In the 1993 imperial styles mine had 2 spare tires. A full size with extra matching hubcap and a donut space mounted against a rail in back of seat. . A feature not available in the towncar series of the same years. And the air suspension was weight & height adjustable. And had flip headights. That stays clean until needed.
While I am sure the Imperial is the more solid feeling car due to the massive frame they built it in, I'd still lean toward the fresher and more timeless styling of the Lincoln.
The Lincoln has an attractive, timeless appearance. The Imperial, while decent looking, looks as if they were trying to add every early 1960's little styling geegaw to the car.
@@larrynason8716 I remember years ago when my father was looking for a luxury car to replace his 62 Caddy, he looked at both the Lincoln and the Imperial. He did not like the styling on the Imperial whatsoever. I remember even as a young boy it just didn't look right like the front and the back didn't match.
The elephant in the room was that Cadillac dominated the luxury market, these two were fighting for table scraps. Ford made money on this generation of Lincoln because of the 2-model line - the sedan base price was halfway between those of a Caddy Sedan de Ville and 60 Special, the convertible firmly in Fleetwood territory. Imperial was still trying to match Cadillac model-for-model and Chryco was lucky if they broke even on the project.
I like the dash on the Imperial -- this was the last year of the oval steering wheel, but you can't beat the side slab styling of the Lincoln and the dash style, which they resurrected on the early Navigators.
I have actually owned both cars. The Lincoln has timeless styling, but it's rear passenger leg room shortage is a serious issue and makes you feel like you are a riding in a much smaller car. That's why Lincoln lengthened the wheelbase in 1964 to adjust for this issue. The Imperial also had a more futuristic dashboard, with push button control for transmission and A/C within easy reach.
Many Ford competitors used an unfair trick when comparing acceleration... they would claim that they used the "standard" drive position on the shifter. However, in 1963 (and others), the Ford Cruse-o-matic transmission's "standard" position was "drive 2", not "drive 1". "Drive 1" (small dot) was for snow and sand and started off in 2nd gear, while "drive 2" (circle-dot) started in first gear and shifted through all 3 gears. So, "Drive 1" accelerated much, much slower.
When I hear the term luxury car, the 61-65 Continental comes to mind, the Imperial never does. The 63 is less bizarre looking than previous models, but not much.
1963 was most definitely the Silver Standard era...you could choose the stunning Lincoln on style alone, yet still be quite satisfied with the overall quality. Or, you could overlook the odd styling of the Imp and enjoy a true enthusiast's machine. Something for everyone.
100% agreement. The story gave mostly irrelevant points from the consumer perspective. I mean, do people really care about that little back-seat handle or bumper geometry? That movie would not convert the Lincoln buyer to Imp.
Those imperials were tanks, but since I am not invading Ukraine at the moment, I'd pick the timeless elegance of the Lincoln Continental. Chrysler made great engines in the day, but their design language stunk. Outside of the 1958 Belvedere / Fury, Chrysler produced a lot of baroque "super busy" styling from the late 50s to the mid-60s, and this 63 Imperial was no exception. The trunk thinks its a 1957 Continental, the fins are a poor-man's 59 Caddy, the headlight design was plucked from 1937, and that grill saw duty on Army trucks of WWII. To many soft curves and abrupt angles in one design.
it was a couple years old. It was a variant of the 60 Imperial which is the best Imperial. It wasn't that busy" and they were still putting trim on vehicles :)
The '59 Cadillac was a panic reaction to the '57 Imperial, not the other way around, but your other points are well taken. The free standing headlights were a return to classic '30's style... purportedly. The '63 Imperial had shaved off the fins which reached maximum height in '61. The '61 Continental made everybody stand up and notice. It was a complete sea change in design. The '64 Imperial (design credit goes to Elwood Engel, who also did the '61 Continental) was a nice rendition of the Continental: restyled on the '57 body! Cadillac finally got on board in '65.
I am one of the few who would have chosen the Imperial over the Lincoln for styling too: at best I find the Continental's shape to be bland, leaning towards being "brick like" Oh well, I actually grew to like the 61 Plymouth front end so perhaps I am an outlier 😅
The Imperial is the bolder gamble, and I think it's better looking until you get to those headlights. they flare the fenders to accommodate those headlights... which I don't think many liked. The Lincoln is the safer design thats for sure.
You are definitely an outlier. The 61 Plymouth was hideous, rivalled in ugliness only by the 61 Dodge. Some of these cars grow on us with the passage of time, like the 58-60 Lincolns. I admire your honesty, it was a rough year for Chrysler although the Imperial was handsome for a bloated barge.
