my grandparents bought a VIP in fall '66..a '67 model with a 2bbl 383...loaded..top line interior...grandma sold real estate and used the car for showings it had some tall hiway gearing, we drive with them across country a few times ..i recall napping and waking up and glancing over the front seat and seeing my grandpa humming to himself and the speedometer at 90 mph and you couldn't hear anything but the ice cold A/C fan and grandma snoring
If I was buying a brand new car in 1965 it would've been a 396-425/4 speed Chevy Biscayne. But I would've traded it in 1966 for a brand new Plymouth Belvedere 1 with the 426 Street Hemi and a 727 automatic transmission. A 4 speed is definitely more fun to drive but nothing could beat the shift time of the Chrysler 727 automatic transmission on the drag strip. The 60s was such an awesome time to be a gearhead. So many high performance machines out there to choose from
My Dad had a blue '66 Impala 283 4-door. It was no road burner, but solid and comfortable and probably the best car he ever owned. That little V8 was a great engine and I remember Dad boasting that he could get almost 30 MPG (Imperial) out of it on Alberta's flat highways without trying too hard. I don't recall the Impala ever breaking down and when he finally got rid of it in 1978 it was still running like a top but showing some pretty serious rust.
Notice how they did not match up the Plymouth with the Chevy in a drag race (it would have won in spite of being the smallest engine in this comparison). The 383 with a 727 Transmission and 8.75 differential was not only fast/powerful but bulletproof. Likewise, they did not test these cars on a slalom as the wallow wagon frame on, trailing arm, coil spring suspensions of the Ford and Chevrolet were inferior to Plymouth's stiff/integrated unit body, torsion bar/leaf spring suspension. The '66 Fury was not only a good handling/riding automobile, it was a tank. A friend of mine in high school had a 2-door Fury with the 318 Poly who (he and his friends as he loaned the car out freely) thoroughly ABUSED it in unmentionable ways. I was not a Chrysler fan back than; however, after trouncing and witnessing the absurd abuse this car withstood from our group of hoodlums, my respect for Chrysler products greatly appreciated. In addition, the 318 Poly (with 904 tranny) was no slouch and withstood many hours of over revving without fail. It was a comfortable, fine handling, strong and fun machine to prowl the streets with.
We had a 69 Impala with the 327. One of the best cars made, stood up better than any of the cars in years since. Had about 500,000 miles before my brother got to it!
I love these old car Sales videos! Totally fascinating and relentlessly biased, no matter which company is selling it. Interesting video and thanks for posting, Minor detail, but the Caprice was the new top of the line Chevrolet so it should have actually been compared to the Ford 7 litre. In today’s values the the 7 L would bring 2 - 3 times the value of a Caprice. Minor trivia I know lol...
Such a fun video! It's also very 'slanted' (...as are most corporate films of this type). However, the most glaring omission for me is how they dodged showing a handling/roadability comparison between Caprice & VIP(!). Granted: the Caprice likely had a silkier ride (...prized by full-sized car buyers of that day). However, by 1966, Chrysler Corporation's Torsion Bar suspension had been universally acknowledged for a decade by the motoring press as leading the field in handling and roadability in full-sized U.S. cars (...and continued to do so into the 1970's). Torsion bars offered discernibly more stable road manners with less body roll, bounce, and float, while still offering an acceptably-smooth, big-car ride. So..., that was a pretty glaring omission. Still..., it's a wonderful time-capsule of a video!
Totally on point; additionally, they did not drag race the Plymouth against the Chevy as it would have probably won (383's with either the A833 four speed or 727 automatic transmissions were bullet proof as well as tough to beat against cars of similar size (engine displacement and total weight). The 396 four barrel with Turbo 350(?) tranny was also an excellent, powerful combination. It took a few years, but all automotive manufactures have succumbed to Chrysler's excellent "unit body" type structure (first introduced on its Airflow models in 1934). Remember, this is a Chevrolet commercial.
We had two '66 Impala's (at separate times). One was a wagon with the 396 in it. Totally AWESOME car that was fully loaded (my dad also worked for GM and that's the way he wanted it). That car did more than what was required of it the four years we had it. The other was a 4 door with (I think) a 327 in it that he bought for my sister to use at school in '72. It didn't have all the luxuries as the wagon, but still a pretty good car.
Yeah. I thought that was a bit weird too. Outa those three, I'd take the Plymouth. Simply cos I reckon Chrysler engines and transmissions were always just that bit better.
En Venezuela todavía ruedan muchos de esos jaja, son íconos andantes de la gloriosa Venezuela de antes, que esperamos que vuelva pronto! Gracias por subirlo David. Un gran saludo!
@@corkyrose9011 True. A 1965 Caprice is even more valuable because it was an optional luxury package for the 1965 Impala sedan back when body styles change every year.
goatmudiay While separate from the motor company the Ford Foundation’s militant support for illegal immigration and for every leftist cause to come down the pike means one thing: I will never buy another Ford product!
Michael Bacon I guess that was socialistic so you correctly identify the problem. I am not sure what the alternative would have been to our ending up with only one major US automaker. As I suggested, the Ford Foundation is independent of the motor company yet no other automaker’s name-indeed few of America’s many politically correct corporations are as hard-Left-is associated with anything as militantly anti-American and anti-traditional family values as Ford.
Actually Ford with aero cars less than 20% of Fords still exist while over fifty percent of Dodge and Plymouth ones still do! Then there is the whole Rustang nickname that was well earned!
They didn't dare do the bump test against the Plymouth. What the Ford's wheels off the ground proves is that Ford outdid the Chevy float! It was a shame when Chrysler gave up their own idea of ride and handling and started chasing the GM/Ford float with the 76 F bodies.
