The '53 Chevy 210 and Plym Cranbrook were dull to the max but sold millions of cars. The Sun Valley was a gorgeous car. Who is calling these cars silly ? I think these presentations are silly
My Grandfather drove his light green Plymouth up and down Sepulveda from Venice to San Pedro and back before the 405 existed . It never failed him as it was a very reliable car with that 3 on the tree . A day gone by
The Nash was a great vehicle. The Hudson set may track records. The Studebaker filled niche with a car that would go anywhere it was pointed at a cost many could afford. My recommendation - make a copy of this video and bury it in your garden. THEN just watch how fast the crops grow!
I pretty much agree with your post, but one small correction The Hudson Hornet was the one that dominated stock car racing (for a few years), not the Pacemaker. 😉
@@UberLummox No I didn’t but I’m not surprised. I don’t know much about the Scotsman so I thought the first car it showed in that section was a 1957 Scotsman. I did notice that they showed a lot of Studebaker cars that were not Scotsmans *(Scotsmen? I don’t know.)* which is what they did for every car they talked about. I nominate this for one of the top ten silliest and most misleading videos of all time.
These cars are beautiful and so much a part of our culture and history . These cars provided freedom and that was most important . I love all the original colors and American styling that is still copied today
You failed to show a single Scottsman model in your entire Studebaker segment. A "cautionary tale" of AI generated horsh!t gone wrong! Thanks for the laugh! 🤣
Mercury Monterey Sun valley was a bold attempt at the future . A nice V-8 was beneficial however the roof was a bad idea . A convertible was the answer
I had a chance to buy one of these about 25 years ago from an estate sale. The car was all original, in running condition, and in decent shape overall. I've always regretted not buying it, they are pretty rare. I've not seen one since.
The first two cars you showed on video were a Dodge and a Hudson. My first car was my grandma's '49 Dodge Coronet Club Coupe. My great uncle had an impressive 1950 Hudson Commodore two-tone sedan.
I nominate this for one of the 7 silliest and most misleading videos of all time. I wonder if it’s made deliberately misleading just to generate a lot of negative comments because even negative comments are engagement which helps the algorithm. If someone who doesn’t know much about the cars of the 1950s watches this video they will come away more misinformed than informed. Would it be too much effort to show pictures of the cars you’re talking about, instead of other cars so the viewer isn’t looking at a Bel Air and thinking it’s a 210? Just about everything it says about the Hudson Pacemaker is wrong. While talking about the reliable but sluggish flathead six, they show a picture of the Twin H Power six which was a 308 cubic inch, high *(for the time)* compression ratio, high performance engine which dominated stock car racing when they really did race stock cars. That’s because the company made performance a priority. The six cylinder engine in the Pacemaker was basically the same engine but while it was a lower performance version than the one in the Hornet it was still putting out plenty of power. It wasn’t sluggish for 1951. … “Its bulky frame seemed rooted in a bygone era.” No. That’s 100% wrong. While the Pacemaker was not the top of the line Hornet 🐝 it did have the same “step down” frame which was definitely NOT rooted in a bygone era. While other early post war cars were warmed over versions of their pre war models, the Hudson body was built around the frame instead of on top of it. That’s similar to what customizers were doing when they channeled their cars. Far from “boxy” the Hudson was quite curvaceous. Hudson was a true pacemaker for post war automobile innovation. It’s really too bad they were going broke and had to merge with Nash Kelvinator and fold into AMC but that certainly didn’t happen because they made inferior products. I’ll be sure and remember not to click on this channel’s videos again.
Whaaaat? - Who in hell talk such crap? The AI voices sucks! The choice is more as ridicolous. Taste is in the eye of the beholder. I do like them all! You've got no clue at all!
As far as I'm concerned, GM invented the modern automobile in the 1960s. They were not underpowered, or over styled, nor did they have any ridiculous features. That began in 1963 with the Chevrolet Impalas.. Chrysler caught up quickly with the Roadrunners, Demons and Satellites, as Ford did with the 1965 model line (the LTDs, the Mustangs etc.). People would not find cars from the 1950s as "iconic" if they ever actually had to drive one.
