You are here: Forums Classic Cars About The Mastadons...

About The Mastadons...

2 messages,  Last post on Oct 05, 2009 at 6:46 AM

You are in the Classic Cars Forum. Your Host is mr_shiftright

What is this discussion about? Chevrolet, Ford, Chrysler

Messages Page 1 of 1 All Messages Displayed

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#1 of 2 About The Mastadons... by hpmctorque Oct 02, 2009 (7:49 pm)
There were huge American and European cars in the '20s and '30s, but they for the rich. It wasn't until the second half of the '50s that Detroit began building large cars that were within the reach of the middle class. Then, shortly thereafter, in the late '50s, '60s and '70s, very large cars became common for buyers on a modest budget (think Chevy Biscayne, Ford Custom, Plymouth Fury I).   The terms large, very large and huge cars is somewhat subjective, of course, and size creep after WWII was gradual and uneven. For example, the first post-war redesigns were roughly the same size as the pre-war carryovers. However, the '57 and '58 Fords and Chevys, respectively, were considerably larger and less space efficient than their predecessors. Then, Chevy upped the size ante again in '59, and Ford played catch-up in 1960. There's little question that, to a great extent, Detroit was responding to buyers' preferences.   In my view, the '57 Ford Fairlane 500 is a good example of style over function, since it was significantly more highly styled, and less space efficient, than the '56 Ford.   It's interesting that as domestic cars grew larger, quality deteriorated. This may have been coincidental, but maybe not entirely.   There's no question that the size and power of the Big 3 gave them considerable latitude in terms of product offerings, but the fact that they introduced compacts in '60, and intermediates shortly thereafter, also demonstrates their responsiveness to public demand. This market segmentation was a very effective way for the Big 3 to increase sales and profits.   I've been pondering the post-WWII car size phenomenon for some time, and thought that others would have some interesting perspectives on this matter. The downsizings that began in '77, plus the role of the VW Beetle and the Japanese imports, are also very relevant to this general topic.
#2 of 2 I had a brush... by andre1969 Oct 05, 2009 (6:46 am)
with a 70's mastodon at Carlisle on Saturday, that left me a bit disappointed. I mentioned this elsewhere, but it was a '75 Caprice 4-door hardtop. Price seemed reasonable, $2950/OBO, and the body and interior looked fairly solid, other than the cracks in the dash that they all seem to develop. But then I noticed that it didn't have a/c. Which I could actually live with, if the car's priced accordingly.   However, I was really disappointed when I sat behind the wheel. I guess I just thought a car that size would have much more sprawl-out room. Now headroom was fine for me, and to get that much shoulder room in a modern vehicle, you probably need to get a full-sized pickup or Expedition or Suburban. This thing was a TRUE 6-passenger car. Provided, that is, the driver has short legs. And I don't.   The seat just didn't go back far enough for my tastes, leaving me too close to the steering wheel, and with too little legroom. Maybe a power seat/tilt wheel would have helped out here?   I've always admired these big '71-76 GM cars, and wouldn't mind having one, but after sitting in the Caprice, it left me a bit disillusioned, I guess. As big as that car is, I just think it should have more legroom up front! I mean, if Mopar could build a compact Dart that I fit fine in, and GM themselves can build a mid-sized LeMans that fits me perfectly, you'd think they could build a full-sized mastodon that fit me!   At first, I thought that perhaps the seat track was just not working right, but I tried moving the seat fore-aft a few times, and it seemed to hit solidly on a stop when it reached the end of its travel.   I think GM's big cars have always been a bit tight with legroom, though. My '67 Catalina convertible has less legroom than my Dart or LeMans, although I still find it better than that '75 Caprice. And one reason I have a preference for Mopar's '79-81 R-body is that they feel like they have a bit more legroom up front than GM's '77 era downsized cars, and especially Ford's '79 "Panthers". Although I think I've seen published specs that actually list the Fords has having the most legroom.

Messages Page 1 of 1 All Messages Displayed

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums Classic Cars About The Mastadons...