The big difference in fuel economy is because the Ford and Plymouth are still in second gear at 40 MPH, which is their "middle" gear. The Chevy is in top gear, which is also second gear, but its geared lower than the other cars. The difference has less to do with the engines than it does with that, in reality the Plymouth would probably get the best economy overall.
We bought a new BelAir in 1966. It didn't ride harsh, but it was nowhere near the smoothness and quite the Caprice or Impala had for a ride. We also had a 1963 LeSabre - now THAT was a smooth and quiet ride. World of difference between GM divisions and trim levels within the same basic car. BTW I'd rather have the Ford in retrospect. GM cars just didn't hold up over the long haul.
My car is a 2000 Buick Lesabre Limited Edition. It has that tight turn radius too, I can often squeeze it into tight spaces with no troubles..Only complaint I have is power windows, I prefer hand crank ones because the motors in power ones goes bad.
I'm so disappointed that Chevrolet isn't like that anymore. Also, that classic vintage promotional video is still darn good as it has that charm to it.
Maybe not a Completely unbiased appraisal of these cars, BUT some great driving & utility etc. shots of them AND in the dust and (nearly) the whole GM line up for '66 ? Now, 'That's what I call Groovy Baby.' Cheers people. A like for This little car-historical gem !
karl kamphefner Just trying to clear the air with some facts. I have been restoring/driving 1967 Impala/Caprices longer than you have been alive. Just saying.......
Not a word or even a look at the INSIDE of the car where the 'prospect' will be. Were they embarrassed? How come the Plymouth didn't get to pop a coin? Or the price of these, not other GMs in a different price class. And the race at the end had a different engine in the car!
Not against the 383! That commercial was way biased to hide all the ways the Plymouth was inherently better then both Ford and Chevy. Chrysler's reputation even then was still as the engineer's car company! Chevy was great at selling looks and new model year changes. To me the Caprice was the best looking of the three but least likely to stand the test of time from a mechanical and rust perspective.@@DolleHengst
I find it interesting that the 396 cubic inch powered Caprice would have better gas mileage than the 390 cubic inch powered LTD and 383 cubic inch VIP yet it also has better performance yet no one was concerned about fuel mileage back in 1966
+Doobie1975 I just drove my 1965 Grand Prix a couple thousand miles, 389-4bbl 325hp, and I get a consistent 17mpg, not babying it too much, similar to the 396-325Caprice, but my '88 suburban 2wd 454 FI got 9MPG at @55
The biggest lie of several lies in that test was the mpg test. The Chevy must have been supertuned.. Also take a 66' Caprice and LTD over some rough roads and you'll quickly find out the Ford is MUCH smoother. One thing that's definitely true however is the Chevy's steering is much quicker and more precise.
+Ben I have to agree. I've driven both brands. I've always had better reliability with a Ford product. I still drive my 27 year old Grand Marquis every day. The only time it ever let me down was when it needed a new battery. And, the battery was over 7 years old.
Hello in the Ford 390 is 2 barrels and the Fury the standard engine was the 318 2-barrel V8 and the optional 383 V8 4 barrel 330 HP and $ 153. Regards.
actually the standard engine for the LTD was the 289 with the 352, 390 2bbl and 4bbl's and 428's being optional, most of them were equipped with the 390 I believe
I thought that segment was weird to. I used to own a 66 Fury 3 with a factory 383 that came equipped with nice thick sound deadening insulation under the hood.
Me too. While not a full size luxury car, I've got a '63 Dodge Dart base model with only a few options (heater, auto trans, seatbelts), and it has a thick layer of insulation under the hood. Though I know Wikipedia isn't exactly the most reliable source, their article on the Fury says that the VIP came with even more sound insulation than the standard car. Maybe the "VIP" shown was actually a stripped-down police package car with just enough trim added to give the appearance of a higher model.
I bet the 396 was sporting a Q-jet, enabling it to be the Economy Champ, while the Ford and Plymouth had 2bbl carbs The 427, as a Descendant of the Mark IV engine, was known as a Detuned Racing Engine
What a complete bias film, but still fun to watch. What they didn't tell us is whether or not the 396 was a 2bbl car with a glide or 3 speed, or with what rear gear ratio.. in any car for that respect! And ok, it beat the Ford in a drag race, why didn't they show it against the VIP? What about handling and braking? What about capacities? Prices? No, not fair, but again, fun to watch a Ford get air.. lol
re4adng though the comments, I am shocked, all these Ford lovers commenting in a negatively on a GM Sales pitch ad ddesigned for the Salesman to watch on a new model year car from 1966. So to all you ford lovers out thee, I want to ask this: Go to a lot of Car shows, and i love lookng a classic old cars from every make, but if Ford is so great and wonderful..... Why do most of those old restored classic Ford cas from the 20s, 30s, and 40s have Chevy 350 engines laced in them by the ford loving men who rebuit them? if this trend continues remember the ford car you love today will one day be powered by a Chevy.
Haha why is it that most Chevys are running ford rear ends and gearboxes. Most of the hot rod builders are probably Chevys lovers and find that the Chevys are too ugly.
you might want to ask,how come you don't see any old chevys from the 20's,30's,or 40's....the reason is that ford used better quality sheetmetal and didn't use as much wood.
Chevy has parts that are more common and cheaper than Ford or Mopar. One example is the bell housing bolt pattern for a small block chevy is also the same for a big block. Heads water pumps, fuel pumps and more than there is room to list can fit different Chevy has engine sizes. We used to jokingly say you can sweep the shop floor and find parts to fit a Chevy where Ford may have 4 different water pumps for a 289. Today you are seeing more Ford engines in old Fords.
