Imperial Concept interior pictures

[Greg McDonnell CLC# 20841]

In view of the the fact there is now a thread on the CLC regarding the new Imperial Concept, I thought Id add my .02 worth. I belong to the IML (Imperial Mailing List) and am almost finished restoring (frame-off) my 1965 Imperial Crown convertible (one of 633 produced).  I too have admired the Imperials of the fifties and (mostly) sixties since I was a child watching The Beverly Hillbillies.  Chrysler sponsored the show and Imperials were prominently featured throughout the shows run from 62 through 71.  I bought my 65 as a direct result of the impression these cars made on me when I watched those episodes and saw the cars for the first time!

Having said that, I will admit, Im happy to see the marques revival being considered by Daimler Chrylser.  I join most of the members of the IML in applauding DC for considering putting the IMPERIAL nameplate on a modern vehicle.  But, I have no interest whatsoever in this bulky, awkward looking, ill-proportioned attempt to bring back the Imperial.  Regardless of whether or not it resembles the Rolls Royce Phantom, it simply does nothing for me and I hope the car does not make it into production as it appeared at The Detroit Auto Show.  I think the designers need to start all over again and rethink the cars proportions.  If they can design and build cars like the Crossfire, the potential is there for a much better looking Imperial.  

Here is a link to interior shots of the Imperial Concept:
http://www.allpar.com/cars/ly/imperial.html TARGET=_blank>http://www.allpar.com/cars/ly/imperial.html

Greg McDonnell
Mobile, AL

[Pat]

Suicide doors are AWESOME!

[Bernie DeWinter, IV]

The best way to sum up whats wrong with the styling of that car is that its exterior is too much K. T. Keller and not enough Virgil Exner.

[Greg McDonnell #20841]

Bernie,

THANKS for saying so succinctly what Ive been trying to say since I first laid eyes on the Imperial Concept.  There is a WORLD of difference between the two men and the 57 Imperials styling was lightyears ahead of the early and even mid fifties Imperials which had a somewhat stodgy look.  As much as I liked the 55 and 56 models, they were tall vehicles(Keller wanted a gentleman to be able to enter the car while wearing his hat) and lacked the racier, more streamlined look of the 57 and subsequent models.  These cars had unusual styling features unique to Imperials and to a certain extent higher end Chryslers (i.e. tempered glass headlight covers on the 65 and 66 Imps. and Chryslers.  Love em or hate em, theres one thing undeniable about Imperials from the late fifties through the mid to late sixties:  They had their own style and didnt try to copy (well maybe the 64 - 66 models slightly resembled the streamlined early sixties Lincoln Continentals)other automobile manufacturers.  The 57 thru 59 models were part of Chryslers Forward Look campaign and their styling was like nothing else on the road back then!

I have one late model Cadillac (98 SLS) and four collectible Cadillacs but wouldnt mind having another Imperial to add to my modest collection.  Needless to say, Im not interested in buying this new Imperial should it end up in production.
Im hoping the designers at DC will give the Imperial Concept another try and this time make it sleek, unique and drop-dead gorgeous like its predecessors!

Greg McDonnell    

[denise 20352]

  I didnt think I would ever say this about a new car again, but that is a beautiful car!  I love the rear doors, so much easier to get in and out of.  There is almost nothing Japanese-looking about this car!  The tail lights are a little Mongoloid, but I could live with that.

  Round headlights!  Im on the edge here!  Imagine how nice it would look with headlight covers.  Of course, by the time it becomes a production car, it will probably have Mongoloid headlights on it, but give me this small peek at satisfaction today.

  The only thing that it really needs is tires, and different wheels.  It will be a kidney-trasher with those lawn mower tires on it, but overall, I say "nice job".

-denise

[densie]

  I wrote to Chrysler about the car.  Will post any response that I get.

  Basically, I told them all of the things that I loved about the car, asked if it was going into production, and if it was available with bigger tires and smaller wheels, for a healthier ride.  I wanted to know about the steering, whether it was easy to keep on the road or not, and I suggested covered headlights.

