(EXPANDED FROM 9/2/2022)
The 1958 Imperial has received little attention by automotive historians even though it arguably represented the brand at its peak. Never again would Chrysler’s luxury car offer so many field-leading product innovations. And while the main difference between the 1958 and 1957 models was a new front grille and bumper, this would prove to be the most aesthetically pleasing Imperial produced during Virgil Exner’s reign as head stylist.
Perhaps the 1958 Imperial is ignored partly because it sold so poorly. Production dropped a whopping 57 percent from the previous year — more than twice the decline of the luxury car field. In contrast, Cadillac’s output only fell 17 percent in this recessionary year. So even though General Motors’ luxury brand fielded the least modern design of the Big Three automakers, its market share jumped eight points to almost 73 percent.
In the 1958 Imperial’s defense, one could argue that its sales dropped so spectacularly because the brand’s all-new design in 1957 was such a hit. Output reached almost 38,000 units, which was far above what the Imperial would ever again achieve.
Indeed, Imperial production for 1958 — a bit more than 16,000 units — was close to the average of what the brand would tally from 1955-75, when it was discontinued. The biggest long-term significance of the 1958 Imperial was that it predicted the weak sales of the brand when it didn’t have new styling.
The 1958 Imperial also illustrated the futility of trying to outdo Cadillac when it came to size. The Imperial was substantially bigger than its General Motors’ rival, but that didn’t prove to be an advantage. This may have been partly because a growing number of buyers were becoming disenchanted with what American Motors head George Romney derisively called “The Dinosaur in the Driveway” (Wernle, 1996).
Chrysler fine tunes an already good — if big — design
The 1957-58 Imperial is arguably one of the finest American car designs of the second half of the 1950s. Torsion-bar suspension contributed to what was the best handling of American luxury cars.
In addition, the Imperial looked more “modern” than the 1957-58 Cadillac because it was lower, longer and wider — and curved side glass. And while the Imperial had more flamboyant styling than lower-priced Chryslers, it did not suffer from the design eccentricities that plagued both the 1957 and 1958 Lincolns (go here and here for further discussion).
Richard M. Langworth and Jan P. Norbye argued that the 1957 Imperial was “the most ‘formed’ of any Chrysler make this year” (1985, p. 168). Motor Trend went a step further in calling it Detroit’s “the most attractive, ’57 car” (Molson, 1956). And then for 1958 the magazine reported that the brand adopted a “little-annual-change philosophy to give it a more favorable investment outlook via lower depreciation” (Wherry, 1957).
Maybe so, but the Imperial was nevertheless given a more substantial facelift than any other Chrysler brand. Designers cleaned up what was arguably the weakest aspect of the Imperial’s styling — a rather busy-looking fascia.
The most obvious change was that quad headlights were made standard across the board, but the Imperial also ditched a bi-plane bumper and crosshatch grille in favor of a much cleaner and more horizontal design.
Note that the above photograph of the Imperial’s front end looks somewhat different than that of the featured car below, which was auctioned a few years ago at a car show sponsored by the LeMay Collections at Marymount. If you look closely you can see how the bumper and grille are mounted lower than intended.
Imperial’s teardrop shape limited the body’s longevity
The most dramatic aspect of the Imperial’s styling was its large fins offset by a tapered trunk. Here Chrysler Corp. head stylist Virgil Exner took a different road than with less-expensive Chrysler brands, which had squared-off decks. Even the 1959 Cadillac had less of a teardrop shape.
The teardrop shape was carried over to the Imperial’s A-pillar. The base of the windshield curved upward, in contrast to the flatter cowl used on the rest of the Chrysler lineup.
Motor Trend described the unusually complex shape of the Imperial’s windshield as “fantastically expensive” — and similar only to those used on the Chrysler Corporation’s convertibles (Molson, 1956; p. 24).
Imperial greenhouse was years ahead of competition
The Imperial’s greenhouse may not have been as big of a focal point as the tail fins, but it was arguably the car’s most innovative design feature.
Also see ‘1961-63 Imperial: Ode to Virgil Exner’s neo-classical excesses’
The above images show how the Imperial had a more swept-back windshield than either Lincoln or Cadillac. Exner was prescient in not copying the then-trendy dog leg A-pillar because the Imperial’s design did not become obsolete so quickly. That was important for a low-volume, stand-alone body.
The Imperial was also the first US car to offer curved side glass. It wasn’t until 1961 when Ford followed suit on the Lincoln and Thunderbird. However, Ford did not exploit curved glass’s advantages nearly to the degree that Chrysler did.