Actually, the 396 and 427 came with the 3 spd Turbo-Hydramatic tranny. But yes, my dad's '67 Impala had a 283 with the Powerglide. Keep in mind, however, that the Powerglide is still used today indrag racing applications.
Shut an old GM hood or trunk lid next to a Chrysler product! I owned a 1969 Malibu followed by a 1969 Dodge Coronet. The Malibu sounded extremely tinny and cheap compared to the Coronet. The Coronet was a far better vehicle in so many ways than that Malibu was.
@@lisam4503 You are 100% right, I owned just 1 G.M. car and never again, poor quality in almost everything... and when they fail it is usually WAY more expensive than fixing a Chrysler product...
All the big 3 made good cars, but this video speaks for itself. GM should’ve looked into a modern version of the 396 V8 like Chrysler did with the Hemi! Then instead of discontinuing car production in America, we could’ve made some iconic vehicles to match that engine! GM loves to brag about their heyday, but what about now?! You guys dropped the ball on a lot of potential car and engine legends!😕
I know this is clever marketing and all, but I can't help but be impressed by how Chevrolet made the Caprice. Too bad they couldn't give a shit about its quality before leaving the factory.
Man...where have WE GONE in cars!? Everything is all too small, no pride...not even class may I add. The new Buicks are shameful. As much as EVERYTHING is being recycle such as music and styles, let's go back to THIS.
+Corky Rose the G.M engines would self destruct after 4000 RPM, AAMCO made a fortune in the sixtys and seventys on unreliable GM transmissions, and GM was never able to compete in NASCAR where ford and chrysler products dominated high speed races
+dicarlo57 Ford and Chrysler owned NASCAR back then. GM TH350 transmissions were pretty decent, but Ford and Chrysler transmissions were tougher. Performance built Ford C-4 automatic boxes are legendary in drag racing along with the C-6.
My bro & I have both owned '60's 383 2v full size cars, as well as our father when they were new and they each pulled in upper teens to 20 mpg hwy, fully loaded w/passengers and luggage. And to say the Chevy coil spring & full frame design is superior to the unitized construction and torsion bars on the Plymouth is laughable indeed. The Ford is a better car than the Chevy, but it's a moot point as the Plymouth was head & shoulders above either in engineering and design.
+Tom Johnson Couldn't be said better. This video is laughable indeed. Fun to see though. You should check out the "Uncle" Tom McCahill Chrysler comparative vids from '58.
The only thing GM was great at in those days were in selling the public the cars that convinced to many Americans to buy Japanese ones! GM quality and engineering was crap! @@rogerbahakel8130
I remember back in the day,chevy's would always win these contest(or GM) but as police cars fords were much better,and the only ones that didn't fall apart.the chevy transmission would fall out at 30k miles,and the Chryslers just plain fell apart.Yes chevys were faster but would not hold up.still true today.
Might want to watch some Jay Leno's garage! In that time period the cop cars were majority Chrysler! Chrysler was also known as the engineers Company! It wasn't until Dodge discontinued the Diplomat that Ford regained its status as the number one choice of law enforcement like it had in the fifties.
Geesh....Chevy was already grasping for straws in '66....throwing other GM branches under the bus all savage lol. The Ford was the better vehicle in this case reliability wise I'd say.
Dillon Correa Chevy was always ready to throw the other gm branches under the bus. Especially back then. The reason was gm itself. Back then the only thing about a Pontiac or an Oldsmobile that was close or the same was the body. The power trains were completely different Pontiacs engine even turned a different direction. GM as a corporation saw it best that each division competed with one another. In 66 gm was out selling everyone else too. I believe to this day they still hold the record of selling the most units of one vehicle in a single year. That happened in 65 so in 66 they were doing pretty good. Also how were they throwing other gm divisions under the bus? Ford is Ford Plymouth is Chrysler. No mention of any gm division other than Chevy here
@@redneckwithajeep5001 The promo talked about Pontiac, Olds, and Buick buyers going to Chevy Caprice. They mentioned Mercury too. And the promo bragged about Chevy's 427 pulling away from its cousins, as well as the FoMoCo and Mopar competition.
Michael Bacon and if you noticed I had a second comment my first viewing of this my internet didn’t time everything right so the video finished and cut the audio short.
Everyone who lived thru the sixties knows that Chevy was kink. Like it or not . They made great cars then and had few problems. I did a valve job on a 1966 impala convertible with over 100000 miles on it. Do you remember doing valve jobs back then? Also did one on a 428 cj in a Torino with 43000 miles . Back to story the convertible had well over 200000 when sold and still running great. Not all old cars are bad.
The full size fords of 63 and 64 are great looking cars. For 65 and on, they were just squared off and ugly. No contest between the 67 ford, and the 67 Coke bottle styled beautiful full size Chevy. The Fords were just butt ugly.
You could see some rigging going on! Notice only certain parts contained all three cars! More was tailored to the LTD vs the Caprice. Flying along and hitting the bump in the road. The Plymouth with its torsion bar suspension would have outperformed the Chevy! Looking back in retrospect we all should know Chevy starting in 1966 had a motor mount problem and other product quality problems as did Ford. Much more so than Chrysler did. Hands down I think the Chevy was the better-looking car of the three! The car I would buy out of those three the Plymouth! While a loser in the looks department far better in the engineering department. Looks don't get you point A to point B over time it's how well engineered a vehicle is.
8:17 - hilarious as F! Chevy won by like what, 11 body lengths? 🤣 The rest of the cars used only 27% of acceleration??? Man c'mon. But anyway old Detroit iron was great!
@@MisterMikeTexas It was available to the public. However, the Hemi was not available in the Fury. Only in the Satellite, Belvedere, Coronet and Charger in '66.
