Collector Car Corner – Comparing cars from the 1950s and 1960s to today’s computerized marvels

Collector Car Corner - Comparing cars from the 1950s and 1960s to today’s computerized marvelsToday’s modern vehicles are computer controlled marvels that feature up to 800 horsepower and safety innovations galore. The 2021 Ford Mustang Shelby GT 500 is a prime example of safety and ultra-performance, in the right hands of course. (Ford Motor Company)

Q: Greg I enjoyed all of your articles in the recent Boston Herald insert on cars and it was a very enjoyable read. I’d love to hear your opinion on how things were back in the ‘50s and ‘60s versus today’s modern cars. What are your memories on yesteryear cars versus today’s highly computerized vehicles? Back in the 1950s you were lucky if your car had air conditioning, power steering, and an automatic transmission. Thanks, Jim L., Boston, Mass.

Q: Jim – thanks for the kind words, and I actually love this question as my friends and I always compare the cars we drive now to the cars of yesteryear. 

As you note, it’s clear that the modern cars of today, some of which can actually drive themselves, are way better and much safer than the cars we grew up with seven decades ago. 

Back in the 1950s and 1960s, and when the new car introductions took place starting in late October, I always felt they were exterior “beauty’s only skin deep” upgrades more so than notable technical and suspension improvements. Clearly when it came to the actual new car season announcements, the words “mechanical advancements” weren’t in the new car formulas. 

Further, many of the engines used in the 1950s were from the pre-WWII era. Flathead six- and eight-cylinder engines were the norm until the new overhead valve V8s appeared in 1949 by Olds and Cadillac and 1951 by Studebaker and Chrysler. 

Matter of fact, the inline-6 flathead in my dad’s 1955 Plymouth Savoy was the same basic engine that powered Chrysler vehicles beginning in 1924. Although it had grown to 230 cu. in. from its 170-inch 1924 debut, it was the same engine in theory. This engine lasted until late 1959 when Chrysler released its all new inline Slant-6 overhead valve engine that proved to be one of its best engines both for durability and longevity and lasted until 1987 in the Dodge truck line. 

To answer your question (sorry about my Flathead-6 and Slant-6 ramblings), let’s use 1957-58-59 as examples of “new cars” that didn’t necessarily mean new cars. Chrysler led the way with design changes that featured its exterior “forward look” cars. These three years also found the other manufacturers producing cars that looked nothing like the prior years, yet were still the same underneath. Chevy is another good example in 57-58-59, as is Buick. I really love the ‘58 and ‘59 Buicks, and the ‘60 model that was somewhat similar to the ’59, but with smaller fins.

Chrysler also made huge exterior design changes from ’54 through ‘57, while over at Ford the big change years came in 1957 to ’59, in my opinion. Still, these cars were mechanically the same with just a bit of progress to steering, brake, suspension, and interior upgrades.

Studebaker is perhaps the best example of the “beauty’s only skin deep” viewpoint. (Okay, I’ll give a tip of the hat here to The Temptations, one of my all-time favorite Motown groups.) Studebaker’s poor sales and somewhat homely 1958 model was completely re-skinned for ’59 with a new, good looking and smaller Lark body. 

The result? 

Collector Car Corner - Comparing cars from the 1950s and 1960s to today’s computerized marvels

The 1959 Studebaker Lark was basically a re-skinned version of its 1958 Studebaker. A bit smaller in wheelbase and length, this “new” midsize Lark saved the company from bankruptcy while utilizing the exact same mechanicals from the full-size Studebaker that debuted in 1953. (Former Studebaker Company)

The “new” ’59 Studebaker Lark sold so well it saved the company from bankruptcy. Even though there were no major mechanical differences other than being a bit smaller in wheelbase between the ‘58 Studebaker and ‘59 Lark, the Lark was a huge success. Other cars I really liked from that era were the ’51 to ‘54 Hudson Hornets and Wasps, ‘53 Kaiser Manhattan, ‘53 to ’56 Packards,’56 multi-colored Dodges, and the ‘55 and ‘56 Mercury’s. Luxury favorites include the big Chrysler Imperials and just about any Cadillac, while the Lincoln Continental was not a favorite as it grew to massive proportions in ’58 and ’59.  

The Sixties were similar, too, so we won’t delve too much into this decade, style wise. Yet when it comes to performance, engine advancements and muscle, this was the decade of note. Everything from 409 Chevy Biscaynes, 406 Ford Galaxies and 413 Dodge Darts were everywhere, joined later by the midsize “Pony Car” craze where Mustang Cobra Jets, Hemi Cudas, and Camaro Z28s roamed the nation’s boulevards. Even AMC got into the game, as its 390 SC/Rambler American could run as quickly as most of the other competition. Ditto for Buick with its Gran Sport and Olds with the 442.

And the GTO? Thanks to Jim Wangers and John DeLorean, Pontiac started the midsize muscle craze back in 1964. Ronnie and the Daytona’s took care of the radio airwaves with its hit single “Little GTO,” pre-dated by the Beach Boys “She’s real fine my 409” in 1962 and Jan and Dean’s “Little Old Lady From Pasadena” honor of the 426 Super Stock Dodge in 1964. Again, what a great decade to experience.   

Collector Car Corner - Comparing cars from the 1950s and 1960s to today’s computerized marvels

The 1960s became the decade of muscle cars and performance, starting with the full size performance cars of the early 1960s. This Dodge Ramcharger 413-V8 article featured in Motor Trend magazine in 1962 explained everything about the new engine. (Motor Trend Magazine)

I’ll admit the 1960s were very important as for muscle cars, but the family sedan with the Slant-6 under the hood didn’t change much. If you had a ’67 Dodge R/T with no power steering, no air conditioning and no power whatever that would rob even one horsepower or add weight, that’s just what those performance buffs wanted. However, this ’67 Dodge R/T came with four-wheel drum brakes, so one option you did want was front disc brakes as trying to stop the R/T after a quarter-mile run and a short shutdown area was a tough task.

Let’s end with the modern day comparison. All of today’s cars come standard with computer controlled everything, electric hybrid options, tremendous safety innovations, airbags, and accident impact enhancements to reduce driver and passenger injuries. There may be too many computer-aided features, as an engineer friend always points to very high repair costs when these computers and / or electric batteries fail. Still, we agree the cars of today are awesome. 

In summary, the antiquated 1950 and 1960 decade vehicles we drove back then (you know, the ones that now bring five, six and seven figures at the Mecum and Barrett-Jackson auctions) can’t compare in any manner to 2021 model cars.

Yet “skin deep” or not, we still love them.   

(Greg Zyla is a syndicated auto columnist. He welcomes reader questions and comments on collector cars, auto nostalgia and motorsports at greg@gregzyla.com.)

1 Comment on "Collector Car Corner – Comparing cars from the 1950s and 1960s to today’s computerized marvels"

  1. I prefer the cars from the 50’s and 60’s because the cars of today are catalog cars,look through a book and there is your car.You really can’t work on them and you have to rely on a computer to let you go fast where at least with the back in the day cars you could get alot of satisfaction by wrenching on your own car and then you could proudly say I worked on my own car and you could actually put your own treats in the engine,there is just something about the old school cars and engines that just gave you so much satisfaction,like the old hemi’s max wedges 396’s 427’s and the 454’s that just made you happy where when you had a race at least you did with good old brain power not computer power,love the good ol days

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*