Not only did Exner’s crew give the Imperial a lovely curved C-pillar, but it also wrapped into the roofline. To further emphasize the curvature, the Crown two-door Southhampton two-door hardtop shown here has two-tone paint. This mid-level model competed against the Cadillac Coupe de Ville and the Lincoln Premiere.
Styling was a mix of understatement and excess
The Imperial had some surprisingly thoughtful design touches for that time period. For example, the recessed door handles were an attractive safety feature. In addition, the dashboard was unusually functional and clean for a luxury car.
“Many drivers will consider the Imperial instrument groupings to be the finest combination of mechanical efficiency and esthetics produced to date,” Motor Trend said of the almost identical 1957 models. “Instead of thermometer-type gimmicks surmounting a multitude of confusing warning lights, there are good, honest, readable gauges, beautifully set in a tooled steel panel.” (1957, p. 36).
But then there was Exner’s notorious fake spare tire on the trunk lid, which has quite rightly been compared to a toilet seat. Fortunately, the feature was optional.
The Imperial’s insignias were also rather flamboyant. Perhaps that was to be expected for the time. But despite all of the pomp and circumstance, the Imperial brand failed to develop the cachet that it would need to effectively compete with Lincoln and Cadillac.
Chrysler overplays its hand with the Imperial
For all of the 1958 Imperial’s good points, it showed the futility of Chrysler trying to break into the luxury-car field by one-upping the Cadillac.
The Imperial’s unique body gave it temporary stylistic advantages such as curved-side glass, but it hurt economies of scale to the point where the brand was stuck with the same platform for a decade. Cadillac received more frequent styling updates because it shared a platform with high-volume GM cars.
Chrysler also overplayed its hand by making the Imperial bigger than the Cadillac. That may have worked okay in 1957, but a recession in 1958 played a major role in shifting buyer preferences. The only two US cars that sold well were the compact Rambler American and the new, four-seater Ford Thunderbird.
Indeed, the T-Bird’s 1958 output was twice as high as Imperial’s. Ford’s personal coupe would go on to sell more than four times as many cars through 1975, when the Imperial was discontinued.
It’s true that the Imperial lineup was positioned in the more rarified luxury-car field, but the T-Bird was only one notch lower at the top of the premium-priced class. So, yes, this is not a perfect, apples-to-apples comparison. Even so, I think you can still reasonably argue that pioneering a new market niche proved to be a better idea that vainly trying to go head to head with Cadillac.
NOTES:
This story was originally posted on Sept. 2, 2022 and expanded on Feb. 5, 2025. Product specifications were from the auto editors of Consumer Guide (1993, 2006) and Gunnell (2002). Production and market-share figures were calculated from the same sources.
Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.
RE:SOURCES
- Auto editors of Consumer Guide; 2006. Encyclopedia of American Cars. Publications International, Lincolnwood, Ill.
- Gunnell, John; 2002. Standard Catalog of American Cars, 1946-1975. Revised 4th Ed. Krause Publications, Iola, WI.
- Langworth, Richard M. and Jan P. Norbye; 1985. The Complete History of Chrysler Corporation 1924-1985. Publications International, Skokie, IL.
- Molson, Pete; 1956. “’57 Imperial.” Motor Trend. December issue: p. 24.
- Motor Trend; 1957. “Imperial: Its luxury detailing and unrestrained looks make it a challenger.” January issue: pp. 36-37.
- Wernle, Bradford; 1996. “Romney had a mission and a dream: Sell America on small cars.” Automotive News. Posted June 26.
- Wherry, Joe H.; 1957. “Illustrated car-by-car report on all ’58 cars.” Motor Trend. September issue: pp. 18-25.
ADVERTISING & BROCHURES
- aacalibrary.org (Antique Automobile Club of America): Imperial (1958)
- oldcarbrochures.org: Cadillac (1958); Imperial (1957, 1958, 1961); Lincoln (1958)
As a boy in central Indiana, my family’s physician had a 1957 Imperial hardtop coupe in a metallic lavender. What a car ! (And he made housecalls !) While my great uncle and aunt drove black Cadillac Sedan de Villes, the Cadillacs looked like they were from the previous decade compared to that Imperial. The Imperial’s interior was and appeared to be so much roomier and exotic than the Cadillacs. Whenever my family’s physician made a house call, my driveway attracted a lot of gawkers admiring that car. Mercury may have called the 1957s and 1958s “Dream Car Design”, but Exner’s 1957-1958 Imperials were to true embodiment of that slogan.