To think that anyone would fall for this crap is beyond comprehension. CHEVY or I should say GM had been pulling that crap for years. They were so afraid of FORD.
lol they just slandered against their own brands at 6:35, by saying people that used to drive a buick Pontiac and olds now drive a caprice because the caprice offers more stuff for 100's of dollars less.
More than a few people have said it was the introduction of Caprice in 1966 that started Pontiac on its long slow death. Caprice just gave potential Bonneville buyers one more thing to consider.
Lol, that tight monotone voice really gets on the nerves.... As if the world was coming to an end... By that time MBWs neue klasse and Mercedes were put together already by so much more precision and quality finish. They could easily last 10 years as well. For Americans I suppose they wanted something like a big comfy cheap sofa for long distances. But by g_d were these things badly put together. Parts were falling of by vibrations, poor paint jobs and mostly rust holes within 3 years in more moist cimates. They needed quite some maintainance. At the time of course many autos rusted, but within 3 years... you could leave that to Italians automakers, and appearantly many American car makers. I can't find them pretty either tbh. Lots of chrome but design and quality... meh.
15.7 is very impressive given the size and power of these six passenger cars, the fact that they didn't have fuel injection, overdrive or lock-up torque converters, and the fact that they were designed almost 50 years ago. Modern cars with this level of size and power (think 2014 Chrysler 300 w/Hemi), but with fuel injection, 5/6 speed overdrive transmissions and lock-up torque converters hardly do any better.
Go back and study your automobile history a little more there always was some intramural competition that went on. Not just with GM but with Ford and Mercury and Most especially Plymouth and Dodge!
my grandparents bought a VIP in fall '66..a '67 model with a 2bbl 383...loaded..top line interior...grandma sold real estate and used the car for showings
it had some tall hiway gearing, we drive with them across country a few times ..i recall napping and waking up and glancing over the front seat and seeing my grandpa humming to himself and the speedometer at 90 mph and you couldn't hear anything but the ice cold A/C fan and grandma snoring
I would gladly take any of those cars, especially over today's crap.
That Quadrajet with the small primaries helps with fuel mileage. I own a 66 Caprice with the 327. Love it!
If I was buying a brand new car in 1965 it would've been a 396-425/4 speed Chevy Biscayne. But I would've traded it in 1966 for a brand new Plymouth Belvedere 1 with the 426 Street Hemi and a 727 automatic transmission. A 4 speed is definitely more fun to drive but nothing could beat the shift time of the Chrysler 727 automatic transmission on the drag strip. The 60s was such an awesome time to be a gearhead. So many high performance machines out there to choose from
My Dad had a blue '66 Impala 283 4-door. It was no road burner, but solid and comfortable and probably the best car he ever owned. That little V8 was a great engine and I remember Dad boasting that he could get almost 30 MPG (Imperial) out of it on Alberta's flat highways without trying too hard. I don't recall the Impala ever breaking down and when he finally got rid of it in 1978 it was still running like a top but showing some pretty serious rust.
Notice how they did not match up the Plymouth with the Chevy in a drag race (it would have won in spite of being the smallest engine in this comparison). The 383 with a 727 Transmission and 8.75 differential was not only fast/powerful but bulletproof. Likewise, they did not test these cars on a slalom as the wallow wagon frame on, trailing arm, coil spring suspensions of the Ford and Chevrolet were inferior to Plymouth's stiff/integrated unit body, torsion bar/leaf spring suspension. The '66 Fury was not only a good handling/riding automobile, it was a tank. A friend of mine in high school had a 2-door Fury with the 318 Poly who (he and his friends as he loaned the car out freely) thoroughly ABUSED it in unmentionable ways. I was not a Chrysler fan back than; however, after trouncing and witnessing the absurd abuse this car withstood from our group of hoodlums, my respect for Chrysler products greatly appreciated. In addition, the 318 Poly (with 904 tranny) was no slouch and withstood many hours of over revving without fail. It was a comfortable, fine handling, strong and fun machine to prowl the streets with.
Always on the look out for the ball-race steering and the double-wall cowl. I just don't know how they did it!!!!
We had a 69 Impala with the 327. One of the best cars made, stood up better than any of the cars in years since. Had about 500,000 miles before my brother got to it!
@wzrubicon 1 you didn't drive the car! Two engines and that was it!
That Plymouth VIP was way nicer than the other.
It sure had formal elegance, but nothing beats that silky 1966 Caprice interior.
Chrysler products usually were the best among the competition, back when Chrysler Corporation existed
I love these old car Sales videos! Totally fascinating and relentlessly biased, no matter which company is selling it. Interesting video and thanks for posting, Minor detail, but the Caprice was the new top of the line Chevrolet so it should have actually been compared to the Ford 7 litre. In today’s values the the 7 L would bring 2 - 3 times the value of a Caprice. Minor trivia I know lol...
Such a fun video! It's also very 'slanted' (...as are most corporate films of this type). However, the most glaring omission for me is how they dodged showing a handling/roadability comparison between Caprice & VIP(!). Granted: the Caprice likely had a silkier ride (...prized by full-sized car buyers of that day). However, by 1966, Chrysler Corporation's Torsion Bar suspension had been universally acknowledged for a decade by the motoring press as leading the field in handling and roadability in full-sized U.S. cars (...and continued to do so into the 1970's). Torsion bars offered discernibly more stable road manners with less body roll, bounce, and float, while still offering an acceptably-smooth, big-car ride. So..., that was a pretty glaring omission. Still..., it's a wonderful time-capsule of a video!
