, one side or the other.
You could complain that paper cups can be sold with "propaganda," Handling is important to people who know how to drive, and it's an important consideration for them.
Willie Mays used to endorse Chryslers and Imperials, and drove an Imperial. "Baby, I drive CHRYSLER!"
All kidding aside,the Imperial was the superior machine. It did not share several important parts even with the other full size MOPARS. Heavier suspension,heavier axles etc..
I'm getting a '57 Saratoga here soon the Lady and her husband bought it new in late '56. Can't wait to get it back on the road. I also know where there is an Imperial but oh does she need work.
I will take either one of those cars... I'm quite sure that a well preserved or fully restored cars would cost a small fortune today🚀🚀
This is a very convincing film. It makes you want to go out and buy... a Chrysler New Yorker!
The Cadillac is already a behemoth, and yet they're bragging at 1:56 that the Imperial is 8 inches longer? WTF! (The Cadillac's wheelbase was actually half an inch longer. The Imperial's extra length was all in the rear overhang.)
I do know that Cadillac was doing something right, something that Imperial and Lincoln could not easily duplicate, because year after year Cadillac consistently outsold both Lincoln and Imperial, often selling more than both rivals together.
Clearly it wasn't just styling, though that was important. In 1957 the Imperial being 2.5 inches lower than the Cadillac was a big deal. Imperial arguably got a two year jump on Cadillac in 1957. I'm sure GM would hate to admit it, but Virgil Exner's "Forward Look" styling greatly influenced the styling direction of the entire industry. (But note that Imperial's "Continental" spare tire styling on the rear deck was a reinterpretation of FoMoCo's 1956 Continental Mark II. Cadillac declined to follow that particular folly.)
And I don't think GM's engineering was enough better to make GM cars noticeably more reliable, though they were a bigger company and could afford to spend more on R&D. And it wasn't exclusive features. If one car company invented something that was a clear improvement, all the others would get something similar within a year or two. I suspect it was something more subtle: parts availability. GM had more parts stocked in its distribution warehouses and could get parts to dealers with less frequent backorders, thus noticeably faster, meaning GM cars had less downtime due to quicker repairs.
In part they could afford to do this because more parts were shared between GM brands than either Ford or Chrysler. As noted in this film, the Cadillac 62 shared a platform with Buick. Imperial is claiming that their "exclusive" platform is somehow better, but the practical reality is that it was a rarely used platform and it didn't pay to stock a lot of parts for it in the regional warehouses. If your Imperial broke down, your car was inoperative and you were without transportation until they sent parts from the factory warehouse in Detroit.
Ford and Chrysler also switched suppliers more frequently than GM, and often replacement parts were wrong and didn't fit and would have to be reordered. Different parts in the same model run also contributed to higher stocking costs for complete coverage, or alternatively excessive backorders due to incomplete coverage. Such delays were very noticeable because they greatly inconvenienced the customer.
I'll take all 3. Vehicles of those days were works of art. Probably not the most safest things to be flying along at 70 in, but damn they had style.
God damn it! Car from 57 has adjustable defrosters! 50 years later and there are still cars where you can't see a thing because of steamed up windows...
I went through sales training at a Ford dealership in 1973. They used film strips and 33-1/3 records to do this type of training. Every time you heard the beep they would advance the film strip for a new picture. This went on for two weeks 6 days a week, after you were through you knew the wheel base, interior leg room, trunk cubic feet and all kinds of facts. Not just Ford, Mercury Lincoln but all the competition from GM and Chrysler products. You were expected to use these facts to help sale against the competition.
Imperial should make a comeback with a large luxury SUV.
Imperial-Dodge-Ram
All you Caddy lovers should watch Jay Leno's Garage review of the 1958 Imperial here on TH-cam. The parts on the late 50's Imperials were substantially heavier duty than the rest of the Chryslers and anything that GM had. The Imperial weighed in around 5,600 lbs, so naturally the Chrysler was quicker. The 392 cu in Hemi was a far better engine than Cadillac's. I learned to drive in a '57 Crown Imperial and believe me when I say it rode and handled better than any other American car back then. I own a '56 Olds 98 which isn't nearly the car the Imperial was, but it fits in my garage. We had my dad's '57 Imperial in the garage with my uncle's '59 Caddy, and the Imperial was longer by several inches. The '59 Imperial was longer yet. The 1974 Olds Regency 98 was the longest standard production American car ever made. Anyway, you overpaid for your mushy, sloppy handling Caddy.