@@OceanJoe-cy8rx I think it depends on what part of a car's styling matters the most for a person: to me the most important part is certainly the side profile and in particular the proportions: in the two door hardtop body style the Plymouth and Dodge are flawless, a very sloping roofline (even more so than the 57 models!) and balanced hood and trunk volumes. The front and rear ends are "different" from usual but for my personal taste, they are not so bad as to say "those case are hideous". The 61-62 GM full size *pillared sedans* are hideous for my taste, overgown Corvairs 😂
The Imperial is better in every way except one and like the man said, it's a matter of taste. The Lincoln has a timeless shape, like a block of wood. The 64 Imperial mirrors that shape only prettier
Yep, I'm sure the Imp was better in all regards except the one that mattered the most to this customer set: styling. The Linc was near the beginning of it's 61 restyle. The Imp was at the very end of it's, as 64 brought out a newly styled Imp! Also, I imagine Imp was still fighting the poor quality reputation brought on by the 57's being rushed to market. People don't soon forget being screwed by poor quality products, yet manufacturers continue the practice to this day. Marketing rules when engineering should!
that is the "mpg" mileage run... and a mpg run. Meaning they accelerate easy and cruise at highways speed the whole time that maximized mpg(hyper miling). In reality daily driving is probably the same at 9-10 mpg
The Imperial is probably overall the better quality car , but it looks old fashioned , and not pretty , the headlights look bizarre .The Lincoln is a more basic body style, but is attractive .I thought there was a 2 door version of this Lincoln?
The elegant coupe body style debuted in 1966…or rather came back after the 1960 model year. I’ve always liked coupes…two-doors make for smoother lines.
The 64 Imperial was FAR better looking than the 63. It was designed by Elwood Engel the same person who designed the Continental. If Chrysler wanted to make a favorable comparison they should have waited one more year
The styling of the 64 Imperial is usually credited to Elwood Engel, who Chrysler acquired from Ford after he had a hand in the styling of the 61 Continental.
@@autochronicles8667Earle and Exner kinda stayed past their usefulness. The carryover 50s styling became cartoonish as the 60s got underway. Later in the 60s, Chrysler adopted the sharp Coke-bottle styling across its lineup. The 68 and 69 Chargers especially benefitted from that.
@@Pdraver333 he would have taken some time to get his influence in the pipeline. The middle ground between Exner health issues and Engel was limbo and random managers trying to figure out what to do.
![⭐️( ลอยกระทง 2024 ) Ver. แดนซ์ Remix BY [ ดีเจกิต รีมิกซ์ ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/rMWOLhgXUHc/mqdefault.jpg)
Virgil Exner really had some crazy designs during his time at Chrysler
those vintage floating headlights I can't get onboard with...
I’m very surprised they did not mention the dual A/C option on the Imperial. A very desirable accessory here in the south.
Even in the South then, air conditioning was not inevitable in a luxury car.
In the 1993 imperial styles mine had 2 spare tires. A full size with extra matching hubcap and a donut space mounted against a rail in back of seat. . A feature not available in the towncar series of the same years. And the air suspension was weight & height adjustable. And had flip headights. That stays clean until needed.
The Linc, can pass for an early 70s car, The Chrysler can pass for a late 50s car.
those floating headlights... ack... I actually love the rest of the car but those head lights ruined it.
While I am sure the Imperial is the more solid feeling car due to the massive frame they built it in, I'd still lean toward the fresher and more timeless styling of the Lincoln.
the 61-62 are not desireable cars.. those floating headlights... I love the 60 Imperial though...
The Lincoln has an attractive, timeless appearance. The Imperial, while decent looking, looks as if they were trying to add every early 1960's little styling geegaw to the car.
Lots of facts and data, my family had a '63 Lincoln. A really fine car that looks contemporary today.
oh the Lincoln certainly held up... That Imperial... well...
The Lincoln is a far better looking car there's no question about it.
Did you just say the Lincoln was a far better looking car? Really? It looks just like the box my Keds sneakers came in.🤷♂️
@@larrynason8716 I remember years ago when my father was looking for a luxury car to replace his 62 Caddy, he looked at both the Lincoln and the Imperial. He did not like the styling on the Imperial whatsoever. I remember even as a young boy it just didn't look right like the front and the back didn't match.
Agreed.
Agreed. The Imperial looks old in comparison.
The elephant in the room was that Cadillac dominated the luxury market, these two were fighting for table scraps. Ford made money on this generation of Lincoln because of the 2-model line - the sedan base price was halfway between those of a Caddy Sedan de Ville and 60 Special, the convertible firmly in Fleetwood territory. Imperial was still trying to match Cadillac model-for-model and Chryco was lucky if they broke even on the project.
Yeah Caddy ruled the market thats for sure... I am also pretty sure Chrysler lost a lot of money on Imperial but wanted to keep that luxury brand.
I think I wouldn't have looked for a leftover 1962 Cadillac.
I would choose the Imperial because I've always loved the fins and the creative designs of the Imperial's.
yeah but those headlights?? 1960 for me :)
I like the dash on the Imperial -- this was the last year of the oval steering wheel, but you can't beat the side slab styling of the Lincoln and the dash style, which they resurrected on the early Navigators.
Anyone who bought the 1963 Imperial was going to be real upset when 1964 models rolled out.
Yeah end of the hanging headlights... I'm sorry but I can't handle those :)
I have actually owned both cars. The Lincoln has timeless styling, but it's rear passenger leg room shortage is a serious issue and makes you feel like you are a riding in a much smaller car. That's why Lincoln lengthened the wheelbase in 1964 to adjust for this issue. The Imperial also had a more futuristic dashboard, with push button control for transmission and A/C within easy reach.
special glowing dashboard...
I would proudly own AND drive either one of these two Cars over ANY Cars built today!💕
Good choice!
Many Ford competitors used an unfair trick when comparing acceleration... they would claim that they used the "standard" drive position on the shifter. However, in 1963 (and others), the Ford Cruse-o-matic transmission's "standard" position was "drive 2", not "drive 1". "Drive 1" (small dot) was for snow and sand and started off in 2nd gear, while "drive 2" (circle-dot) started in first gear and shifted through all 3 gears. So, "Drive 1" accelerated much, much slower.
When I hear the term luxury car, the 61-65 Continental comes to mind, the Imperial never does. The 63 is less bizarre looking than previous models, but not much.
Well hardly anyone knows about Imperial but they were no slouches... they were hand built monsters.
“Draw your own conclusions” about the appearance. Chrysler might as well just said “Suddenly it’s 1960”
Those headlights were suspect :)
1963 was most definitely the Silver Standard era...you could choose the stunning Lincoln on style alone, yet still be quite satisfied with the overall quality. Or, you could overlook the odd styling of the Imp and enjoy a true enthusiast's machine. Something for everyone.
This comparison is hilarious.
100% agreement. The story gave mostly irrelevant points from the consumer perspective. I mean, do people really care about that little back-seat handle or bumper geometry? That movie would not convert the Lincoln buyer to Imp.
@@thomashawkinson7017 they had to find anything for the salesman even the tinyest advantage they could point out to buyers.
Those imperials were tanks, but since I am not invading Ukraine at the moment, I'd pick the timeless elegance of the Lincoln Continental. Chrysler made great engines in the day, but their design language stunk. Outside of the 1958 Belvedere / Fury, Chrysler produced a lot of baroque "super busy" styling from the late 50s to the mid-60s, and this 63 Imperial was no exception. The trunk thinks its a 1957 Continental, the fins are a poor-man's 59 Caddy, the headlight design was plucked from 1937, and that grill saw duty on Army trucks of WWII. To many soft curves and abrupt angles in one design.
it was a couple years old. It was a variant of the 60 Imperial which is the best Imperial. It wasn't that busy" and they were still putting trim on vehicles :)
The '59 Cadillac was a panic reaction to the '57 Imperial, not the other way around, but your other points are well taken. The free standing headlights were a return to classic '30's style... purportedly. The '63 Imperial had shaved off the fins which reached maximum height in '61.
The '61 Continental made everybody stand up and notice. It was a complete sea change in design. The '64 Imperial (design credit goes to Elwood Engel, who also did the '61 Continental) was a nice rendition of the Continental: restyled on the '57 body! Cadillac finally got on board in '65.
I am one of the few who would have chosen the Imperial over the Lincoln for styling too: at best I find the Continental's shape to be bland, leaning towards being "brick like"
Oh well, I actually grew to like the 61 Plymouth front end so perhaps I am an outlier 😅
The Imperial is the bolder gamble, and I think it's better looking until you get to those headlights. they flare the fenders to accommodate those headlights... which I don't think many liked. The Lincoln is the safer design thats for sure.
