Ask the Car People.SM


Tulsa Belvedere Time Capsule... Bad Idea, Even Back Then! - READ ONLY

39 messages,  Last post on Jul 21, 2007 at 11:03 AM

You are in the Classic Cars - Archived Discussions Forum.

This discussion is ARCHIVED. To reactivate the discussion, post a request in the Lost In The Town Hall... discussion.

What is this discussion about? Classic Cars

Messages Page 1 of 4

#1 of 39 Tulsa Belvedere Time Capsule... Bad Idea, Even Back Then! by ponderpoint

Jun 19, 2007 (6:38 am)

Well they unearthed that 1957 Belvedere in Tulsa the other day. It was part of the time capsule they put in the ground back in 1957.... What a disaster! The car looked like a big mound of mud with fins!
 
Seems like back then somebody that had to exhume bodies for criminal/scientific fact-finding could have warned them it was a bad idea.... a really bad idea!
 
I think it's possible to time capsule a car, but it's always going to involve a dedicated climate controlled garage.
 
I don't know if it still exists (probably not) but I knew of a car dealership in a small town in Upstate New York that time-capsuled a brand-new Cadillac but they knew it would have to be in a garage. It was in a town called Whitesboro and it probably doesn't exist anymore... Trip Motorcars or "Tripps", I'm not sure. It was quite the spectacle back in the sixties and the car was already very old.
 
Probably the ideal place for "time-capsuling" a car would be in the desert with absolutely no moisture whatsoever.... Just keep it out of the sun.

#2 of 39 Re: Tulsa Belvedere Time Capsule... Bad Idea, Even Back Then! [ponderpoint] by andre1969

Jun 19, 2007 (6:46 am)

Replying to: ponderpoint (Jun 19, 2007 6:38 am)
Well, I guess it could've been worse! There's an old "Alfred Hitchcock Presents" episode about a stuffed racehorse that was used as a time capsule. It was aired in 1957, and no doubt influenced by the '57 Plymouth burial. Anyway, the guy who was preparing the racehorse for the time capsule got fed up with his brother-in-law, killed him, and stuffed the body inside the horse!
 
It would've been kinda creepy if they found a few skeletons in the trunk of that Belvedere.

#3 of 39 Re: Tulsa Belvedere Time Capsule... Bad Idea, Even Back Then! [andre1969] by Mr_Shiftright HOST

Jun 19, 2007 (7:35 am)

Replying to: andre1969 (Jun 19, 2007 6:46 am)
They really should have consulted a person who knew how cars deteriorate and under what conditions.
 
"Sealing" a car from the air is about the worst thing you can do to it. A car needs DRY but circulating air around it, and of course protection from rodents and from the corrosive action of its own fluids.
 
There are lots of subtle precautions...for instance, if you leave the differential full and there is moisture in the air---well, the bottom of the ring gear is saved by the oil but the top is exposed to moisture through the vent hole. So you get a half-good, half-rusted ring gear and a differential that will howl like the wind.
 
Best place for a car would be a wooden garage, de-humidified, with the car gently lifted off the tires, fluids drained, engine "pickled" with oil on the tops of the pistons, and a fan circulating air underneath, and all orifices plugged up like tail pipe and air filter, etc., to protect from rodents and insects. Do NOT cover the car!! A little dust never hurt it.
 
Those "bubble tents" are great...the car is encased in a dry, circulating air bubble and the plastic film never touches anything.
 
Of course, don't try and preserve a 1958 Plymouth, since that would have rusted by the time you got it from the dealer's showroom to the time capsule

#4 of 39 What it would've taken... by lemko

Jun 19, 2007 (7:47 am)

...to preserve that Plymouth for 50 years probably would've cost more than it was worth. I could've seen a Tulsa city council meeting going over the budget and seeing the unnecessary cost of preserving a 14 year-old car that was worth a couple hundred bucks in 1971.
 
The car probably would've been better off left in the local Chrysler-Plymouth dealer's garage for 50 years until the day the car would be trailered to the ceremony to be claimed by the winner or his heir.
 
By the way, did anybody claim the car?

#5 of 39 Re: Tulsa Belvedere Time Capsule... Bad Idea, Even Back Then! [Mr_Shiftrigh by british_rover

Jun 19, 2007 (7:51 am)

Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Jun 19, 2007 7:35 am)
Slightly off topic...
 
What you are saying kind of reminds me of the third Back to the Future movie where they had the Delorean stored in the mineshaft for 50 years.

#6 of 39 Re: What it would've taken... [lemko] by Mr_Shiftright HOST

Jun 19, 2007 (7:52 am)

Replying to: lemko (Jun 19, 2007 7:47 am)
I've inspected cars that were abandoned in people's garages in California for up to 40 years, without any attempt at preservation and they looked way better than that Plymouth. Sure, we had ruined tires, flat brakes, totally gummed up fuel systems, dried out leather and lots of spiders, but really the paint and chrome were still decent, the body was perfect of course, interior good. A couple of thousand bucks away from a clean #3 driver.

