The 1961 Dodge Dart/Polara and 1961 Plymouth were highly controversial when new and sold poorly... whereas the full-size 1961 Chevrolet had strong sales. General Motors abandoned the deep well trunk after 1964 because some of its customers complained about the inconvenience of filling the gas tank on only one side of the car. Crank ventiplanes were also a class exclusive in the low-price full-size market (both Ford and Plymouth didn't use them). The center glove box was a great design but it didn't catch on with customers long enough to stick around.
Yeah, um, about that X frame.......it's all good until you get T-boned. I'd sure hate to have to pay for those "complicated repairs" on the highly reliable self adjusters on those Ford brakes. Gotta watch out for thing like that!
Yeah that X frame... I mean CMON its NOT boxy! It's got to be better right? it's like a bridge! with a really really weak point in the middle of that bridge.... I would HAVE loved to see the internal GM "Memo's" on the x-frame design meetings... They had to be "omfg fire the guy that designed the x-frame!!!". I have bulletins on the x-frame... wow they are doosies.
The X-frame isn’t my favorite feature, it was all perimeter frames after ‘64, so Chevrolet engineers agree. But when you get t-boned, it’s structural sheet metal protecting you in either case. The frame is down low; the only thing between you and the car hitting you is the metal body. If the X-frame was dangerous, unibodies were even worse.
As the film noted early on, the Fords, except for the Galaxie, were comparable to the Meteor 600 and 800 sedans, You may also remember the 1961 Mercury was billing itself as "the BETTER low-priced car," which in itself was a major letdown after four years of the unique body shared only with the 1958 Edsel Corsair and Citation
The Chevrolet people really nit-picked throughout the entire video here. The only substantial thing on Chevrolet's side was the lower trunk height. Of course, they didn't say any about the dangerous X-Frame in all the GM cars with no side protection at all.
Owned 2 61 Chevys, a Bel-Air with a 283 and Biscayne with the blue flame six. They were both awesome cars. I loved the overhanging rear edge of the roof. Very unusual and got plenty of comments in the 80's.
I took a 1961 Brookwood parenthesis Biscayne) wagon to college in the early 70s with the blue flame 63 on the tree and not a single option including a fresh air heater. But it never broke. It was a great car.
The 1961 Meteor/Monterey were downgraded from the full-size 1960 Mercury which used both a body and chassis that were distinctly different than the big Ford models. This downgrade was ordered by Robert McNamara as a cost savings due to the massive financial losses from both the Edsel and 1958-1960 Lincoln.
I remember seeing a series of Ford ads comparing the Ford full-perimeter frame to Chevy's X-frame. It is also telling that Pontiac used a similar X-frame in 1959 and 1960, but reverted to a full-perimeter frame for 1961. I also have a Buyer's Guide for the 1961 Mercurys and Meteors that noted Chevy had sheet metal under its front and rear bumpers, where Ford and Mercury had full depth wraparound bumpers. So you paid your money and took your choice!
x frame was a disaster... jacking up the car on one corner would twist the car bad... they sent notices to the service stations to be careful of jacking them up... told them to use the lifts and be extra careful.
My dad was a Chrysler man, and my uncle was a Chevrolet man. Everyone always said Chrysler cars rusted. My uncle washed and waxed his Chevrolets all the time and they sat in a garage. His 59 Bel Air rusted on the tops of the front fenders just behind the headlights. His 62 Bel Air the rear body mounts rusted away so when you hit a bump the body bounced up off of the frame. His 65 Bel Air rusted around the wheel wells and dog legs. The 68 Chevelle rusted around the wheel wells and the top left of the windshield. His 74 Nova lost the rear bumper after going over a big bump. They all ran great and were dependable and that is probably why he kept buying them.
All the cars rusted if you look back. Certain cars did have trouble spots where water and dirt would collect and rust out near instantly because it would hold wet mud... add in salt and that was a killer... It's funny when I work on old cars, I can sit back and go "WTF, that's a horrible design, made to rust out... ". Mopars started dipping the whole body in 1960 with the unibody but they got a bad rep in 57-58. I don't think manufacturers cared since people were buying cars every 2-3 years. The 57-58 Mopars had some leaking issues and some trouble spots, the rockers would clog up(they had like 6 venturis) but they were too small..
@@autochronicles8667 What I am saying is so many people thought Chevrolets were so superior those days So many Chevrolet owners really felt this way and so often I heard I would never buy this or that because they rust. I just got so sick of their Chevrolet was so superior attitude. I know they all rusted I am 71 as of 2024. What I am saying is I saw those rusted Chevies. That is the reason for every new car back then .
I remember how you could run a powerglide equipped Chevy out to sixty MPH. in low range. And I remember how you just heard that one shift and that was it, ONE.
