"WilliamsSW" (williamssw)
07/01/2019 at 10:49 • Filed to: It's not a Chrysler
0
24|
"WilliamsSW" (williamssw)
07/01/2019 at 10:49 • Filed to: It's not a Chrysler | 0
| 24 |
Ok I think I can see why many demolition derbies banned these...
nerd_racing
> WilliamsSW
07/01/2019 at 10:55 |
|
Pardon my ignorance, but what is this vehicle?
fintail
> WilliamsSW
07/01/2019 at 10:56 |
|
60s Imperial?
CalzoneGolem
> WilliamsSW
07/01/2019 at 10:57 |
|
Lot s of frame posted this morning haha
|
WilliamsSW
> nerd_racing
07/01/2019 at 10:58 |
|
It’s a 1960 Imperial Crown convertible. Same basic frame on all 57-66 Imperials, however.
|
WilliamsSW
> fintail
07/01/2019 at 11:00 |
|
Yep - the demo derby comment was the giveaway for old car fans.
This one in particular is on a 1960 Crown convertible listed for $ 40k on Hemmings. And it’s a project car.
|
WilliamsSW
> CalzoneGolem
07/01/2019 at 11:01 |
|
Lol totally unintentional on my part, I was browsing Hemming s and saw this.
I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker
> WilliamsSW
07/01/2019 at 11:01 |
|
Damn, that’s chunkier than a lot of trucks. What is that?
ranwhenparked
> WilliamsSW
07/01/2019 at 11:02 |
|
Clearly, Chrysler wasn't too concerned with minimizing material costs, saving weight, or fuel economy. It looks like the frame of the Empire State Building under there.
|
WilliamsSW
> I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker
07/01/2019 at 11:02 |
|
1960 Imperial Crown convertible
|
I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker
> WilliamsSW
07/01/2019 at 11:03 |
|
....the hell were those ever doing in demo derbies?
|
WilliamsSW
> I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker
07/01/2019 at 11:06 |
|
Winning.
Seriously, though, cars were basically thrown away within 5-10 years back then, especially in the rust belt, no matter how cool.
|
WilliamsSW
> ranwhenparked
07/01/2019 at 11:08 |
|
No fucks were given about any of those things.
They were trying to build the best car in the world - better than a Cadillac. In some ways, they achieved that, though they never sold many.
|
I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker
> WilliamsSW
07/01/2019 at 11:09 |
|
Fair enough.
Also, jack points? lmao, wherever!
|
ranwhenparked
> WilliamsSW
07/01/2019 at 11:09 |
|
Which, for a luxury car, is how it should be. Economizing and luxury really don't belong together.
RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht
> WilliamsSW
07/01/2019 at 11:09 |
|
The ‘64-’66 are the most epic. They reengineered the bodies to prepare for a switch to unibody, but were still putting them on top of... this.
|
WilliamsSW
> RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht
07/01/2019 at 11:17 |
|
From the ridiculous to the sublime...
|
WilliamsSW
> I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker
07/01/2019 at 11:18 |
|
Yeah, you have a few choices on where to put the jack under this car...
KnowsAboutCars
> WilliamsSW
07/01/2019 at 11:22 |
|
This brings to my mind that I once had an idea of building a lowrider out of one of these. Now I started thinking could that frame survive 3-wheeling or light hopping without bending with no reinforcements?
|
nerd_racing
> WilliamsSW
07/01/2019 at 11:29 |
|
No wonder they were so heavy! Still love their styling. I’ll take one with a Max wedge please.
|
WilliamsSW
> KnowsAboutCars
07/01/2019 at 11:30 |
|
Honestly, low rider culture is traditionally associated with the 1958-64 Impala - which has probably the lowest resistance to twist of any body on frame car of that era- really.
I don’t know what they do to beef those up, but I really don’t think they could handle the bouncing without reinforcement.
The GM X frame was designed to help lower the body, which is part of the attraction I think, but I wonder if the flex that frame allows makes for *better* 3 wheeling? You’d have to ask an expert on that - I suspect this frame could handle it, but might be too stiff to do it.
|
WilliamsSW
> nerd_racing
07/01/2019 at 11:36 |
|
That would be an easy drop in, since these Imperials only got the 392 hemi, then 413/440 wedges.
|
KnowsAboutCars
> WilliamsSW
07/01/2019 at 12:08 |
|
I’ve read some technical stuff about how they are built. They “wrap” frames. That means they weld thick steel plates onto the frame and control arms. You don’t want flex with the antics people do with hydros, it leads to bent frames and bodies.
The most popular explanation I’ve read on the popularity of Impalas is that they were cheap and plentiful during the time period. I guess the X-frame design might’ve played some part in it. Or people just thought Chevys looked better than Fords.
|
WilliamsSW
> KnowsAboutCars
07/01/2019 at 12:54 |
|
I suspect the X frame had something to do with the choice of Chevys. For one thing, although you occasionally see a 65+ low rider, they seem to be less common than the earlier cars. Perhaps it was because the absence of the side frame rail made it easier to lower the body/interior- I think that’s why GM designed that frame to begin with, and they’re not that plentiful outside of Chevrolet and Cadillac.
Welding plates into the frame makes sense - X frame cars are known for cracking at that center intersection under normal use. 3 wheeling seems implausible without frame and body damage on an unmodified car.
At any rate, a low rider Imperial would be awesome.
Bowtie_Guy
> WilliamsSW
07/02/2019 at 10:32 |
|
We have a small basically 0 rule Demo derby at the local county fair and one year a guy rolls in with a well used Imperial. I'm making dollar bets with my friends on the races & see this smashed up green monster roll in & go $20 he wins it all. First heat he hits a mint straight Caprice wagon and just folds it in half. It was brutal