You are definitely an outlier. The 61 Plymouth was hideous, rivalled in ugliness only by the 61 Dodge. Some of these cars grow on us with the passage of time, like the 58-60 Lincolns. I admire your honesty, it was a rough year for Chrysler although the Imperial was handsome for a bloated barge.
@@OceanJoe-cy8rx I think it depends on what part of a car's styling matters the most for a person: to me the most important part is certainly the side profile and in particular the proportions: in the two door hardtop body style the Plymouth and Dodge are flawless, a very sloping roofline (even more so than the 57 models!) and balanced hood and trunk volumes. The front and rear ends are "different" from usual but for my personal taste, they are not so bad as to say "those case are hideous". The 61-62 GM full size *pillared sedans* are hideous for my taste, overgown Corvairs 😂
The Imperial is better in every way except one and like the man said, it's a matter of taste. The Lincoln has a timeless shape, like a block of wood. The 64 Imperial mirrors that shape only prettier
Yep, I'm sure the Imp was better in all regards except the one that mattered the most to this customer set: styling. The Linc was near the beginning of it's 61 restyle. The Imp was at the very end of it's, as 64 brought out a newly styled Imp! Also, I imagine Imp was still fighting the poor quality reputation brought on by the 57's being rushed to market. People don't soon forget being screwed by poor quality products, yet manufacturers continue the practice to this day. Marketing rules when engineering should!
I can't do the floating headlights... I know Exner loved them but no... just no
@@autochronicles8667Elwood Engle came over from Ford to Chrysler's rescue. The 64 Imperial was much more elegantly-styled thanks to Engle.
100% agreement.
The imperial trunk lid is ugly.
I'm a mopar guy but the Lincoln is a nicer looking car
The Lincolns averaged like 9 mpg, so there is no way the Imperial, with a bigger engine and huge weight, was averaging 19 mpg.
that is the "mpg" mileage run... and a mpg run. Meaning they accelerate easy and cruise at highways speed the whole time that maximized mpg(hyper miling). In reality daily driving is probably the same at 9-10 mpg
My '63 Imperial LeBaron with the high compression 413 with dual inline 4 bbls got 15mpg in town driving and 18mpg on the highway.
I’d buy the Lincoln !
The Imperial is a dinosaur
Yeah ROAR :) I think the Lincoln was the winner of that year :)
The Imperial is probably overall the better quality car , but it looks old fashioned , and not pretty , the headlights look bizarre .The Lincoln is a more basic body style, but is attractive .I thought there was a 2 door version of this Lincoln?
The elegant coupe body style debuted in 1966…or rather came back after the 1960 model year. I’ve always liked coupes…two-doors make for smoother lines.
2 door version from 1966.
Yes. The Lincoln looks like 'Jackie O. Kennedy' and the Imp is all 'Mamie Eisenhower '.
true the 62-63 Imperial was a refined vehicle...
The 64 Imperial was FAR better looking than the 63. It was designed by Elwood Engel the same person who designed the Continental. If Chrysler wanted to make a favorable comparison they should have waited one more year
oh stealing designers :)
So you mean to tell me in 61 years gas mileage has only increased to 25 mpg for big cars.
I'll take BOTH, and it l will wipe and wash and wax: and it STILL isn't a MERCEDES! 😞😄
Suddenly it’s 1958
you mean 1936? :)
The Imperial copied Lincoln's styling for 1964.
they were leaderless in 64... just went plain jane since Exner was gone.
The styling of the 64 Imperial is usually credited to Elwood Engel, who Chrysler acquired from Ford after he had a hand in the styling of the 61 Continental.
@@autochronicles8667Earle and Exner kinda stayed past their usefulness. The carryover 50s styling became cartoonish as the 60s got underway. Later in the 60s, Chrysler adopted the sharp Coke-bottle styling across its lineup. The 68 and 69 Chargers especially benefitted from that.
@@Pdraver333 he would have taken some time to get his influence in the pipeline. The middle ground between Exner health issues and Engel was limbo and random managers trying to figure out what to do.
For me, this Imp resembles Mercedes, while this Linc a family fridge does. And also, this Linc is for employee drivers, but not for this car owners.
Lincoln much better looking car, that Imperial, is just down right ugly
those floating headlights... yeah questionable choice :)
The Lincoln is an ugly car for sure with no styling to speak of, especially compared to the exquisite Imperial. Wish I had my '63 LeBaron back.