The Buick and Olds drivers ate DRUNK

Greatest video, thanks for sharing! The curve and railroad crossing tests are magnificent !

I bought a LOT of cars over the years, most everything built through all the 50's. The 57-58 Olds (I had "98" convertibles from both years, and a 57 Super 88 coupe, all equipped with 'J-2' tri power, the converts were full power equipped, the 58 had air suspension) Both 98's , with HD shocks would dig up asphalt on corners or sharp dips with the rear bumper , and bottomed the front bumper often enough it fell off on the way to San Fransisco. They could all keep up with the 2 bbl Windsor, all the rest of the cars in this test could beat the Old's. When the 394 came out in '59 Olds got faster. The fastest Buick in 57-58 was the Century, (I had 7 57 Buicks in all series, and 14 58 Buicks in all series including convertibles.) The Century's could take Windsor and Saratogas, match the Imperial, and just loose to the New Yorker. The way to do it was in LOW gear from 0-60, which was very quick at 0-60 in 7.8-7.9 seconds, in DRIVE is was 9 seconds. I did have rear shocks tear out of their mounts on several of my 57- 58 Buicks driving fast on bumpy roads. I had a dozen 57 Cadillacs and another dozen 58's including two convertibles from each year. Any V8 Chrysler product could out-do a 57-58 Cadillac in all performance categorizes. However, I loved the way these looked, my favorite being an extended deck Sedan DeVille with full power and a/c, a mild custom with Lake pipes, chrome rims and baby moons with wide whites, pearlesent white with perfect black and white leather interior. An Imperial or Lincoln could run rings around the Cad but it was very satisfying on the road cruising at 80-100 mph. I loved the looks of most Ford products, and build quality was there, however, the suspensions on stock Ford and Mercury's was frightening, the Lincoln was damn good and handled close to as well as Imperial, which could be why it wasn't in the test. My current list of cars show my preferences, a near new 1956 DeSoto Fireflite, two 1957 Plymouth Belvederes, a SportCoupe and convertible, two 1963 Buick Electra Limited convertibles which with HD suspension feel exactly like the best torsion bar Chrysler ever, two Buick Rivieras 1964 and 1965, two 1964 Imperials, a Crown coupe and Convertible, and Crown sedans from 1965 and 1966.

Chrysler was a step ahead of Ford and GM in engineering for decades. Even the '57 Plymouth, Dodge and DeSoto cars benefitted from that expertise along with Chrysler and Imperial.

I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder. GM was so impressed (and intimidated) by Chrysler's Forward Look, that they tore up their 1959 facelifts of the new for 1958 designs and started from a clean sheet of paper. I'm going to presume you've seen a 1959 Cadillac.

That new yorker is such a happy car.

I had a personal test with a '58 Windsor and a '57 Olds back in 1962. The Chrysler ran good enough and had plenty power but DAMN it sounded like all 4 windows were down and it had ball bearings scattered inside the body panels. The Olds was very quiet and smooth at speed but the Chrysler sounded as if it would fly to pieces any second. I told the guy who tried to sell me the Chrysler that it had good power but I wanted a family car we could ride for hours on long trips comfortably, so I picked the Olds. I was always glad I did. It gave us over 200,000 miles of comfy travel.

All beautiful cars IMHO!

These film reels were made by Ross Roy, Inc for the Chrysler Corporation. They were meant to show salespeople about the advantages against the competition.