Totally on point; additionally, they did not drag race the Plymouth against the Chevy as it would have probably won (383's with either the A833 four speed or 727 automatic transmissions were bullet proof as well as tough to beat against cars of similar size (engine displacement and total weight). The 396 four barrel with Turbo 350(?) tranny was also an excellent, powerful combination. It took a few years, but all automotive manufactures have succumbed to Chrysler's excellent "unit body" type structure (first introduced on its Airflow models in 1934). Remember, this is a Chevrolet commercial.
The gasoline vase on the bonnet is PRICELESS !!!
We had two '66 Impala's (at separate times). One was a wagon with the 396 in it. Totally AWESOME car that was fully loaded (my dad also worked for GM and that's the way he wanted it). That car did more than what was required of it the four years we had it. The other was a 4 door with (I think) a 327 in it that he bought for my sister to use at school in '72. It didn't have all the luxuries as the wagon, but still a pretty good car.
I really like the jazz music at 4:22 for the fuel economy test.
Very nice footage of the beautiful cactus along that desert road at 6:52.
that drag race at the end was awesome
Notice in the acceleration test there was no Belvedere or Charger with a 426 Hemi but there were was a GTO - Just pointing it out
They even brag about taking sales from other GM divisions. Madness!
Yeah. I thought that was a bit weird too. Outa those three, I'd take the Plymouth. Simply cos I reckon Chrysler engines and transmissions were always just that bit better.
area51isreal chrysler is the worst car company in America by far
@@slavonic7907 Wasn't always that way!
when murika made Real cars🇺🇸👍🇺🇸👍🇺🇸👍🇺🇸👍🇺🇸👍🇺🇸👍🇺🇸👍
I like the Plymouth back when Detroit made real cars
En Venezuela todavía ruedan muchos de esos jaja, son íconos andantes de la gloriosa Venezuela de antes, que esperamos que vuelva pronto! Gracias por subirlo David. Un gran saludo!
Now today the LTD and VIP are worth way more than the Caprice
+Anonhsawenrate McGregor You better check your figures. A 66 Caprice brings double the money of a LTD or VIP
@@corkyrose9011 True. A 1965 Caprice is even more valuable because it was an optional luxury package for the 1965 Impala sedan back when body styles change every year.
I'll take that Ford thank you very much....you can have all the test in the world but the outcome for me will be the same ...its Ford for life
Ford máquina j
goatmudiay While separate from the motor company the Ford Foundation’s militant support for illegal immigration and for every leftist cause to come down the pike means one thing: I will never buy another Ford product!
@@fairfaxcat1312 Ford didn't take the Bush/Obama bailout! GM and Mopar did! And Obama pimped the Fiat buyout of Mopar.
Michael Bacon I guess that was socialistic so you correctly identify the problem. I am not sure what the alternative would have been to our ending up with only one major US automaker. As I suggested, the Ford Foundation is independent of the motor company yet no other automaker’s name-indeed few of America’s many politically correct corporations are as hard-Left-is associated with anything as militantly anti-American and anti-traditional family values as Ford.
Mopar Baby! Forever!
If only I scooped a bunch of these old cars up back in the days they were difficult to give away.
My uncle had a 66 Ply. Fury. I had a 69' Ply RoadRunner. Now driving a 17' Super Sport Chevy Camaro with a stick.
Melhor comparativo automotivo que vi até hoje!
But the Ford was still alive and kicking long after the Chevy and Plymouth were in the scrapyard.
+scdevon Yeah, but all three cars went downhill quite a lot when the 1970s arrived.It got even WORSE in the 1980s.
I would estimate the Plymouth had the best longevity.
The junk yards were full of all three when they got around 14 years old / 120,000 miles.
Actually Ford with aero cars less than 20% of Fords still exist while over fifty percent of Dodge and Plymouth ones still do! Then there is the whole Rustang nickname that was well earned!
They didn't dare do the bump test against the Plymouth. What the Ford's wheels off the ground proves is that Ford outdid the Chevy float! It was a shame when Chrysler gave up their own idea of ride and handling and started chasing the GM/Ford float with the 76 F bodies.
My brother had a 65 Ford Galaxie and that car drove pretty good.
The big difference in fuel economy is because the Ford and Plymouth are still in second gear at 40 MPH, which is their "middle" gear. The Chevy is in top gear, which is also second gear, but its geared lower than the other cars. The difference has less to do with the engines than it does with that, in reality the Plymouth would probably get the best economy overall.
We bought a new BelAir in 1966. It didn't ride harsh, but it was nowhere near the smoothness and quite the Caprice or Impala had for a ride. We also had a 1963 LeSabre - now THAT was a smooth and quiet ride. World of difference between GM divisions and trim levels within the same basic car. BTW I'd rather have the Ford in retrospect. GM cars just didn't hold up over the long haul.
16 mpg on low speed cruising was something to brag about. Shows how unprepared Detroit was for fuel crises 10 years later.
My car is a 2000 Buick Lesabre Limited Edition. It has that tight turn radius too, I can often squeeze it into tight spaces with no troubles..Only complaint I have is power windows, I prefer hand crank ones because the motors in power ones goes bad.
Too bad, you couldn't get a three speed automatic on all chevys.
coil springs don’t hold a candle to torsion bars and leaf springs - Mopar or no car!
Most part of the comparison is based on the ford because the Plymouth is at least as good as the chevrolet
I'm so disappointed that Chevrolet isn't like that anymore. Also, that classic vintage promotional video is still darn good as it has that charm to it.
Many love to restore old Chevies, I doubt many late model cars will be restored
Maybe not a Completely unbiased appraisal of these cars, BUT some great driving & utility etc. shots of them AND in the dust and (nearly) the whole GM line up for '66 ? Now, 'That's what I call Groovy Baby.' Cheers people. A like for This little car-historical gem !