Don’t be gullible. This is an obvious Chrysler promotion. Who drives 30mph over railroad tracks on unpaved roads? Cadillac didn’t need to make a video to sell it’s cars. Any car maker can make another car maker look less impressive. Testing? Anybody alive today that was there for the testing of these 2 vehicles? Please chime in. Both cars are equally impressive as well as the Lincoln Continental. I’ve owned several of these cars. It comes down to personal preference… I prefer the 61-64 lincolns over the 61-64 cadillacs and Imperials. I prefer the 65-66 Imperials over the 65-66 Cadillacs and Lincolns. I prefer the 58-60 Cadillacs over the 58-60 Imperials and Lincolns. You get what I mean?
that is typical again. Information that is biased from the beginning. a mopar dealer does one "Who is better, advertising that has multiple errors. 1st coupe against 4 door. weight advantage chrysler! 2. imperial (luxury version) against cadillac series 62 (cheap model) instead of 1957 eldorado seville coupe. why, because eldorado is equally strong and has more luxury. including air suspension. 3. Thick tires against thin tires, who probably brakes better ??? but that still happens today. man can not believe anyone !!!
Funny how the vehicles’ comparison pictures were taken in totally different seasons 😂
Annoying to read so many ignorant comments and so much trash talk. Of course this factory film was slanted in favor of the Imperial. No, a 57 Imperial is NOT a Chrysler, and no, the test didn't compare a top-of-the-line Chrysler or Imperial to a base Caddy. And even if it did, how would that affect the handling comparison? Yes, the Imperial actually did handle better; the Caddy was tuned for a soft, gentlemanly ride without regard to handling. No, you wouldn't deliberately run that fast over a railroad track, but doing it demonstrates the difference between the handling of the two cars. And sometimes you-know-what happens. A 57 Imperial would handle that kind of Oh-sheet situation better. But neither one is a sports car. In 57 the Caddy was a more conservatively styled car, but they made up for that in 59. On and on. As Isaac Asimov commented many years ago, we have a cult of ignorance in this country, nurtured by a false notion that "my ignorance is just as valid as your knowledge."
Chillax. I think everyone's comments here are good-natured and no one takes any of the information in the film too seriously. When car buffs get talking, there is bound to be some "cheering for the home team" and some exaggeration. I think we can all agree--and the film makes the same point repeatedly--these are both good cars with differences that were designed to appeal to certain kinds of buyers. Agree with your comments on the "engineering intent" of the Caddy vs. the Imperial; it was what is was and the film generally supports your point. You're absolutely right about Caddy catching up to Chrysler with crazy styling, those fins (and the grille) on the '59 being the ultimate example!!
A bygone era, when designers/engineers still had a imagination, to be fair with that 30mph railroad track comparison, MOST people who slow down to BELOW 30mph before going over tracks where the road dipped-down on the other side.
This video got me bad, I want that Cadillac more then ever.
Imperial.
"Rapid exposure camera that can take up to 20 exposures a second"
And yet, Cadillac still exists. More than you could say about Imperial.
Imperial never had it's own engine line separate from other Chrysler products, which led to it always being considered the top level Chrysler rather than it's own luxury make. This persisted even when Chrysler went unibody and Imperial remained body on frame.
Due to middling sales they finally just merged it back into the Chrysler lineup. The 75 Imperial and the 76-78 New Yorker Brougham are the same cars.
This seemed to work for 1957....big jump in sales for Imperial, vs loss in sales for Cadillac. BUT......that was short-lived....they dropped by 57% in recession-year 1958, vs only 17% for Cadillac. So apparently they missed some things in the comparison:
1956 Sales: Cadillac 154,577, Imperial 10,684
1957 Sales: Cadillac 146,841, Imperial 37,583
1958 Sales: Cadillac 121,778, Imperial 16,133
I love this film....but one thing...it wasn't a Chrysler at this point, it was the Imperial Crown or the Imperial LeBaron, they weren't using the Chrysler name anymore, not since 1955
I love these
Train tracks do save lives, with the dragging of your new Cadillac bumpers.....Chrysler unfortunately does not offer this...lol.....thanks
for posting video......miss these type of auto comparison .....