This test very well could be rigged, but I don't doubt the results. All these cars had similarly powerful V8s, but Chrysler had a huge advantage at this time with the TorqueFlite automatic. The Dynaflow and 4-speed Hydramatic were groundbreaking technology a few years earlier, but the TF was the next generation of efficiency and performance and it took awhile for everyone else to catch up. A torsion bar front suspension isn't inherently better than an A-arm/double wishbone design, but Chrysler was really the first American company to try and strike a balance between handling and ride quality rather than focusing on comfort alone. GM's philosophy at the time, especially for Buick, Olds and Caddy, was "the softer the better" and many people still believed that more weight *improved* handling in the 50s! The styling on the '57 Chryslers was also totally radical and ushered in the over-the-top, huge fin blow-out at the end of the '50s. The wild '59 Cadillacs and Chevrolets were a direct response to these cars. The one thing this video doesn't tell us is that for all their many virtues, the "Forward Look" Chryslers were also a massive quality control disaster. They were rushed into production and many were rusting, rattling and running poorly within a year or two of leaving the showroom. This was a huge blow to Chrysler, because they had previously been seen as a rock-solid reliable, if somewhat boring and conservative make. The '57s sold great, but also burned a lot of converts and turned off many traditional Chrysler diehards!

The engineering on the Chryslers was really outstanding. Unfortunately, the build quality left much to be desired. They were fast! I raced her Desoto (hemi, 2bb carb) against a 58 Tbird and blew his doors off. These cars were great on curves, but the body construction left something to be desired.

The styling of the '57 Chrysler Corporation cars was significantly more modern and attractive than the competitors. But - as beautiful as I think all these cars are now - at the time, a significant segment of American car buyers was getting fed up with immense size and increasing weight and gaudy styling. 1958 and '59 marked the first boom in sales of imported cars, mostly compact and at that time almost entirely European. This was the start of the process that's gotten us to today, where GM is no longer the biggest car maker in the world, and Toyota and VW are fighting for #1.

Which makes it not propaganda at all, but facts.

Obviously you've never read about the Chrysler cars of that period much less had first hand experience. The GM cars used springs and shocks that were so soft, you could bottom them out with a shove down of your hand. Independant test after test, magazine articles, not Chrysler commercials showed their cars to have handling superiority over their competitors. But the cars had other issues that caused sales to nosedive. It wasn't because they couldn't handle well.

I love Michigan. It is the best place to do a car test.

What the hell ever happened to race on Sunday and win on Monday, the industry still makes cars so why is so alienated from the other, this is why mistakes are frequently overlooked due to lack of real world testing.

'Ross Roy, Inc". Now there's an independent testing firm! lol

I also ask why in the 1957 and 1958 Nascar races (Orange Speedway, Daytona Beach and several others), there is no Chrysler, Dodge or Plymouth. No car from Chrysler Corporation. They just ran and won Oldsmobile, Pontiac, Chevrolet, Ford. If the Chrysler cars were so powerful, so fast, with such good brakes and good suspension as this bad video intended to demonstrate in this video, the situation in the main races would have been very different.

I am going out and get a new 57 Chrysler.

O.K. Great if you are looking to enter your "New" 1957 car into the Hell on Wheels competition at the local fairgrounds then go torsion bar Chrysler. But I would think as today one would buy a full size car and back then they were all full size cars, for the ride and comfort not for the gymnastic rock hard ride that torsion bar ridding suspension provides. Rock hard is what you want at Willow Glen or Infinion Raceway but for the street or the highway give me that famous Boulevard Buick ride every time !

Chrysler sold about a quarter of amount of GM cars back then. i always thought mopar looked better, but build quality was real poor. Mopars are still a good buy today, no problem with any of my caravans over the past 25yrs - except for rust.. All these cars rusted like crazy - especially GM in 60's

The Chryslers would have been powered by the 354 Hemi. The Imperial, with the 392 Hemi. Surprised they omitted the Chrysler 300C with the most potent 392. "Big Bill" France flat out refused to allow the 300C to be raced in NASCAR in 1957. Would have dominated.

Very nice Windsor I have my own Windsor 57.Wery god kondition bay the way! 100% Rost frea..

Remember--coil springs are just torsion bars wrapped in a circle. The wire in coil springs twists exactly the same way--no bending stresses. Chrysler cars obviously had stiffer springs, better shock absorbers and lower centers of gravity. And let us not forget leaf spring windup--note the Imperial's ass actually rises during the acceleration test. The GM's all had coils in the back and squatted like a dog taking a, uh, . . ..