This video is incredible...you stumbled on to something. There is more here then meets the eye.
All Chevy big block b body cars never had the powerglide. Big block cars got the turbo 400, and the twelve bolt rear end, out of necessity.
and they still sucked
karl kamphefner
Just trying to clear the air with some facts. I have been restoring/driving 1967 Impala/Caprices longer than you have been alive. Just saying.......
No way
Even with the 396, the Impala came with either a power glide or the optional turbo 400.
Not a word or even a look at the INSIDE of the car where the 'prospect' will be. Were they embarrassed? How come the Plymouth didn't get to pop a coin? Or the price of these, not other GMs in a different price class. And the race at the end had a different engine in the car!
Chevy rules overall, best styling and chick magnet
By no means this test can be seriously taken but it´s fun to watch.
Una joya de video....
I wish they would have done the 0-60mph and quarter mile run tests, that would have been interesting to see.
Doobie1975
Something tells me the Chevy would have won....
Not against the 383! That commercial was way biased to hide all the ways the Plymouth was inherently better then both Ford and Chevy. Chrysler's reputation even then was still as the engineer's car company! Chevy was great at selling looks and new model year changes. To me the Caprice was the best looking of the three but least likely to stand the test of time from a mechanical and rust perspective.@@DolleHengst
I find it interesting that the 396 cubic inch powered Caprice would have better gas mileage than the 390 cubic inch powered LTD and 383 cubic inch VIP yet it also has better performance yet no one was concerned about fuel mileage back in 1966
+Doobie1975 I just drove my 1965 Grand Prix a couple thousand miles, 389-4bbl 325hp, and I get a consistent 17mpg, not babying it too much, similar to the 396-325Caprice, but my '88 suburban 2wd 454 FI got 9MPG at @55
The 396 is talked about like a regular day at the office
"Comparative"? What does that mean. Did they mean "Comparison"?
I'll take that Pontiac GTO!!
I'll take one of each please
I'll give Chevy two power advantages, they had the quadrajet carb and maybe hydraulic fan clutch,
Notice they didn't tell what the differential gearing was, or if the others had 2 bbl carbs.
@@ToneCabinet I know in 1968-9 Chevy had an optional economy version 396 with a 2brl carb but not sure if it avail in earlier 65-67 chevy’s.
good finish drag racing
Obrigado.
I was surprised at the fuel economy test. Was the Ford 390 really that much more fuel thirsty than the Chevy 396 or Plymouth 383?
Hard to say over 50 years later. Those tests could have been fudged a bit. Who knows?
The biggest lie of several lies in that test was the mpg test.
The Chevy must have been supertuned..
Also take a 66' Caprice and LTD over some rough roads and you'll quickly find out the Ford is MUCH smoother.
One thing that's definitely true however is the Chevy's steering is much quicker and more precise.
Great ending!
Its very sad because the most extraordinary car IS the FORD. Extra sad to think that Chevy put this on.... sorry boys.
Don't worry, it's only a test made by GM. I love Ford. Regards.
+Ben I like them all.
+Ben I have to agree. I've driven both brands. I've always had better reliability with a Ford product. I still drive my 27 year old Grand Marquis every day. The only time it ever let me down was when it needed a new battery. And, the battery was over 7 years old.
My one and only Ford product was a 87 Merc Sable which was a great car and driver until the engine went kaput at 60,000 miles. Never again!
was the 390 and 383 engines for the Ford LTD and Plymouth VIP a 4 barrel or a 2 barrel?
Hello in the Ford 390 is 2 barrels and the Fury the standard engine was the 318 2-barrel V8 and the optional 383 V8 4 barrel 330 HP and $ 153. Regards.
actually the standard engine for the LTD was the 289 with the 352, 390 2bbl and 4bbl's and 428's being optional, most of them were equipped with the 390 I believe
Hi, you right Doobie1975, the standard V8 on LTD was the 289, probable the most used opcion was the V8 390. Regards.
Ford 390s could be had in 4bbl aswell
Didn't the Chevy have a Quadrajet? Those small primaries make a difference.
4:45 Yeh...but what size rear gears are all 3 cars running. That will determine MPG.
That's a lot of bull. Showing the Plymouth VIP with no sound insulation under the hood? The VIP came standard with heavy duty sound insulation .
I thought that segment was weird to. I used to own a 66 Fury 3 with a factory 383 that came equipped with nice thick sound deadening insulation under the hood.
Me too. While not a full size luxury car, I've got a '63 Dodge Dart base model with only a few options (heater, auto trans, seatbelts), and it has a thick layer of insulation under the hood. Though I know Wikipedia isn't exactly the most reliable source, their article on the Fury says that the VIP came with even more sound insulation than the standard car. Maybe the "VIP" shown was actually a stripped-down police package car with just enough trim added to give the appearance of a higher model.
The hood on the Ford wasn't even a production hood, built different than any I've ever seen.
The purpose of the film wasn’t to dispense truths, it was to sell Chevys.
I bet the 396 was sporting a Q-jet, enabling it to be the Economy Champ, while the Ford and Plymouth had 2bbl carbs
The 427, as a Descendant of the Mark IV engine, was known as a Detuned Racing Engine
What a complete bias film, but still fun to watch. What they didn't tell us is whether or not the 396 was a 2bbl car with a glide or 3 speed, or with what rear gear ratio.. in any car for that respect! And ok, it beat the Ford in a drag race, why didn't they show it against the VIP? What about handling and braking? What about capacities? Prices? No, not fair, but again, fun to watch a Ford get air.. lol
Adam Trombino they didn't make the 396 2 barrel until 1969 which was later replaced with a 400 2 barrel for 1970 up.