-denise

[Randall A. McGrew CLC # 17963]

I still think it looks like a Brinks armoured vehicle, but having said that, I must admit I am excited by the prospect of a real Imperial (not that abomination produced in the late 80s and 90s) with suicide doors no less!  How long has it been?  I recall the 47 or 48 Chrysler came with them.  Denise, you are absolutely right!  Having the door open out like that makes it elegant and easy for ladies to alight without looking like a cowgirl climbing out of a buck board.  I wont got much further with that ...  simply to say that the 57 Brougham and the 62 - 68 Lincolns were better, more elegant automobiles for that.  

And remember, it was once believed that ladies and gentlemen only alighted on the sidewalk side, never in the street.  So the doors would be no more dangerous than any other.  My only wish is that they could make a really comfortable bench seat rather than buckets, even big buckets.  At one time, Chryslers were the most comfortable cars built in America according to people I have talked with over the last 40 years.
Of course, the 1960s killed that with the muscle car interiors, consoles and bucket seats.  Great to look at but pure misery for many to ride in.

[denise 20352]

  My 76 has comfortable seats.

  http://www.americansoapbox.org/pics/76ny/S3010044.jpg TARGET=_blank>http://www.americansoapbox.org/pics/76ny/S3010044.jpg

-d

[Brian Daum, 18809]

Quote K.T.Keller:

"We make cars to sit in not to *****over"


Brian

Norway

[Randall A. McGrew CLC # 17963]

Actually the split bench isnt bad and the ones you have in your car are real close to the old ones my Dad likes, with the big roll under the let and at the shoulder.  The only thing about a split bench that makes sense is allowing each person in the front to adjust the seat to their needs with power controls.  And in a coupe it makes sense so you can pull that seat back forward.

I actually liked the last of the Imperials, and the New Yorker of 1975 and 1976.  Nice looking cars, with big comfortable interiors and elegant for the most part.

This new one is still a little boxy but it sure beats the heck out of the egg and cab foreward designs.  At least you know what it is without having to check the badging!

[Mike #19861]

 They say the pictures do not do it justice. An excuse? The proportions are not something that pictures will change.

 This car is still dumpy to me. The interior is nice, but it is still show car. This will not doubt change at least some if the car is to be produced.

 But, at the very least it shows that DC has some interest in the Imperial name. Even though it more closely resembles Bentlys ugly sister.

 Mike

[denise]

  I actually prefer the ride and easier steering of a Cadillac, but I fell in love with the styling of the New Yorker.  The 76 doesnt ride as smoothly as the 72 that I had, but that could be because it is outfitted to tow 10,000#.  Yeah, seriously.  Whether or not it rides as well as the 76 that I had 20 years ago, I just dont remember.

  Steering effort is one of my major concerns.  The NYB doesnt steer as easily as a Cadillac when parking it.  I can still park it with my finger, but there is a difference.  It is just as easy to keep on the road, though, which is what really matters to me.  Keeping a new car on the road, with their high caster angles and low ratios, is a constant fight.

   All things considered, I am glad that I went with the New Yorker.  The only thing I really dont like is that the seats are too high, but I was able to compensate for some of that by moving them back two inches.  Someday, I will find a way to make them lower.

-denise

[Eric Maypother CLC #15104]

Hi,
Its looks kinda like the new Rolls Royce, I love the look of suicide doors,
Eric

[denise 20352]

  I didnt get a detailed response like I did when I wrote to Cadillac, but I was glad that they didnt try to sell me some other car.   Maybe they care about making something that people want, instead of just selling them anything.  I got the feeling from Cadillac that they just wanted me to buy something and go away.


----------------------------------------

Dear Denise:

Thank you for your recent email expressing interest in the Chrysler Imperial.

We are pleased to read of your interest in the Imperial. Unfortunately, because this vehicle is still in the concept stage, there is no pricing or production data available. Please keep in contact with the Chrysler website for future updates.

We greatly appreciate your feedback on the Imperial concept vehicle. It is comments like yours that are paramount to longevity of the Chrysler brand.

Many of our concept vehicles have made it to market, such as the
Plymouth Prowler, Dodge Viper, and the Chrysler PT Cruiser. I have documented your interest and will forward it to the product planning department.

Thank you again for your email. Have a great day!

------------------------------------------

Tony tells me that it doesnt do any good to write to carmakers because they get so many letters that they wont pay any attention.  I SERIOUSLY doubt that!  How many people write to carmakers and tell them what they want, vs. settling for whatever there is, or just not buying anything?


-denise