I disagree with everything you said. You were constantly contradicting yourself, do you get it. If a car built in that era when the competition was on every street corner and the public had money to spend, a vehicle that reached the required sales figures must have been a successful model. You gotta be reprogrammed again with some extra gigabytes. Hey it's not your fault you can't help it your probably doing your best but it you'll be replaced and be shifted into the back room and put in the corner with no window view. Most of these cars are around 76yrs old and are loved and have feelings 😂
hey voice guy....saying two hundred and ten again and again is like running fingernails on a chalkboard.....it's two-ten...one-ffty...."and" is not proper English when it comes to voicing voicing numbers.
► Watch this video: 30 Silliest Pickups Trucks of All Time! You've Never Seen Before!: ➜ th-cam.com/video/avJL7dxgF1E/w-d-xo.htmlsi=sCyKS9x_Nuz5Xrfs
The '53 Chevy 210 and Plym Cranbrook were dull to the max but sold millions of cars. The Sun Valley was a gorgeous car. Who is calling these cars silly ? I think these presentations are silly
My Grandfather drove his light green Plymouth up and down Sepulveda from Venice to San Pedro and back before the 405 existed . It never failed him as it was a very reliable car with that 3 on the tree . A day gone by
I love those old cars. Miss them immensely.
Vehicles shown do not reflect those being described.
They never have. The entire channel is pretty bad.
The Silliest Video
Week said. Videos are interesting, even exciting. A/I narrative is laughable. Such a waste. This could have been a great post.
The Nash was a great vehicle. The Hudson set may track records. The Studebaker filled niche with a car that would go anywhere it was pointed at a cost many could afford.
My recommendation - make a copy of this video and bury it in your garden. THEN just watch how fast the crops grow!
I pretty much agree with your post, but one small correction The Hudson Hornet was the one that dominated stock car racing (for a few years), not the Pacemaker. 😉
Did you notice how he never showed a single Scotsman in the entire Studebaker segment? 🤣
@@UberLummox
No I didn’t but I’m not surprised. I don’t know much about the Scotsman so I thought the first car it showed in that section was a 1957 Scotsman. I did notice that they showed a lot of Studebaker cars that were not Scotsmans *(Scotsmen? I don’t know.)* which is what they did for every car they talked about.
I nominate this for one of the top ten silliest and most misleading videos of all time.
Yes, I see what you’re saying. *(Bullsh)* it makes great fertilizer.
Studebakers were cars of the future when it came to budget friendly . Look at plastic and tiny cars of today
These cars are beautiful and so much a part of our culture and history . These cars provided freedom and that was most important . I love all the original colors and American styling that is still copied today
I strongly disagree with the opinions expressed in this video. I would be proud to own many of these cars.
Ah yes, the Hudson “Twin H-Power.” TWO one-barrel carbs! WOW! 😁
You failed to show a single Scottsman model in your entire Studebaker segment.
A "cautionary tale" of AI generated horsh!t gone wrong! Thanks for the laugh! 🤣
Mercury Monterey Sun valley was a bold attempt at the future . A nice V-8 was beneficial however the roof was a bad idea . A convertible was the answer
I had a chance to buy one of these about 25 years ago from an estate sale. The car was all original, in running condition, and in decent shape overall. I've always regretted not buying it, they are pretty rare. I've not seen one since.
The first two cars you showed on video were a Dodge and a Hudson. My first car was my grandma's '49 Dodge Coronet Club Coupe. My great uncle had an impressive 1950 Hudson Commodore two-tone sedan.
Wunderbare und schöne Pkws.
Dummer Bericht!
My mom drove a Rambler Cross Country in pink and white. I remember being embarrassed to be seen in the thing.
I nominate this for one of the 7 silliest and most misleading videos of all time. I wonder if it’s made deliberately misleading just to generate a lot of negative comments because even negative comments are engagement which helps the algorithm.