23:09 The driver appeared to aim for the last cone in this "unbiased" run. Ha ha

father had lots of Chrysler Plymouths, Big Chrysler Imperial LeBaron, little rear window 1965 3 ton beast 440 C.I i had a 1971 Imperial...And a 1970 new Yorker cars where as long as a bus! And a Windsor...dopy fins, fins where in

The "Forward Look" of these cars was SUPPOSED to come out in' '59, but Virgil Exner moved styling up two years to catch up to GM in new styling. Engineering didn't have a chance to find and fix all the design flaws before the '56 rollout and, as a result, '57 Chrysler products were horrid, both in quality control AND design. Powertrain-wise, the big move ahead was the 3 speed Torqueflite and some superior engines, The original "Forward Look" cars in '55 were quite competitive against GM's A bodies in both style and reliability, but were hampered by the 2 speed Powerflite in the Dodge and Chryslers against GM's Hydra-Matics in Pontiac, Olds and Cadillac. The Powerflite was superior, though, against Buick's Dynaflush, which made the '57 and '58 Buicks the thirstiest cars on the road. Like all late '50s and early '60s Chrysler cars, build quality was nil, and they were notorious for tinny sounding bodies and loud road noise, not to mention lousy interior materials. Elwood Engle would fix all this later with the '63s, which started Chrysler's best years, the mid-'60s. After the 'fuselage look" came in '69, things started south again and they've never recovered, except for Iacocca's K car recovery platform and the minivans. His LH cars had bad engines, and everything since has basically been junk.

Chrysler outside recessed door handles beat GM stick out door handles.

Noticed all tests are won from the inside lane I sense there were free lunches and holidays handed out

IMPERIAL!!!!!!!!

Always been a Mopar fan, but can see where the video was biased. Simple as the brake test, 4 wheel drum brakes, which cars had the adjusters properly set up. And knowing each Mopar was fine tuned. But at the same time their competition did the same, when comparing products. It still goes on today, you will bring your finest tuned car, to a comparison.

👍

Chrysler stomps the competition in every test, proven over and over Chrysler wins.

Notice on the 3rd 0-60 run the Buick Century was almost even with the Chrysler and they cut the video short. I bet the Buick was about to pass the Chrysler.

All Right , who said that they pulled the shocks out of the O;lds. LOL

Looks like Chrysler engineers got "A"s in differential equations class.

Mopar rules every year !

Where are the Lincoln and Mercury products?

The narrator's voice sounds so familiar. Recognize the voice from watching many similar types of films from the 50"s and 60"s but can not put his name to it. Any guesses?

When Mopar was set the standard of the whole American car industry... probably this and the 80s was it for them. Their part Italiano now. Who knows what it'll do now...

that 394 olds turned on and i am a dodge guy but i think the race was shortened just a little 394 was a comming on quick would that hemi out run it top end i would love to know wide open top end

i know right!! i thought it was going to be an unbiased comparison test

No bias here...rriight...😂

I wonder how much slant was given to the chrysler cars....sounds like a long chrysler commercial to me.

Lol the tests were held at the Chrysler proving grounds.

The Cadillac looks like it's had the shocks removed or replaced with old ones.

Chryslers in the late 50's had too many "updates" to the forward look. They didn't look as good as they did in the early 50s.

ok

The truth is I feel ashamed of the satraps who did this dishonest video. When reading the comments, it is seen that annoys even the hardcore MOPAR. I insist, with the good quality of their cars, Chrysler does not need and never needed to make a video as dishonest as this one.

These commercial were so hysterical though. We are just supposed to trust the drivers of the other cars to be honest? Lol btw the Buick century beautiful car

Chrysler test driver slows down on every test and there isn't ford so the test is flawed. the harps are beautiful though.