To my eyes that Chevy also caught some wind underfoot.
re4adng though the comments, I am shocked, all these Ford lovers commenting in a negatively on a GM Sales pitch ad ddesigned for the Salesman to watch on a new model year car from 1966. So to all you ford lovers out thee, I want to ask this: Go to a lot of Car shows, and i love lookng a classic old cars from every make, but if Ford is so great and wonderful..... Why do most of those old restored classic Ford cas from the 20s, 30s, and 40s have Chevy 350 engines laced in them by the ford loving men who rebuit them? if this trend continues remember the ford car you love today will one day be powered by a Chevy.
lol Bobby, you sure speak a lot of truth in your comments. Could not agree more.
Haha why is it that most Chevys are running ford rear ends and gearboxes. Most of the hot rod builders are probably Chevys lovers and find that the Chevys are too ugly.
you might want to ask,how come you don't see any old chevys from the 20's,30's,or 40's....the reason is that ford used better quality sheetmetal and didn't use as much wood.
Chevy has parts that are more common and cheaper than Ford or Mopar. One example is the bell housing bolt pattern for a small block chevy is also the same for a big block. Heads water pumps, fuel pumps and more than there is room to list can fit different Chevy has engine sizes. We used to jokingly say you can sweep the shop floor and find parts to fit a Chevy where Ford may have 4 different water pumps for a 289. Today you are seeing more Ford engines in old Fords.
I'm very surprised that the other cars didn't come standard with a hood silencer!!!
Must have been an option to make more $...
+TheSpritz0 ...And neither Ford nor Plymouth offered Chevy's outdated 2-speed Powerglide transmission--you got a state-of-the-art three-speed automatic instead!
William J. McHale
LOL!!!!!
Actually, the 396 and 427 came with the 3 spd Turbo-Hydramatic tranny. But yes, my dad's '67 Impala had a 283 with the Powerglide. Keep in mind, however, that the Powerglide is still used today indrag racing applications.
Shut an old GM hood or trunk lid next to a Chrysler product! I owned a 1969 Malibu followed by a 1969 Dodge Coronet. The Malibu sounded extremely tinny and cheap compared to the Coronet. The Coronet was a far better vehicle in so many ways than that Malibu was.
@@lisam4503 You are 100% right, I owned just 1 G.M. car and never again, poor quality in almost everything... and when they fail it is usually WAY more expensive than fixing a Chrysler product...
427 left those cars hanging...BOL LMFAO
Tremenda comparativa xD parece motor trend
LTD any day of the week.
All the big 3 made good cars, but this video speaks for itself. GM should’ve looked into a modern version of the 396 V8 like Chrysler did with the Hemi! Then instead of discontinuing car production in America, we could’ve made some iconic vehicles to match that engine! GM loves to brag about their heyday, but what about now?! You guys dropped the ball on a lot of potential car and engine legends!😕
Me gustan los dos carros
I know this is clever marketing and all, but I can't help but be impressed by how Chevrolet made the Caprice. Too bad they couldn't give a shit about its quality before leaving the factory.
Or what it would do to Bonneville sales.
Man...where have WE GONE in cars!? Everything is all too small, no pride...not even class may I add. The new Buicks are shameful. As much as EVERYTHING is being recycle such as music and styles, let's go back to THIS.
WHY GM NOT MAKE SIM SIM THIS WHHHHHHHY?????
Too bad Chevy needed the 427 HP to beat all the rest!..lol.
Did not know you could get 15.7 mpg while drag racing. Oh wait.
Dang Chevy has been lying and ripping people off forever!
+gman prather Chevrolet killed the competition throughout the 60's. The full size line will always be more collectible than Ford or Plymouth.
+Corky Rose still doesn't change the fact that they lie!
+Corky Rose the G.M engines would self destruct after 4000 RPM, AAMCO made a fortune in the sixtys and seventys on unreliable GM transmissions, and GM was never able to compete in NASCAR where ford and chrysler products dominated high speed races
+dicarlo57
Ford and Chrysler owned NASCAR back then. GM TH350 transmissions were pretty decent, but Ford and Chrysler transmissions were tougher. Performance built Ford C-4 automatic boxes are legendary in drag racing along with the C-6.
My bro & I have both owned '60's 383 2v full size cars, as well as our father when they were new and they each pulled in upper teens to 20 mpg hwy, fully loaded w/passengers and luggage. And to say the Chevy coil spring & full frame design is superior to the unitized construction and torsion bars on the Plymouth is laughable indeed. The Ford is a better car than the Chevy, but it's a moot point as the Plymouth was head & shoulders above either in engineering and design.
+Tom Johnson Couldn't be said better.
This video is laughable indeed. Fun to see though.
You should check out the "Uncle" Tom McCahill Chrysler comparative vids from '58.
UberLummox thnx..& I'll check that out!
Hmm why no drag race between the stock Chevy and Plymouth? 😎
I have to admit in some ways GM was more on top of there game back in those days. Not so much today. Today Chrysler beats them in the game
Gm was great in those days
The only thing GM was great at in those days were in selling the public the cars that convinced to many Americans to buy Japanese ones! GM quality and engineering was crap! @@rogerbahakel8130
The Ford LTD was the best built car out of these three.
I remember back in the day,chevy's would always win these contest(or GM) but as police cars fords were much better,and the only ones that didn't fall apart.the chevy transmission would fall out at 30k miles,and the Chryslers just plain fell apart.Yes chevys were faster but would not hold up.still true today.
Might want to watch some Jay Leno's garage! In that time period the cop cars were majority Chrysler! Chrysler was also known as the engineers Company! It wasn't until Dodge discontinued the Diplomat that Ford regained its status as the number one choice of law enforcement like it had in the fifties.