I love these old videos, but the Chryslers as tested weigh 4300 pounds, they used hardtops. The 62 series Cadillac sedan weighs 5000 to 5200 pounds. The Cadillac was carrying a hemi engine in the passenger seat! No wonder this Mopar test reigned supreme! 😂
They just need to avoid driving over that railroad crossing like a bat out of hell and everything will be ok.
I drive New Yorker in "Mafia:The city of lost heaven" at freeride. It was best car in game.
one looks like a wife and husband car.... would buy the cadillac for my wife and imperial for myself
Torsion air ride👍
And how do we know that the cadillac really crossed the tracks at 30 mph for sure when you use still photos? How do know that any of this isn’t bias when you use still photography?
I wish they did these tests with a video along with the pictures. Many ways to manipulate pictures.
This video might possibly be biased, wouldn't you say?
sorry i love both cars its a 50's 60' thing for me
The clip art is hilarious! The Chryslers have 30 cubic inches over Cadillac beginning in 1957 (392 vs. 365) and are using the first version of the three-speed torque converter while Cadillac is using the re-designed Jetaway Hydra-Matic--Cadillac won't get a larger engine until 1959 (390) and a new transmission until 1964.
TorqueFlite tranny has 5:1 (2 x 2.5:1) off the line compared to Hydramatic 4:1 as the video shows... but 30' out the TorqueFlite has dropped to 2:50:1 as the torque converter drops from 2:1 to 1:1... Whereas the HydraMatic is still at 4:1 until the shift into 2nd gear... TorqueFlite is 3 gears forward... HydraMatic is 4 gears forward... Chryslers have the bigger engine and would have been even quicker with a Hydramatic tranny!... I think Chrysler and Ford/Lincoln bought GM's/Old's/Cadillac's HydraMatic tranny earlier for their biggest luxury cars...
Which was kind of the point. Bigger engine, roughly same price.
There's a reason why Chrysler was always #3. This film confirms why.
My dad also told me they had to increase the height of the fence around the proving grounds because the cars were hitting deer.
I would buy the Chrysler just for the Hemi 👍
there's a clip somewhere TH-cam showing these road tests in real time.
The Imperial had 4 head lights to start off then in the tests it was down to two head lights.
+orange70383 Many states had yet to make quad headlights legal during 1957. The proving grounds were presumably in a state where they were not yet legal.
+Daniel McLean Yep, Until 1958, and even in states where they WERE legal, they were only optional (as stated in the filmstrip.)
Quad lights optional.
The 4-headlight was an option. 2-headlight was the standard.
dual headlights were optional that year, according to the film. (I didn't know that either)
They are comparing the base Cadillac with the top line Imperial. Chrysler quality was less than perfect even though the "forward look" styling was ahead of its time.
The Cadillac was tested in the cold, when the springs were stiffer and would cause the problems starting at TIME 4:37. The Imperial was tested in warmer weather, which was more sympathetic to spring action.
I noticed that too, I guess with color film that shenanigans wouldn't fly that well.
Why was there dust and no snow in the Imperial runs but no dust and snow in the Cadillac runs?
The narrator fails to address which vehicle would be most advantageous for enthusiastic 'doggers'. I suggest that in this respect, 'riding comfort' is a critical factor in weighing up the 'pros' and 'cons' of each vehicle, though it appears that the Chrysler absorbs more noise and vibration than the Cadillac. This in itself would be a significant 'plus' for many within the dogging community searching for 'the finest ride'.
REPLY
Did they have aircon in '57?
Cars, in those days, were so stylish. Whatever happened to elegance?
We listened to soyboys, that's what.
Air conditioning has been available since 1948. Chevrolet offered it beginning with their 1955 models. Cadillac had it in 1949.
You can actually see the ac compressor under the hood of the Cadillac.
no, we listened to fucks like you