In '57, Chrysler had the suspensions, hot hemi engines and the new Torqflite, all superior to the competition. They also had tinny undamped bodies that rusted out in five years with Exner's ever-screwier styling cues, crappy interior materials that were shot in no time and more rattles and squeaks than all the competition combined. They were also notorious for windshield and roof rib water leaks. Because of those derogatives, Chrysler Corp. suffered greatly in the recession of '58, worse than did Ford with Hank the Douche's incredibly poor Edsel and boat anchor unibody Lincoln. Although the Big 3 all did poorly in '58, Chrysler got smacked the worst by far, which hampered their recovery by years. This led to the ouster of Virgil Exner and the slow recovery under Elwood Engel, which led to some of Chrysler's best years. But Exner's goal of taking the #2 spot away from Ford again by 1959 was forever dashed by inattention to matters that made owners come back for more of the same, while overconcentrating on matters that would sell them the first time. Al Sloan over at GM knew repeat buyers were the key to success, one reason why GM suffered less than either Chrysler or Ford in '58. The Exner Imperial of '57 barely made a dent in Cadillac sales, and worsened in '58.

Air suspension is always a better ride than spring suspension, no matter who builds it lol... Not fooled!

I am Mopar from go to whoa, but we all know that the olds was a far better performer than these old films show

After Chrysler 300, Road Runner, GTX Cuda' , they did the K car, the END of Chrysler!!

I loved the designs of the Chrysler products but, the overly stiff ride turned off many prospective buyers. Back then, the soft ride is what people wanted. They would never have driven a Cadillac or Buick over train tracks at such a speed. They would have accepted that too as part of driving a car that was softly sprung. As for the pylons, the cars from G.M. did avoid the first two. That is what would have been expected under normal circumstances. How many times would a driver be faced with a situation where he/she would have had such a situation in real life of avoiding 6 or 7 objects in a row? Also, it is obvious that the braking was rigged. If the cars were tuned to factory specifications, the rear brakes would not have grabbed like in these tests. In the brake fade test, it is obvious that the Cadillac was purposely driven off the side of the road. To get a good ride in a Chrysler product, back then, you'd have to have gone 80 MPH or faster whereas you could float along at 65 -70 MPH in an Oldsmobile, Buick, or Cadillac and get a better and more comfortable ride. The seats were also cushier in the G.M. cars.

Fun watch. In today's world of tasteless, worthless cars like the Prius, Civic and Corolla, none of the results matter and I would gladly own any of those cars. However if we were in 1957 I would buy the New Yorker then the Windsor, then the Olds Super 88 in that order.

WAW THE IN PIRIOR WAS THE WENOR .ON NO SKUAYIRIIMG. VAY WAT A BAUT MPG AN HP ..

this is bs. they obviously removed the shocks on all the cars except for the chryslers. and if torsion bar suspension was better than coils, then most of todays cars would be equipped with them. still an awsome video though.

These tests prove very little. They can and probably show deliberate bias toward Chrysler. They probably had Chrysler-paid drivers in all cars. I've seen many of these videos where deliberate bias, call it rigging if you like, is done to make the supposedly standout car in question perform better than its competitors, when in reality the differences are so insignificant that they are pathetic at best.

still no Chevy

those Mopars had the power all right, but they were homely as all get out...

Chrysler power steering was too easy, complete washed out, no feel, horrible

such junk compared to modern cars

This video is very little objective. It is so biased that bothers who knows anything about mechanics, even the funs of Mopar cars. Both GM cars such as Chrysler were very good, even when precisely in 1957, the MOPAR cars were heavily criticized by their owners for bad endings. (Popular Mechanics, Motor Trends, Science and Mechanics Illustrated) The power and performance of a car are important; even more brakes and stability. I think with the quality of cars MOPAR not need to make a video as biased and dishonest. It is shocking and damaging to their interests. I advise download these hateful videos. Noblesse oblige

Have to take this with a grain of salt. We are on a Chrysler test track in a film being produced by MOPAR. Sorry, but, even for the era when this was produced, the bias is just too great. I would rather have a comparison from a PURELY independent tester. Having the manufacturer sponsor a test makes the results biased, skewed, slanted and worthless. Sorry, Chrysler, your results of this test are bogus.

Chrysler propaganda,what a load of bs

Which makes it not propaganda at all, but facts.