Chevy needs to reinvent the chevyII. Kind of like the way mustang and dodge have new versions. That would be awesome.
damn lol..chevy was beasting back then lol on well rounded platform
Geesh....Chevy was already grasping for straws in '66....throwing other GM branches under the bus all savage lol.
The Ford was the better vehicle in this case reliability wise I'd say.
Dillon Correa Chevy was always ready to throw the other gm branches under the bus. Especially back then. The reason was gm itself. Back then the only thing about a Pontiac or an Oldsmobile that was close or the same was the body. The power trains were completely different Pontiacs engine even turned a different direction. GM as a corporation saw it best that each division competed with one another. In 66 gm was out selling everyone else too. I believe to this day they still hold the record of selling the most units of one vehicle in a single year. That happened in 65 so in 66 they were doing pretty good. Also how were they throwing other gm divisions under the bus? Ford is Ford Plymouth is Chrysler. No mention of any gm division other than Chevy here
Dillon Correa alright take back my question my internet apparently froze the video before that part and I thought it was over
@@redneckwithajeep5001 The promo talked about Pontiac, Olds, and Buick buyers going to Chevy Caprice. They mentioned Mercury too. And the promo bragged about Chevy's 427 pulling away from its cousins, as well as the FoMoCo and Mopar competition.
Michael Bacon and if you noticed I had a second comment my first viewing of this my internet didn’t time everything right so the video finished and cut the audio short.
Everyone who lived thru the sixties knows that Chevy was kink. Like it or not . They made great cars then and had few problems. I did a valve job on a 1966 impala convertible with over 100000 miles on it. Do you remember doing valve jobs back then? Also did one on a 428 cj in a Torino with 43000 miles . Back to story the convertible had well over 200000 when sold and still running great. Not all old cars are bad.
The full size fords of 63 and 64 are great looking cars. For 65 and on, they were just squared off and ugly. No contest between the 67 ford, and the 67 Coke bottle styled beautiful full size Chevy. The Fords were just butt ugly.
racing in the dirt just means I got better traction.
Eatin’ Ford
Shittin’ Dodge/Plymouth
You could see some rigging going on! Notice only certain parts contained all three cars! More was tailored to the LTD vs the Caprice. Flying along and hitting the bump in the road. The Plymouth with its torsion bar suspension would have outperformed the Chevy!
Looking back in retrospect we all should know Chevy starting in 1966 had a motor mount problem and other product quality problems as did Ford. Much more so than Chrysler did.
Hands down I think the Chevy was the better-looking car of the three! The car I would buy out of those three the Plymouth! While a loser in the looks department far better in the engineering department. Looks don't get you point A to point B over time it's how well engineered a vehicle is.
Real gasoline in graduated cylinder,not like today’s e85.water corn funny fuel.
Looks like El Mirage dry lake.
why is chevy competing against their own brands? lol
All different divisions of GM. They were still all in competition with each other.
@@recpro7847 The 1960s,was the start of the GM downfall. Every division wanted sport, luxury and performance cars( except for Cadillac).
15.7 mi per gallon gm hasn't advanced at all in 54 years
8:17 - hilarious as F! Chevy won by like what, 11 body lengths? 🤣 The rest of the cars used only 27% of acceleration??? Man c'mon. But anyway old Detroit iron was great!
My car is caprice 1989 i love
a 66 hemi would have smoked that impala
..and it would of been cool to see that!
Yeah but the Hemi was a performance engine, not for general passenger use.
@@MisterMikeTexas It was available to the public. However, the Hemi was not available in the Fury. Only in the Satellite, Belvedere, Coronet and Charger in '66.
So would the new for 1966 440 engine!
To think that anyone would fall for this crap is beyond comprehension. CHEVY or I should say GM had been pulling that crap for years. They were so afraid of FORD.
lol they just slandered against their own brands at 6:35, by saying people that used to drive a buick Pontiac and olds now drive a caprice because the caprice offers more stuff for 100's of dollars less.
More than a few people have said it was the introduction of Caprice in 1966 that started Pontiac on its long slow death. Caprice just gave potential Bonneville buyers one more thing to consider.
Lol, that tight monotone voice really gets on the nerves.... As if the world was coming to an end... By that time MBWs neue klasse and Mercedes were put together already by so much more precision and quality finish. They could easily last 10 years as well. For Americans I suppose they wanted something like a big comfy cheap sofa for long distances. But by g_d were these things badly put together. Parts were falling of by vibrations, poor paint jobs and mostly rust holes within 3 years in more moist cimates. They needed quite some maintainance. At the time of course many autos rusted, but within 3 years... you could leave that to Italians automakers, and appearantly many American car makers. I can't find them pretty either tbh. Lots of chrome but design and quality... meh.
Show me a 1966 Mercedes that is still on the road!
OK. Because of this anything-you-can-do-I can-do-better pitch I will now buy a Caprice.
15.7 MPG huh
Pretty bad
15.7 is very impressive given the size and power of these six passenger cars, the fact that they didn't have fuel injection, overdrive or lock-up torque converters, and the fact that they were designed almost 50 years ago. Modern cars with this level of size and power (think 2014 Chrysler 300 w/Hemi), but with fuel injection, 5/6 speed overdrive transmissions and lock-up torque converters hardly do any better.
BS!
What a load of crap.
Wilbur Snaffel Lol.
Full size fords always been god awful ugly
Chevy threw its cousins Pontiac, Olds, and Buick under the bus!
Go back and study your automobile history a little more there always was some intramural competition that went on. Not just with GM but with Ford and Mercury and Most especially Plymouth and Dodge!