If someone who doesn’t know much about the cars of the 1950s watches this video they will come away more misinformed than informed.
Would it be too much effort to show pictures of the cars you’re talking about, instead of other cars so the viewer isn’t looking at a Bel Air and thinking it’s a 210?
Just about everything it says about the Hudson Pacemaker is wrong.
While talking about the reliable but sluggish flathead six, they show a picture of the Twin H Power six which was a 308 cubic inch, high *(for the time)* compression ratio, high performance engine which dominated stock car racing when they really did race stock cars. That’s because the company made performance a priority. The six cylinder engine in the Pacemaker was basically the same engine but while it was a lower performance version than the one in the Hornet it was still putting out plenty of power. It wasn’t sluggish for 1951.
… “Its bulky frame seemed rooted in a bygone era.” No. That’s 100% wrong. While the Pacemaker was not the top of the line Hornet 🐝 it did have the same “step down” frame which was definitely NOT rooted in a bygone era. While other early post war cars were warmed over versions of their pre war models, the Hudson body was built around the frame instead of on top of it. That’s similar to what customizers were doing when they channeled their cars. Far from “boxy” the Hudson was quite curvaceous. Hudson was a true pacemaker for post war automobile innovation. It’s really too bad they were going broke and had to merge with Nash Kelvinator and fold into AMC but that certainly didn’t happen because they made inferior products.
I’ll be sure and remember not to click on this channel’s videos again.
These AI narrations are a pain. The algorithm doesn't sync images with narrative.
Nor ideas with facts.
my fave was my 1954 Chevy two door.
Might be a good channel if any of the described vehicles actually were shown when being described. That said, lots of cool vintage cars to be seen.
while riding in my Cadillac, what to my surprise...
Hudson had great areo-dynamic styling that was used in films , classic comix and more . Very popular in Japan
I thought the mouldings looked stupid, i like my mouldings straight.
Doc Hudson, (Cars), was a Hudson Hornet.
Powerglide, (two speed auto), had no passing power.
The rambler was not a station wagen.
You couldn't get a manual with 8 cyls.
Whaaaat? - Who in hell talk such crap? The AI voices sucks! The choice is more as ridicolous. Taste is in the eye of the beholder. I do like them all! You've got no clue at all!
It's the cheesy repetitive writing that sucks so hard. Much worse than the voice.
No one ever exept this guy called it a two hunred and ten.
Or the one hundred and fifty! Where do they get that stuff ?
@@glennso47 AI written. It's all fake horsh!t. Much like the "opinions" contained within.
As far as I'm concerned, GM invented the modern automobile in the 1960s. They were not underpowered, or over styled, nor did they have any ridiculous features. That began in 1963 with the Chevrolet Impalas.. Chrysler caught up quickly with the Roadrunners, Demons and Satellites, as Ford did with the 1965 model line (the LTDs, the Mustangs etc.). People would not find cars from the 1950s as "iconic" if they ever actually had to drive one.
I disagree with everything you said. You were constantly contradicting yourself, do you get it. If a car built in that era when the competition was on every street corner and the public had money to spend, a vehicle that reached the required sales figures must have been a successful model. You gotta be reprogrammed again with some extra gigabytes. Hey it's not your fault you can't help it your probably doing your best but it you'll be replaced and be shifted into the back room and put in the corner with no window view. Most of these cars are around 76yrs old and are loved and have feelings 😂
youth is wasted on the young...
Who the hell is rolling out these silly AI videos about cars? Sounds like they're running out of ideas.
How could you call a Bel Air luxurious, you think it’s just like a Cadillac? I think not!
hey voice guy....saying two hundred and ten again and again is like running fingernails on a chalkboard.....it's two-ten...one-ffty...."and" is not proper English when it comes to voicing voicing numbers.
What tiresome crap....how about some facts?
Your AI sounds human, american, and kinda articulate. but out of touch with automotive history.