I genuinely believe that Chrysler’s corporate struggles with build quality and the realignment of brands and models concerning De Soto and Plymouth took their eyes off-the-ball and resulted in a loss of focus that kept the entire corporate line-up hobbled into the 1960s. Looking at Chrysler’s comparative dealer-training films, on paper, their entire corporate line-up offered technically superior cars with better features (although admittedly with high fuel consumption for the late 1950s) than G.M. or Ford, but the quality issues of 1957 and the economic downturn were bad news for Chrysler as a company and the Imperial as a brand.
Regarding the two Imperial grilles. Factor in camera placement, angle, lens type, etc. As far as the 58 Lincoln looking longer and heavier than it was, back then that was the idea.
Kim, take a look at the second photo of the featured Imperial, which is a closeup of the front end. Note how there is a substantial gap between the top of the bumper side and the bottom of the fender. And since the grille is apparently attached to the bumper, that creates more of a gap between the top of the grille and the bottom of the hood. That doesn’t strike me as a function of camera angle.
You’re right that the goal of automakers was to make their cars look as big as possible. What’s interesting to me is that this strategy backfired, particularly once the Eisenhower recession kicked in.
Yeah, I see it now.
Styling was always Chrysler’s strong suit. Great looking interiors. The Imperials of the mid and late 60’s were a great design. Unfortunately, build quality was then and seemingly remains abysmal for the brand. My mom’s first new car was a Dodge Dart Swinger with a slant 6. I learned to drive in that car. Wish I still had that car around. Our subsequent cars, a 1976 Dodge Aspen followed by a 1980 Dodge Omni were absolutely horrible, breaking down all the time.
It may have been that Chrysler Corp. underplayed rather than overplayed its hand with Imperial in that it didn’t give the Chrysler brand exclusive use of the 6-window sedan and include a 2-door hardtop version of it. Had they done this, the unique Imperial body would have achieved fairly good scale and the Chrysler brand would have offered the most advanced bodies in its many price segments. The only thing missing would have been quality and a rearview mirror positioned up high like the competition.
https://content.invisioncic.com/r277599/monthly_2022_05/1228284525_1957ChryslerNewYorkerBrochureb.jpg.3a3e5cbf8429bf6e2d9e0591af8065d4.jpg
The late 1950s Imperial proves that, in the luxury class, pedigree matters. By 1957, Cadillac had built up its reputation over several decades. Plenty of buyers in 1957 would have remembered Cadillac developing the self starter, smoothing out the V-8, introducing the fabulous V-16 and V-12, and leading the way with styling (60 Special in the prewar years, followed by tail fins in the postwar era).
That reputation, which was continued with the 1949 V-8, wasn’t dependent on one new body to attract buyers. Cadillac, under Harley Earl, also did an excellent job of developing styling cues that made sure everyone could recognize a new model as a Cadillac. Thus, it really didn’t matter if the 1958 Cadillac wasn’t quite as up-to-date in the styling department as its main competitors. It looked like a Cadillac, and still had a reputation for reliability, performance and good build quality (all of which boosted resale value, another key Cadillac selling point during this era). That was what mattered to buyers, and the people they were trying to impress.
What Chrysler needed was a long-term program of continuous improvement and styling consistency. Lincoln started down that path with its 1961 models, which continued with the 1969 Continental Mark III. By the 1970s, Lincoln was gaining on Cadillac. Chrysler didn’t have the management skills necessary to maintain that sort of effort over the years.
In retrospect, Chrysler would have been better off if the Imperial had continued to share a body with Chrysler, with enough styling cues and added equipment (four-wheel disc brakes, for example), to set it apart from its Chrysler brethren. The corporation also should have emphasized improved handling and braking, as Cadillac and Lincoln had effectively cornered the land yacht market.
I’ve always thought that the 1967-68 models came the closest to filling this role. If Chrysler had managed to boost the build quality and reliability, and then added four-wheel-disc brakes while tightening up the suspension, it would have offered a real alternative to Cadillac.
The “flyte sweep” decklid (aka toilet seat) was optional most years it was offered. but had a very high take rate. It was dropped in the early 60’s for one year but brought back due to consumer request; dealers retrofitted the prior year lid frequently. Say what you will, but “the dogs liked the dogfood” to quote a later Chrysler chairman.
I have a 1958 six-window sedan, it is even today a good road car especially for it’s era. The rushed to production 57 models’ quality failures hammered Chrysler’s reputation and sales for several years. Imperial also was priced higher than equivalant Cadillac models, not a winning strategy for making conquest sales.