1961 Impala SS 409

[BleachedAnusDawg]

That's stunning. I hate Chevy and GM so that's hard to say.

I have to admit the Chev is prettier, but this one looks good in a convertible and the 409 couldn't hang with a 413 max wedge. Nothing could.View attachment 46409

This is a 62 Dart, btw.

My first car was a 62 Lancer, somewhat similar in body style but with a slant six and push button automatic. My dad actually put a 318 with a 4 barrel and 4 speed manual transmission in it for me. Similar to this one but the lower body was black.

Everyone from my Great Grand Dad to my dad was a Chevy Dealer. GM is king of the 60s. Ford and Chrysler can fuck off.

I would not. touch a Chevy or Dodge with a 10ft pole right now.

Chevy (GM) and Dodge make the coolest performance stuff right now, by far.

 

[Swaye]

I'll take a Porsche 911. German precision.

And an old vintage Jeep, of course. I love the old vintage boats but keeping my fleet of Jeeps running is enough for me.

edit: I will admit for the right GTO or 442 I might reevaluate my position somewhat.

 

[ChillyDawg]

1964 Impala SS is the cream of the crop for classic Chevy's in my mind...

Hot Carshttps://www.hotcars.com/1964-chevy-impala-facts-features/

 

[1to392831weretaken]

1961 Impala SS 409 in the waning days of the "two tone" paint job in an era where colorful cars reflected the culture[/b]. Compare to the dull "modern" vehicles in the background.

What does this even mean?

Cars in the early sixties could be colorful or dull depending on what paint was used, just like today. Their design largely reflected the state of manufacturing technology at the time. They predate lighter/stronger unit-body construction, lighter/more durable plastic components, the necessary mounting locations for suspension that actually works...

If you think a Honda Accord has as much style as that Impala I don't know what to say.

Nice strawman. Look, we've been down this road, and it's not going to go anywhere. I don't care what other people are into, I just don't get why a car's design would have more to do with the "culture" of the time than the manufacturing and materials realities.

Besides, like with the old Impala vs. a modern Accord, I don't "have as much style" as Liberace. And I'm okay with that.

 

[BleachedAnusDawg]

1961 Impala SS 409 in the waning days of the "two tone" paint job in an era where colorful cars reflected the culture[/b]. Compare to the dull "modern" vehicles in the background.

What does this even mean?

Cars in the early sixties could be colorful or dull depending on what paint was used, just like today. Their design largely reflected the state of manufacturing technology at the time. They predate lighter/stronger unit-body construction, lighter/more durable plastic components, the necessary mounting locations for suspension that actually works...

If you think a Honda Accord has as much style as that Impala I don't know what to say.

Nice strawman. Look, we've been down this road, and it's not going to go anywhere. I don't care what other people are into, I just don't get why a car's design would have more to do with the "culture" of the time than the manufacturing and materials realities.

Besides, like with the old Impala vs. a modern Accord, I don't "have as much style" as Liberace. And I'm okay with that.

You could sub in any modern family sedan for Accord and it's the same thing.

Many cars in the 50's and early 60's were styled after rockets, jets, etc. All-new stuff for the era. There really isn't anything like that these days. It's why the Mustang went back to copying the old design, the Challenger sells as a direct rip-off (although bloated), etc. American history is deeply rooted in car culture and it was different back then than it is now. Woodward Ave, even Alki and Golden Gardens, those things don't exist anymore these days.

Engineering advances have obviously brought in function over form to make cars reliable and drive well.