The U.S. 61 Mercury Meteor... different from the Canadian Meteor... was the one year that Mercury offered a straight six in their "600" full size car. Canadian Meteors could get a 6.
How about the '61 Pontiac , it would probably have been my pick for that year. I've been wondering, where would you have seen these brand comparison films back then ? on TV ? or at the movies?, or at the dealership ?
I think this is an example of dealer sale’s training. Could you imagine having to watch this in a room filled with cigarette smoke…everyone in a shirt and tie.
@@JustMe-pc2ii A room full of regular guys that look like Michael Douglas's character in the movie " Falling Down " , yeah, I'd feel comfortable in that setting.
These were confidential.... the public never saw these... Many say "confidential" on the box and documentation. I have a couple "salesman" tactics videos I will be putting out. Everyone basically knows the tricks but it's funny to see the company actually suggest tactics which are not exactly honest :)
@@autochronicles8667 Yeah, the '61 Edsel wasn't too bad ,by that time they'd refrained from having a womans thing on the front, but I'd rather have a '61 Galaxie. If the '61 Pontiac is Chevy like ,then so be it, I really like the grille , my favorite is the 2 door sedan.
Yep: Rather than buy a pick-up truck to haul milk cans in, I'll ride them around in the truck of my Chevrolet and hope I don't get stuck in cow poop on the way out
I had a chance to view a vintage '61 Chevy Biscayne police car belonging to the town of Tuxedo, NY. The car was in very good shape for its age but the factory fit and finish was horrible.
Things start sagging after a while :) The fit and finish on the older cars were suspect at time... I think it depends on how much beer the assembly guys drank at lunch that day :) I bet Monday builds were rough...
the 409 required 5 quarts... but I can imagine how many of those were filled with 4 quarts... You local gas station guy was like "chevys" only use 4... then... a guy with a 409 pulls in.
I remember when all these cars were new. I would have to pick in 61 the Chevrolet even though I have always preferred Fords. I would have it with a 348 4 speed. The 61 Ford was ugly.
When I was 16 my cousin had a 1960 Bel Air with a 348 and trips or better known as three two barrel carbs and a three speed. My uncle would disconnect the two outer carbs so my cousin only had the center two barrel carb. After we left the house my cousin would find a place to pull over and reconnect those carbs. Man what a runner it was. One time he missed second gear and I thought he had blown the engine, but nope we were OK. Before we went back to his house he would pull over and disconnect those carbs and my uncle never knew. Miss those days.
Well they were much simpler that's for sure... and they will run a very long time with regular maintenance. Nowdays the computer will go out after 5 years.. then they don't make them anymore.. and they have made sure you can't program them yourself... These cars need to run when you put a ECU in them... The factory makes sure it wont when you try to replace an electronic part.. YOU NEED to have a dealer with a 20k computer hit the okay button... We truly need to pass a "right to repair" law. That looks at the practices dealership/manufacturers put thing in place to STOP you being able to repair your own vehicle on PURPOSE.
![[Dealer Film] 1953 Plymouth versus Chevrolet film strip... Plymouth fights back](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/_zyZ-XtCqUw/mqdefault.jpg)
![[Dealer Film] 1953 Plymouth versus Chevrolet film strip... Plymouth fights back](/img/tr.png)
![[Dealer Film] 1961 Ford Vs Chevy, Ford takes some good shots! Colorized](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/sQ0lRgJaw8M/mqdefault.jpg)
The 1961 Dodge Dart/Polara and 1961 Plymouth were highly controversial when new and sold poorly... whereas the full-size 1961 Chevrolet had strong sales. General Motors abandoned the deep well trunk after 1964 because some of its customers complained about the inconvenience of filling the gas tank on only one side of the car. Crank ventiplanes were also a class exclusive in the low-price full-size market (both Ford and Plymouth didn't use them). The center glove box was a great design but it didn't catch on with customers long enough to stick around.
I had a 61 Inpala 4 door Hardtop and a 61 Parkwood wagon. Both great cars
“Man-sized door handles”
Whattt😂😂😂
I guess an attempt to call them "dainty". I actually like the refrigerator handles better...
When you rolled a Chevrolet, those buttons often got pushed in and the door came open.
I knew somebody would notice that besides me!
Yeah, um, about that X frame.......it's all good until you get T-boned. I'd sure hate to have to pay for those "complicated repairs" on the highly reliable self adjusters on those Ford brakes. Gotta watch out for thing like that!
Yeah that X frame... I mean CMON its NOT boxy! It's got to be better right? it's like a bridge! with a really really weak point in the middle of that bridge.... I would HAVE loved to see the internal GM "Memo's" on the x-frame design meetings... They had to be "omfg fire the guy that designed the x-frame!!!". I have bulletins on the x-frame... wow they are doosies.
Those X frames are also known to be super unsafe in frontal collisions
The X-frame isn’t my favorite feature, it was all perimeter frames after ‘64, so Chevrolet engineers agree. But when you get t-boned, it’s structural sheet metal protecting you in either case. The frame is down low; the only thing between you and the car hitting you is the metal body. If the X-frame was dangerous, unibodies were even worse.
Wonder why they didn't compare the full-size Fords? Also, that fantastic lacquer paint was eventually discontinued by GM.... for enamel.
Yeah, history would disagree with some "points" :)
Just like the one-key system
@@LearnAboutFlow Which they eventually went *back* to in the '90s.
As the film noted early on, the Fords, except for the Galaxie, were comparable to the Meteor 600 and 800 sedans, You may also remember the 1961 Mercury was billing itself as "the BETTER low-priced car," which in itself was a major letdown after four years of the unique body shared only with the 1958 Edsel Corsair and Citation
I've always found the 1961 Chevy attractive.
I've always found the 1961 Plymouth amusing.
The Chevrolet people really nit-picked throughout the entire video here. The only substantial thing on Chevrolet's side was the lower trunk height. Of course, they didn't say any about the dangerous X-Frame in all the GM cars with no side protection at all.
My parents had a 1961 Dodge Dart Pioneer sedan - I have always wanted a Polara just for the cool taillights!
All three cars were pretty great in 61... The race was in full swing.
Owned 2 61 Chevys, a Bel-Air with a 283 and Biscayne with the blue flame six. They were both awesome cars. I loved the overhanging rear edge of the roof. Very unusual and got plenty of comments in the 80's.
283 was 8cyl 6cyl 235 cu in
I took a 1961 Brookwood parenthesis Biscayne) wagon to college in the early 70s with the blue flame 63 on the tree and not a single option including a fresh air heater. But it never broke. It was a great car.
The 61 Chevy was so far ahead of the competition.
The 1961 Meteor/Monterey were downgraded from the full-size 1960 Mercury which used both a body and chassis that were distinctly different than the big Ford models. This downgrade was ordered by Robert McNamara as a cost savings due to the massive financial losses from both the Edsel and 1958-1960 Lincoln.
Did they carry around a lotta milk and eggs in the olden days???
You bet, it was 1961 and there were farms every where.I worked on one.
they mention this for rural sales :)
Maybe their Chevrolet truck would not start so you could take your farm products to market. Always good to have a backup plan.
409 Chebbies had nothing on 413 and 383 Mopars.
Some 406 Fords would outrun 409s on a longer stretch than a quarter mile.
@Rick-S-6063 and then there was the nastiest thing to come out later in '61 which was the 421SD Pontiac.
I'm always a sucker for tailfins, and by that metric the Ford wins by a mile... The polara is a close second
Chevy had optical illusion tail fins from the sides
I remember seeing a series of Ford ads comparing the Ford full-perimeter frame to Chevy's X-frame. It is also telling that Pontiac used a similar X-frame in 1959 and 1960, but reverted to a full-perimeter frame for 1961. I also have a Buyer's Guide for the 1961 Mercurys and Meteors that noted Chevy had sheet metal under its front and rear bumpers, where Ford and Mercury had full depth wraparound bumpers. So you paid your money and took your choice!
x frame was a disaster... jacking up the car on one corner would twist the car bad... they sent notices to the service stations to be careful of jacking them up... told them to use the lifts and be extra careful.
My dad was a Chrysler man, and my uncle was a Chevrolet man. Everyone always said Chrysler cars rusted. My uncle washed and waxed his Chevrolets all the time and they sat in a garage. His 59 Bel Air rusted on the tops of the front fenders just behind the headlights. His 62 Bel Air the rear body mounts rusted away so when you hit a bump the body bounced up off of the frame. His 65 Bel Air rusted around the wheel wells and dog legs. The 68 Chevelle rusted around the wheel wells and the top left of the windshield. His 74 Nova lost the rear bumper after going over a big bump. They all ran great and were dependable and that is probably why he kept buying them.
All the cars rusted if you look back. Certain cars did have trouble spots where water and dirt would collect and rust out near instantly because it would hold wet mud... add in salt and that was a killer... It's funny when I work on old cars, I can sit back and go "WTF, that's a horrible design, made to rust out... ". Mopars started dipping the whole body in 1960 with the unibody but they got a bad rep in 57-58. I don't think manufacturers cared since people were buying cars every 2-3 years. The 57-58 Mopars had some leaking issues and some trouble spots, the rockers would clog up(they had like 6 venturis) but they were too small..
@@autochronicles8667 What I am saying is so many people thought Chevrolets were so superior those days So many Chevrolet owners really felt this way and so often I heard I would never buy this or that because they rust. I just got so sick of their Chevrolet was so superior attitude. I know they all rusted I am 71 as of 2024. What I am saying is I saw those rusted Chevies. That is the reason for every new car back then .
Slip and slide power glide.
lol them's fighting words!
I remember how you could run a powerglide equipped Chevy out to sixty MPH. in low range. And I remember how you just heard that one shift and that was it, ONE.
The U.S. 61 Mercury Meteor... different from the Canadian Meteor... was the one year that Mercury offered a straight six in their "600" full size car.
Canadian Meteors could get a 6.
Sort of like Chevrolet, Pontiac, Olds, and Buick. Corp cousins. but they did not mention that when talking about the Chrysler cars. They all did it.
How about the '61 Pontiac , it would probably have been my pick for that year. I've been wondering, where would you have seen these brand comparison films back then ? on TV ? or at the movies?, or at the dealership ?
I think this is an example of dealer sale’s training. Could you imagine having to watch this in a room filled with cigarette smoke…everyone in a shirt and tie.
@@JustMe-pc2ii A room full of regular guys that look like Michael Douglas's character in the movie " Falling Down " , yeah, I'd feel comfortable in that setting.
These were confidential.... the public never saw these... Many say "confidential" on the box and documentation. I have a couple "salesman" tactics videos I will be putting out. Everyone basically knows the tricks but it's funny to see the company actually suggest tactics which are not exactly honest :)
What about the 61 Edsel? that was nice also... But cmon for Pontiac you gotta go 59 and 60 :) the 61 Pontiac was kind of very "Chevy"...
@@autochronicles8667 Yeah, the '61 Edsel wasn't too bad ,by that time they'd refrained from having a womans thing on the front, but I'd rather have a '61 Galaxie. If the '61 Pontiac is Chevy like ,then so be it, I really like the grille , my favorite is the 2 door sedan.
Yep: Rather than buy a pick-up truck to haul milk cans in, I'll ride them around in the truck of my Chevrolet and hope I don't get stuck in cow poop on the way out
Weight to aid traction in the winter.
You can't put the whole family in the pickup! I mean if your going to town to sell the milk and eggs... everyone wants to go!
Gimme a Chevy any time !
I had a chance to view a vintage '61 Chevy Biscayne police car belonging to the town of Tuxedo, NY. The car was in very good shape for its age but the factory fit and finish was horrible.
Things start sagging after a while :) The fit and finish on the older cars were suspect at time... I think it depends on how much beer the assembly guys drank at lunch that day :) I bet Monday builds were rough...
A v8 only needing 4 quarts of oil means less of a safety margin. 5 quarts is better.
the 409 required 5 quarts... but I can imagine how many of those were filled with 4 quarts... You local gas station guy was like "chevys" only use 4... then... a guy with a 409 pulls in.
I'd rather have a '61 Imperial - beats anything on the road then and CERTAINLY NOW!
60 Imperial for me :)
@@autochronicles8667 I'll take TWO of those! One in formal black, the other as a red convertible with a white top!
who drives around with milk cans in the trunk ?
I am not buying their story about their stout frame. I think what they had before looked a lot better.
I would never buy a car that couldn’t carry my milk cans?
I remember when all these cars were new. I would have to pick in 61 the Chevrolet even though I have always preferred Fords. I would have it with a 348 4 speed. The 61 Ford was ugly.
I think for 61... my finalists are Chevy, Edsel, Lincoln, Chrysler...
@@autochronicles8667 The last Edsel was in 1960. It didn't return for 1961.
@@autochronicles8667 Edsel was only made in 58, 59, and 60.
@@autochronicles8667show us a film of the 61 Edsel! Canon, I dare you! LOL 😆 😂😅.
When I was 16 my cousin had a 1960 Bel Air with a 348 and trips or better known as three two barrel carbs and a three speed. My uncle would disconnect the two outer carbs so my cousin only had the center two barrel carb. After we left the house my cousin would find a place to pull over and reconnect those carbs. Man what a runner it was. One time he missed second gear and I thought he had blown the engine, but nope we were OK. Before we went back to his house he would pull over and disconnect those carbs and my uncle never knew. Miss those days.
Even the worst car in 1961 is definitely better built and has a longer lifespan than any expensive plastic pile of crap they call a car nowadays.
Well they were much simpler that's for sure... and they will run a very long time with regular maintenance. Nowdays the computer will go out after 5 years.. then they don't make them anymore.. and they have made sure you can't program them yourself... These cars need to run when you put a ECU in them... The factory makes sure it wont when you try to replace an electronic part.. YOU NEED to have a dealer with a 20k computer hit the okay button... We truly need to pass a "right to repair" law. That looks at the practices dealership/manufacturers put thing in place to STOP you being able to repair your own vehicle on PURPOSE.
Sounded like Chevrolet said fu lefthanders, you're inferior