#7 of 39 I'm convinced... by lemko

Jun 19, 2007 (8:01 am)

...that Plymouth was submerged with groundwater at one point. Either that or the top of the vault leaked and often filled with rainwater from the surface. I wonder if a series of drains system on the bottom of the vault would've helped?
 
Somebody mentioned experts who exhume bodies for forensic examination. I don't know, but when a casket is removed from the concrete vault, is the vault often filled with groundwater which deteriorates the casket? If that's the case, the dummies in Tulsa would've realized what a poor idea it was to bury a car in a similar structure.

#8 of 39 I think one of the articles... by andre1969

Jun 19, 2007 (8:26 am)

did mention that the vault had filled up with water and had to be pumped out. If the purse with the contents in the glovebox had deteriorated to mush, it's a good chance that the water swelled up pretty high.
 
Actually, I'm surprised that the Plymouth's glovebox liner didn't fall out. Back then, they just used cardboard, which is okay I guess, as long as it doesn't get wet. More upscale cars, like my '57 DeSoto, used a cardboard lined with some fuzzy material that was soft to the touch, but it was still just cardboard.
 
If Tulsa's climate is anything like Oklahoma City's, they probably could've just parked the thing under a carport and it would've survived pretty well. I was out in Oklahoma City in 1995, and visited a few junkyards while I was out there, and rust seemed a pretty rare sight. Usually, you'd just see the type of scale that forms when the paint and primer fades down to the bare metal, and you get a little bit of scale on the exposed metal, kinda like what you'd get on a shovel or ho left out in the rain.

#9 of 39 Re: What it would've taken... [lemko] by ponderpoint

Jun 19, 2007 (8:35 am)

Replying to: lemko (Jun 19, 2007 7:47 am)
"unnecessary cost of preserving a 14 year-old car that was worth a couple hundred bucks in 1971."
 
Yeah, why a 57 Belvedere? Seems kind of obscure. Was that the end-all beat-all car at the time? Anybody here in the discussion that was in a semi-conscious state back in 1957? Was that a popular car? I realize at the time, nobody knows that a particular car will someday become wildly popular with collectors (57 Chevy), but a Belvedere?...

#10 of 39 Re: What it would've taken... [ponderpoint] by andre1969

Jun 19, 2007 (8:53 am)

Replying to: ponderpoint (Jun 19, 2007 8:35 am)
Yeah, why a 57 Belvedere? Seems kind of obscure. Was that the end-all beat-all car at the time? Anybody here in the discussion that was in a semi-conscious state back in 1957? Was that a popular car? I realize at the time, nobody knows that a particular car will someday become wildly popular with collectors (57 Chevy), but a Belvedere?...
 
Actually, in 1957, the Plymouth, and all Chrysler products in general, were considered to be the most modern, futuristic cars out there. General Motors and Ford still sold more cars, overall, than the Chrysler corporation, mainly because they had a larger dealer network and larger manufacturing capacity.
 
Still, in 1957, Plymouth sold about 750,000 cars. Ford and Chevy each sold about 1.5 million, or about double. However, usually, Ford or Chevy outsold Plymouth by more like 3:1, so getting that ratio down to 2:1 was really saying something.
 
The '57 Chevy was actually considered to be pretty clunky and outdated at the time. It was on a platform that was entering its third year of production. With the exception of Pontiac and the declining independent brands, everything else was all-new that year. The entire Ford/Mopar lineup, as well as Buick, Olds, and Cadillac.
 
The '57 Mopar lineup also played a major influence on Detroit styling. While the Buick/Olds/Cadillacs were all-new that year, compared to the Mopar products they looked outdated the second they hit the showroom. That sent GM scrambling back to the drawing board to come up with what would end up being the 1959 lineup.
 
Now, while the 1959 GM cars left plenty to be desired, style-wise, once you cleaned up the excess, shaved off the tailfins, and straightened out the dogleg A-pillar, you pretty much had the standard template for your typical 1960's car.
 
And from what I've heard, GM's original plans for just facelifting the 1958 design and using that as the 1959 lineup, was pretty hideous, in and of itself. One idea I heard thrown around was a "central" theme for the 1959 Chevy, along the lines of the Edsel's "horsecollar/toilet seat/unmentionable-in-a-family-friendly-environment" grille, or the Tucker's third headlight. So maybe it's a good thing those planned 1959's never matieralized!
 
The main thing that shot the 1957 Plymouth in the foot was rust resistance. I'd imagine that, from a modern standpoint, rust resistance on just about ANY 1957 car is going to be considered laughable, but Plymouth's was pretty bad at the time. The '57 Mopars were rushed into production, about a year too early, and because they were so popular initially, they had to slap them together all the much more quickly to get them out the door. That was none too good for quality control. Plus, to make matters worse, the 1949-54, and 1955-56 Mopars, were pretty solid, sturdy cars in comparison, and a tough act to follow when it came to quality.

Messages Page 1 of 4

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement