[Dealer Film] 1961 Ford Vs Chevy, Ford takes some good shots! Colorized

[@joeapplebaum3763]

I also thought it was interesting Ford carped on the Chevy for having the deep trunk, low lift over the bumper to load the trunk and the gas cap on one side. Exactly what Ford did in ‘65!

[@matrox]

Same thing with the rear coil springs.

[@weskirkland5850]

they been doing that back in forth for over 100 years..lmao

[@jamesdodd9066]

My very first car was a '61 Ford 4 door Galaxie. A 292 2-v, Ford-o-matic, in black. Beautiful styling, good riding, comfortable, and great for dates. There were pull handles on either side under the steering wheel to open air vents for cooling and heating. You could shut off the right side heat in the winter so the girl would snuggle closer to you, or, in the summer when she was wearing a loose skirt, you could open ger side vent to get a "blow up" effect. Loved that car!

[@paulsheehan5010]

In Canada, The full size Chevys were also called Pontiac Stratochief, (Biscayne), Laurentian, (Bel Air), and Parisienne, (Impala), Canadian Fords, were also called Meteors, a divsion of Ford Canada).

[@jimdodge5766]

I really enjoy listening to this guy. He is easy to understand with his masculine voice. He knows what he is talking about. He never hesitates or messes up. The ford is my choice

[@autochronicles8667]

They are in a studio he better can retake it if he does. :)

[@davids6533]

I find few cars now or then that's anywhere near as nice as the '61 Ford Galaxy. My Grandparents had a blue 4 door that was showroom nice and I sure wish I could have found a way to keep it 'till I was old enough to buy it from them, but they traded it for a Toyota Mark 5 or something like that. The Ford was truly a beautiful car in my opinion. Thanks for posting this!

[@sterlinsilver]

By styling alone, id have to choose the ford. Tailfins make everything better! :)

[@sketchydustin8372]

love how they are all "Its a damn corvair!" in the video :)

[@biscuitboy3617]

Ford had the High Performance 352 that was rated at 360 hp....very few knew about it because they did'nt really advertise it's availability. It would chew up a Chevy 348 Tri Power. And the 390 4V was rated at 375 hp, and their 390 6V was rated at 401 hp. The Chevy's were lighter, which suited them better on a drag strip. If the Ford's would have been as lite as the Chevy's, they would have done much better in the races.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

And Ford's 3 speed Cruise O Matic was much better than Chevy's Turboglide.

[@kennethsouthard6042]

I think you are wrong about the horsepower ratings for the Ford. I'm not sure about the Chevy engines, but the 390, was rated at 300, not 375 which means the 352 had to lower as well.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

@@kennethsouthard6042 Only the Hi Po 390 was 375 horses.

[@kennethsouthard6042]

@@jamesbosworth4191 I think you are referring to the "R" Code which was not the garden variety 390 that would have been on a typical family car. I'm thinking that that the 390 referred to in the film strip would have been known as the "Thunderbird Special V8" which was 300 HP.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

@@kennethsouthard6042 You are correct. That R code 390 was more than just a souped up 390, it had thicker main bearing webs, larger oil passages, the oil pump pressure relief valve right under the intake manifold instead of on the oil pump. Probably ditto for the high-performance 352. That's why punching out a standard 390 and calling it a 406 doesn't make it worth what a REAL 406 is worth.

[@bobadams3661]

I had all the shoe box chevys- a 55 2door post, a 56 2 door post, a 57 bel air, a 57 2 door post built into a gasser for the drags, and a 57 nomad to tow the drag car. But 1 of my favorite cars was a 62 galaxy 500XL black ext, black bucket interior, 406 tri power, 4 speed and 456 gears. Wish I had it now.

[@nlpnt]

I always liked the '61 Chevy, especially the post sedans, but the '61 Ford styling came out really well for being an emergency reskin that had to cut out a *lot* of width because the '60 was over legal width limits.

[@T-41]

Thanks for showing this. It is fun to see Ford’s approach to training the salesmen when the customer was also considering a Chevy. Most of narrative is of little consequence. Both are pretty cars, and beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Both were smooth riding and pretty quiet; Chevrolet all coil spring suspension was softer. The Ford rear leaf springs kept the car more level when the trunk was fully loaded. Fords felt and were heavier , but still cornered pretty well. Chevy tended to feel lighter on its feet and get better gas mileage, but has more body lean. Added up, both were nice.

[@autochronicles8667]

According to magazines of the time, the Mopars still handled better. Ride "stiffness" was always GMs strong point where you felt the car was more solid feeling. Ford stuck to soft/smooth up until the 90's I think... I have some videos where they show "corner lean" and the Fords always leaned more. I might do a comparison from the magazines (consumer reports etc) to detail what the magazines were saying in the day.

[@postal_the_clown]

My first car was a '61 Fairlane passed on from my Mom. I really only drove it for a few times before my license test. And THAT is the only nostalgia I have for it. She had driven it into the ground and was glad to be rid of it so, I had no guilt of selling it to a classmate who put it even further down. In the last 55 years I've had 6 other Fords (Pinto to T-Bird) and logged a few thousand miles in different Transit variations all with no issues that weren't my doing.

[@autochronicles8667]

Cars were not as expensive as today... And people enjoyed owning a new car every few years I think.. so off to trade them in!... nowdays people are in loans 6 years.. The price of a top of the line convertible would be 25k in todays dollars in 59 for example... People would be buying a new one every 2-3 years... which is what they were doing back then.

[@Paramount531]

The one thing that stuck out to me that made the Fords look cheap was the steering column with the rod from the shifter exposed. IIRC it went away in 63 and was a tremendous improvement. Ford was the only maker that did that. Other than that I loved the Fords of the era.

[@THROTTLEPOWER]

Great vid, really enjoyed!!!!!

[@sketchydustin8372]

Yeah the Ford one's get pretty deep... And they all exaggerate but they made some good points... I want to see the 61 Ford vs the Dodge.

[@maxr4448]

Ford and Mopar Always got the tail end of the stick through history. Those two brought major changes to the world. My parents bought a '66 Ford Xl convertible. It was one fabulous automobile. They never get any recognition. It is my dream car to this day. I have 1970 Mercury Montego with 351 cleveland... restoring it. GM made awesome engines, and awesome Automatics... They powered tanks. I just didn't like the '61 Chevy front end...to me looked thrown together... but that is just me Be safe all

[@bradzimmerman3171]

57 chevy the most thrown together auto in history- handling was horrible ...

[@jamesbosworth4191]

The Galaxie XL was fantastic. It was in response to the Chevy Impala SS, but it stayed with the same formula - standard V8 power, most with a 352 or 390, some even a 406 or a 427! The 61 Chevy SS had a standard V8, but the 62 and later were strictly appearance - 6 cyl standard, just like the other Chevys.

[@gcfifthgear]

In 1962, the Ford tail fins disappeared, and so did the door handles built into those trim moldings! And why did Ford continue with that triangular metal piece on the back door of Town Victorias (which first appeared in 1957 and lasted in one form or another through 1964)? For that matter, most car companies had abandoned the manual choke by 1961...

[@zchris87v80]

I prefer the mercury line, mainly for the rear. 63-64 still had tailfins and the rear quarter and back of the 63 comet was just clean.

[@zchris87v80]

Not to mention the realization of the futura's concave grille was on the late-50's/early 60's fullsize mercs.

[@southerncross3638]

Fords always looked more solid.

[@timr31908]

The 1961 Ford had the 390 tripower which they called the 401 and that was a force to reckon with it was a 409 eater

[@sketchydustin8372]

Yeah they only made like 1000 high hp chevies... at 305 hp... but Only special high volume dealers could order.

[@customkey]

I like Fords and have owned a few. But if you go back and look at the 1961 NHRA National Championship results, the 390s were out of the running. Chevy 409s driven by Frank Sanders and Don Nicolson and Pontiac 421s run by Arnie Beswick, Jim Wangers, and Mickey Thompson were top dogs in S/S at the Indy nationals and the NHRA winter nationals. A/S and B/S were also dominated by 409 and 421 powered GM's. I was there and saw much of this 1st hand. Ford did a little better with the 427, but then they had to deal with the hemis.

[@sketchydustin8372]

@@customkey by 61 these teams were already backed by big money from the manufacturers... GM could easily pay to make their engines beasts. It came down to how much money they doled out to the racers.... the fix was already in, so you can't really relay on NHRA results. I know by 63 GM would have their cars winning in factory trim... I would easily bet the Fords would win in 61 in factory trim.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

Only 1000? Ford had two 300 horsepower motors - the 4 barrel 352 and the base barrel 390, and a high performance 360 horse 352 and two high performance 390s, 375 horses and 401 horses, and a 330 horse 390 for the police.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

They ultimately were, but the Chevy 409 and the Pontiac 421 didn't come out until mid year. In the early part of the year, the Ford had it going on.

[@herrprepper2070]

My folks bought a new 1961 Ford Fairlane 4-door. Chesapeake Blue. 3 speed column shift. 2bbl 292ci v8. Loved that car. I was 16 with a brand new drivers license.

[@autochronicles8667]

did they keep it? trade it in for another Ford?

[@L4sleeko]

The first front end illustration of the Chevy was comical; slightly droopy at the far ends making it look sad. LoL

[@frankwurth5375]

Both were good values, but a lot of the things claimed to be new for Ford were already available for the Chevy. But most of the other claims are non issues, body styles and moldings and mufflers are just opinion. As for the oil filters, all v8 s Ford or Chevy had the full flow, the Chevy 6 was the partial flow version. But we never had issues with oil on that version of Chevy motors. But those Ford 6's, I always felt that they were a better motor than the low end V8 Ford offered then. Going the longer interval on oil changes was a poor choice unless those miles were long distance driving. The oil technology wasn't up to what we use today. Also remember the cars at that period were kept low cost and folks could afford to trade up every few years. They were never designed to last the miles we expect today. I've owned both makes of that year, I always felt that the Chevy had a better interior grade and better motors, the Ford seemed to use more gas, but my cars were bought used and I accepted them as found, not special ordered. I just wish I still had them both! In the final wrap up, there's very little advantage of either one over the other, the deciding factor would be the dealer prefrence by the buyer, if you have a good relationship with your local dealer, that's the deciding factor.

[@tomservo56954]

I still can't comprehend the idea of ordering an oil filter...

[@frankwurth5375]

On most early motors of that time period, the oil filter assembly was an option, the add on unit was mounted some where on the outside of the motor often on the car inner fender. If the buyer wanted a oil filter system, they had to special order it when the vehicle was ordered. On all modern motors, oil filtering systems are an internal part of the motor.@@tomservo56954

[@jamesbosworth4191]

Actually, the oil filter was optional on Chevy V8s until about 67, although nearly all had it.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

@@tomservo56954 Yup, it was optional, even on Chevy V8s until about 1967.

[@frankwurth5375]

Not so, what your talking about is when GM went from a steel canister filter housing to the modern screw on cartridge. only on the 235 -6 had the add on assembly, and that motor was dropped in 63 and the replacement 230 had the cast in block filter assembly. All V8 GM motors came standard with the filter.@@jamesbosworth4191

[@matrox]

13:40 By 1965 Ford would abandon the Leaf Spring and go to coil springs like Chevys.

[@autochronicles8667]

it was cheaper and a simpler mechanism i think, and they had started stabilizing that rear axle with better support by then. With larger shocks and more rear stabilizer bars it would make sense.

[@mattfarahsmillionmilelexus]

Anyone see that Insurance Institute crash video with the 59 Chevy? That X frame was... really something...

[@autochronicles8667]

yeah that wasn't fair... the worst classic car to use...

[@jamesbosworth4191]

That was doctored. It was supposed to have it's engine in place, but when the front end is caving in, the exhaust pipe does not move at all. Also, that car was supposed to be a Bel Air, but it had Impala roof trim. Me thinks it was put together out of two or more cars, and loosely at that. But no, I do not like that X member frame. Mercedes ALSO used a frame like that, and nobody says a peep about it.

[@tommyversetti4598]

Yeah lol i too think that “impala” was 3d printed. Old cars totally less safe but their metal aint folding like that…

[@KDoyle4]

@@jamesbosworth4191 The engine was in place. Look carefully and you'll see the 235 six during the crash. You can also tell from all the road dirt flying out that the car was not doctored. Simply put, the GM X-frame was a weak design in a crash, and they hit it in the perfect spot to have it fold up like a $5 suitcase.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

@@KDoyle4 If the engine was in place, you would have seen the exhaust pipe move when the front end was being crushed in. That car had no engine. Also, more than a little of the "road dirt" was RUST, and structural RUST severely weakens what was already a weak structure. Also, car was supposed to be a Bel Air, but had Impala roof trim, not easy to retrofit, so I think that car was loosely assembled out of two or more cars. Also, why did the 59's back wheels come off the ground when it and the newer car collided, as if the 59 was a much lighter car? Did they beef-up the newer car, which would have increased it's weight? I never trust ANYTHING coming from Insurance Institutes or ANYTHING from Consumer Reports. I remember the doctored Chevy Truck report - they wired incendiary devices to the gas tanks and rigged them up to explode on impact to make those trucks, which are seriously good trucks, seem totally unsafe. And no, I am not saying that those X-framed GM cars can fare well in crashes. They don't, but I don't believe in exaggerations either.

[@davejensen8882]

How long was the warranty period before the 12 month/12000 miles?

[@autochronicles8667]

90 day warranties only

[@kennethsouthard6042]

I'm surprised they didn't bring up the dogleg which Chevy still had left over from 58 and did not get rid of until 63. As for the engines, they lied a bit as the the 352 and 390 were both FE engines.

[@realmaindrianpace]

They were both good looking cars that year, but in certain body styles, the advantage goes to Ford IMO. '61 Starliner 2dr hardtop - one of my favorite cars of the '60s, the Chevy bubble top just looked plainer, though still the best '61 Chevy design. Wagon - the Squire woody was a beauty. The Chevy was just very nice. Convertible - tossup. 4dr hardtop - Giving it to the Impala here, the roof line was just perfect. Sedans - tossup. None were particularly elegant. In all, no matter which you bought, you did well that year.

[@jimdodge5766]

The ford's are a lot better looking than the chevys

[@operator91210]

In my opinion the 1960 ford was a better looking car than the '61

[@g-mang-man7924]

60 thru 64 Full size Fords are more handsome.

[@bluhammer06]

You never showed the Chevy Impala bubble top! By far the best looking of nearly all 1961 model cars.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

I like that much better than the 63 - 64 Box Tops.

[@graemeburr6463]

@@jamesbosworth4191 The bubble top 61 Chev in my opinion is one of the best looking large cars ( if not the best looking) to come out of the 60's plus it had a simple but neat looking dash and a cool one year only steering wheel. These outstripped the Fords look by miles for that year and I am a "dyed in the wool" Ford man.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

@@graemeburr6463 It was one sweet car, but the 61 Ford Starliner was also a beauty. I always liked it better than the Galaxie Club Victoria.

[@bobadams3661]

@@graemeburr6463 Actually, my favorite was the 62 bubble top. They were made with the left over 61 bubble tops they had.

[@jamesw1659]

This cracks me up. Nobody thought that the standard Fords were better looking than the Chevies at the time; less so, now. In collector circles, very few people are interested in the Fords or Mopars, compared to the GM brands. At that time, and through most of the sixties, GM styling was clearly the market leader, and set the trends. And I am not a GM fan. The Ford was probably the better automobile of the two, but if you want to make that argument, don’t base it on styling.

[@autochronicles8667]

I Agree the post Exner years I think GM took back the styling lead... Mopar would fight back a bit in the late 60's with their muscle cars though... Funny the original Challenger was a total sales failure... People didn't like it... Totally different from today.

[@jamesw1659]

@@autochronicles8667 I don't mean to suggest that Ford and Chrysler didn't have their styling triumphs...the early '60s Lincoln Continental, the Mustang, the original 2-seat Thunderbirds, the '49 Ford, and, of course, Exner's Forward Look family at Chrysler. But from the end of the fifties onward, they weren't as consistently "pretty" , copied, and admired as were the GM designs of that era. GM lost their mojo in the seventies, but by that time, all of the big three were kind of wandering in the wilderness, in my opinion.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

I like the 61 Chevy, except for the 4 door "Sport Sedan", but I was never crazy about the 62 - 64 Chevys. The Fords are way more stylish, and probably safer as well. But I sure will take a 62 - 64 Chevy over anything from Japan, or anything produced nowadays!

[@kennethsouthard6042]

From the 60 - 64 Fords, my favorites were the 61, 63 and 64. The 60 to me was just plain ugly, and the 62 looked too bulky.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

@@kennethsouthard6042 Not everybody liked the 60. I do, but many said it look like a wreck between a 59 Ford and a 59 Chevy.

[@kennethsouthard6042]

@@jamesbosworth4191 I read that the 60 had to be redesigned for 61 due to its width. Ford had actually made an error that nobody caught until it was too late and the car was too wide for the specifications spelled out by the Department of Transportation for a passenger car. They were only given a waiver for the 1960 model year.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

@@kennethsouthard6042 They had to flatten the body sides a little, but it was no error, they just thought they could get away with it.

[@kennethsouthard6042]

@@jamesbosworth4191 Makes you wonder, had that not happened, would they have changed the design direction like they did in 61 which they stayed pretty close through 64,

[@errorsofmodernism7331]

Chevy has always had a strong following with the cheap beer crowd.

[@markbehr88]

Cool. I have a 61 Galaxie. Much better looking than the Chev

[@ronchase1673]

I’m a ford guy but once owned a 61 impala, I loved the impala, my Dad owned a 1960 Ford, I owned a 66 Galaxie but I feel remembering and driving the 60 Ford I can say I am also familiar with the CT Ford, wish I had a 61 Ford and Chevy now though,I’ll take a 352 ford and special order the tranny and rear, lighten it up add a few bolt ons, ( I know what about the 390) I’m on a budget, I’d put some craters on the Ford then the Chevy? I’d take a BelAir with the 348, ad a few bolt ons special order tranny and rear ( what about the 409, ) the dealer gave me a sweet heart deal on the 348, now I have near equal ford and Chevy for cruising I’m a happy boy, but now back to reality

[@danwohlslagel1277]

The '61 Starliner vs the '61 bubble-top Impala?? that is one tough comparison! They are both the best of the era for me as far as design. The Starliner had the Thunderbird 390, but the SS 409 / 4 speed for 1961 gives the Chevy the edge.

[@autochronicles8667]

the SS 409 is unobtanium :) they only made a handful that survived... it was a special build that essentially doesn't exist... Most 61 Chevys are resto mods with LS's and aftermarket engines because the factory was so low HP. Oh wait they only made 142 409 cars... how many survived? 5 cars? 10?

[@danwohlslagel1277]

@@autochronicles8667 good point I was not aware of that I just saw that 61 was the first year for the 409 and that you could get it with a 4-speed. Love that Starliner.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

Only later in the year. Ford's 401 horse 390 and even their 360 horse 352 would run away from the 350 horse 348.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

@@autochronicles8667 Might be more than 5 or 10, but they are super rare. 348 cars are much more plentiful, and the solid lifter ones are good performers, if you can find one.

[@timblaes7028]

Looks wise, they're both good. The 61 Plymouth had a face only a mother could love.

[@stevedeleon8775]

Chevrolet Impalas are the official Low Rider Of California "Odale Vatos!

[@LearnAboutFlow]

Unlike a lot of the Chrysler videos of the same era that strain to point out differences, this video gives solid competitive advantages.

[@autochronicles8667]

Eh Chrysler did a lot of drag races... and brake tests. They even did a huge video in 57... so I am not sure about that. And Roy Ross was an outside company doing various videos for companies and companies back in the 50's cared about their reputation. I see fudging when the video came directly from the company as they took some liberties and had some false facts. I will agree this was a good comparison though and Ford made some good points.

[@stevedeleon8775]

FACE IT that Galaxie is a Giant Falcon..your not fooling me Ford

[@autochronicles8667]

Shhh... :)

[@haldriver1378]

In the old days, Ford actually wanted customers. Times change.

[@autochronicles8667]

yeah it doesnt seem like they care much... they just want to sell F150s

[@stevedeleon8775]

Why don't we see Ford Galaxie Low Riders? Where are they People?

[@tonywestvirginia]

I'll take it! Where do I get one?

[@autochronicles8667]

they cost a little more nowadays, but they are for sale... slightly used :)

[@craigjorgensen4637]

Fords in those years ate brake linings and drums especially on the Station Wagons!

[@autochronicles8667]

Yeah, there were certainly issues with vehicles. Some were like engineering fails... I am going to recap certain years of makes and troubles people reported(they sent in mailer responses). I have a tremendous amount of info.

[@tommissouri4871]

10:33 - LOL, that long stroke give it the torque it has. 12:09 - But, but, but, Ford was bragging about their oil-bath air filter on a video about earlier cars. 21:33 - They show getting out of the Chevy but what about in and out of the Ford? In reality, all of these boil down to personal preferences. Depending on which you liked, it was "better". These types of sales tactics work for people who were just looking for a car, and had very little understanding of anything automotive.

[@autochronicles8667]

It's better on every aspect Mr Smith! Those are the FACTS !:)

[@johnathanleonardo912]

I think people prefer restoring Chevy's over ford's because of society in my opinion. If you had a Chevy you would be cool but if you attached yourself to Ford even if it's a classic Ford not these Ecoboost crap, you would still be considered meh. That's why I give props for Ford with having 3 divisions at that time hanging with the giant GM and their 10 divisions lol

[@autochronicles8667]

Leno has a really nice one... I think GM cars just have a bigger customer base. I really love the 1960 Fords/Edsels

[@johnathanleonardo912]

@@autochronicles8667 that could be the case. If I had Money I would definitely try to find an old thunderbird or Falcon

[@jamesbosworth4191]

I would never let others tell me what I should like or dislike. I still drive a 73 GMC with a 292 6 cyl, 3 speed on the tree, manual steering and manual brakes, and a 54 Chrysler wagon with a HEMI, because I like them, not because others do.

[@tomservo56954]

@@jamesbosworth4191 What newer cars can you dust with that Hemi?

[@jamesbosworth4191]

@@tomservo56954Haven't tried in a number of years - I'm an old guy now - but the last time I did was about 10 years ago. He was driving a Porsche and didn't really know how to use a standard transmission, so I was able to rocket up the hill and leave him as if he was in Neutral. I'm sure if he knew how to drive the thing he would have won. But I don't care if today's rolling computers can beat me. You have to bring them to the shop if something goes wrong. I can fix my car in my driveway. And I don't have to get smog checks, it doesn't have catalytic converters, it rides nice and smooth, it has almost unlimited room, and it isn't Japanese.

[@henrychinaski5223]

Yes, yes! That's why you see so many '61 Fords still on the road...hahahaha! The '61 Impala SS was and is an absolute beauty compared the things Ford was turning out. That being said, my dream car is still a '63 Thunderbird with a 390 ci engine.

[@autochronicles8667]

There is not a huge amount of 61 Chevys over the 61 Fords actually... probably about 30% more.. And Chevy has a bigger following, so they have higher values... which drives more interest to get them restored and out there. I like the 60 Fords better but the 61 is not ugly imho.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

While I was never crazy about the 62 - 64 Chevys, I always like the 61, except for the "sports sedan". To blocky and upright looking for me. I like the 4 door post with that wedge roof better, even if it does look Corvair-like.

[@maccole1406]

While Chevy was asleep in Nascar Fords were winning races that could be why you see more Chevys at car shows 😂

[@antoniohosino145]

@@maccole1406 ALL THAT CHANGED IN 64 WITH RICHARD PETTY WINNING AT DAYTONA WITH THE 426 HEMI !!!

[@tommywatterson5276]

I choose the Fords hands down.

[@scottsimonds6214]

61 Chevy Biscayne with base 283, first car ever owned, age 15, sold to me by my brother in law for $1. Being a first car thought it was greatest car in the universe, gave me the freedom to get out of my limited neighborhood world! In reality that was the ugliest car I ever owned, next car just a year later was MGB, instantly went from being nerd to cool, MGB real chic magnet!

[@stephenholland5930]

Not much room in the back of an MGB for "activities" though 😅

[@scottsimonds6214]

This is true, although I recall many girls willing to sit on that tiny parcel shelf with the mini skirts so popular at the time, and this with roof up in cold weather! In warm weather I'd have them sit up on body with legs down on parcel shelf, got stopped by head cop of traffic control unit one time, read me the riot act, made the girls get out find rides home. Said if he caught me doing that again I'm going to slammer.@@stephenholland5930

[@DustinBaerwolf-kv9jx]

I'd still take the Chevy !!! Of course with the 348/409 😊

[@paulsheehan5010]

Not all Bel Airs had back up lights, like Biscayne and Impala.

[@tomservo56954]

Only Impalas had them standard

[@paulsheehan5010]

Chevy has bonded brake lining, Ford has rivited brake linings.

[@markriley1862]

My First Car was the 1961 Impala Sport Coupe and I'd Buy another in a South Dakota minute

[@stewartgregory3364]

I had a 1961 Chevy bubble top, 409 4 speed SS(she's real fine). The car had a factory scatter shield. Wish I still had it. I worked for Ford 4 times as a mechanic. You know what we Ford mechanics used to call Ford owners? Pedestrians

[@jetsons101]

Chevy had it right with the gas tank between the wheel wells, much safer with the fuel tank away from the rear bumper "pinto anybody." Sad but it would be years before fuel tanks will be placed in a safer location. A important difference between the Chevy and Ford is that Ford located the steering gear behind the front suspension "safer" while Chevy mounted the steering gear just behind the front bumper --- not good for a head on collision. All in all they are both death-traps compared to new cars. KZbin "2009 Chevy Malibu vs 1959 Bel Air Crash Test | Consumer Reports" Thanks for posting, from a mechanic......

[@autochronicles8667]

uhg the x frame was a total failure

[@weskirkland5850]

shocking 70+ years later we only have a 36k/3yr warranty. ought to be 60k bumper to bumper 6 year warranty... 150k drivetrain.

[@weskirkland5850]

especially as much as these junk shits cost now.

[@autochronicles8667]

yeah were regressing :) and there is no right to repair you own vehicle anymore.

[@joelpierce3940]

I didn’t like the “X” frame. When did they ditch it?

[@frankwurth5375]

65

[@donfronterhouse1849]

And yet Chevy sold 491,000 Impalas compared to 350,000 Galaxies. That's more Impalas, isn't it?🤔

[@tomservo56954]

The Falcon made up the difference...

[@autochronicles8667]

I don't think sales totals always followed car value\quality\perfomance etc... sales unit total involved a lot of factors... advertising, brand loyalty, sales incentives, availability just to name a few.

[@ronbrock6153]

@@autochronicles8667 I think selling 141,000 more units clearly shows which car the public prefered, there is no to rationalize that huge number.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

@@ronbrock6153 Ford outsold Chevy in 1935, 46, 54, 57, 59, and 65. Chevy outsold Ford in the other years.

[@donfronterhouse1849]

@@jamesbosworth4191 I haven't fact checked your numbers,but I know right off the top of my head that Chevy sold over one million Impalas in 1965 and turned around and repeated that in 1966. Ford has always bragged about the success of Mustang in those two years, they sold about a million ponies in 65&66 combined. I know Mustangs and Impalas are apples and oranges,but the Pony was their best seller by far, that's all I'm saying.

[@jimdodge5766]

Ford beat them by a mile easily

[@derrickclarke1621]

So chevy only has 3 engines according to the Ford spokesman, but 6 run on premium. Only 3 when they make a point, that in their opinion only 3, others are modified, dont count, but to make OUR point about how many on premium there are now 8. Cant have your cake and eat it too Ford!!! Hahaha funny, truth in advertising.

[@dr.kennethj.sacchetti2765]

Comment to g-mang-man: I will agree that the 1961-1964 Ford Galaxie, especially the 500 XL, 2 door hardtop and convertible had impressive styling. I had a 1964 Impala SS convertible with all the bells and whistles. Not only was it a very nicely styled car, customers also agreed with me according to sales records. I have had 11 Chevrolets and 2 Fords. Except for my first car, a 1965 Impala which I bought used, I had good luck with all of them. Consider the fact that Chevrolet outsold Ford every year from 1929 through the end of the 20 th century, except for 1959 and 1960 when the Chevrolet and all GM cars were ugly. It is all a matter of personal taste. Unfortunately, in the 21st century, NOBODY makes a decent looking car, or a fairly priced car, or even a car that is worth anywhere near the outragrous cost of a new car!

[@autochronicles8667]

Everything new is nice little round jelly beans :)

[@kevinbobo9185]

I'll take the Chevy in all years and find them better looking than Ford, and if the test of time means anything, 62 years later you will find more Chevrolet from that era still on the road than Fords, not to mention in 65 Chevrolet blew the doors off of Ford with their gorgeous Impala. The Galaxy couldn't compete, as the sales numbers proved.

[@autochronicles8667]

Sales numbers involve a lot of issues. I think the Galaxy for 61 was just as nice as the Chevy. I know people would be shocked by the Plymouth that year :) And making more would equate to more surviving also.

[@stephenvelden295]

Gee I dunno. That Chevy wagon is $3.00 cheaper!

[@carlyleporter5388]

Ford picked the wrong year Chevy to mock. The '61 Impala was one of the top three most attractive Chevy designs. 61 Ford was one of the ugliest Fords. Next to the '62. Other than that, this Ford advertisement might be pretty right.

[@autochronicles8667]

well beauty is in the eye of the beholder.. and that Ford looks pretty good. I would go with the 64 Chevy more though

[@gregt8638]

I've generally loved both the Chevy Impalas and the Ford Galaxies. Looks wise, In '60 I thought the Impala looked better than the Ford. But I will give it to Ford as a better-looking car in '61. In '62 I Ithink the Impala looked better than the Galaxy.

[@autochronicles8667]

I love the one year 1960 I think the most.

[@curtcollett2893]

Personally I thought they both got it right in 63.

[@nicholasmagcamit8233]

Ford looks way better ! Chevy tried to claimed that the car is way better ! 1960s ford cars are way cooler !

[@tomservo56954]

Styling was, is, and will always be subjective

[@jamesbosworth4191]

And many 61 Chevys are 6 cyl, almost all 61 Fords are V8s, many being Big Blocks. Most V8 Chevys were small blocks.

[@davidcampbell1899]

Back in 61, why on earth would you want a lousy CHEV when you could have a FORD! FORD stands for FIRST ON RACE DAY...if you had a 390 in your car you would find out why, the dam thing would be idling at 90mph!

[@autochronicles8667]

Hah yeah well... Chevy guys gonna disagree :)

[@MrSticks9999]

I go against the norm . . .would like to start daily driving a car like this today.

[@autochronicles8667]

Driving an older vehicle is different that's for sure but many states/insurance basically make it not possible. Insurance won't insure you and getting a daily driving plate might be tough.

[@MrSticks9999]

@@autochronicles8667 I've never had an issue. I own 18 right now, not a joke. Not everyone is tagged, because several are in restoration. But never had an issue with insurance. I also do restoration work and am a retired Auto Instructor. Old cars interest me, new one not much at all.

[@larrybrown3951]

Since 1961 when I was in the first grade, I have thought 61 Chevrolet's were the ugliest cars ever built.

[@davidhibbs6989]

Like comparing Apple's and oranges 😂

[@JohnSmith-cf4gn]

I'm old and have always been a Ford nut more or less. I would prefer a 61 Chevrolet with a 348 4spd over a 61 Ford.

[@autochronicles8667]

Chevy I think was out front in Styling in 61-65ish... Ford and Chrysler kind got into limbo... Ford and Chrysler were trying to figure out what to do after fins...

[@jimstewart2457]

This video is funny as £uck!!!! We all you don’t see many 1961 fords at cars shows because people prefer a TRUE classic and that was the Impala!!!!

[@autochronicles8667]

lol thems fighting words but for was making some points... Chevy certainly realized their hp was down,...

[@JosephPercel]

I'm sold on the Ford. Heck, I'll take two!

[@KDoyle4]

The Ford had quite a few good points. If only the Ford had better rust protection.

[@autochronicles8667]

It didn't have flush and dry rockers! ... not sure how much those worked but it was a good sales pitch... All these cars were rusted pretty bad in a few years if they were up north.... just gone...

[@KDoyle4]

@@autochronicles8667 I'm in northern New Jersey and my Grandfather bought a 1961 Belair brand new. It still looked pretty darn good when it was 14 years old, but the '61 Ford Country Squire down the street was rotted to pieces.

[@althunder4269]

Ford seems to be the better of the two.

[@bradzimmerman3171]

In the days of "Demolition Derby"59 chevy folded immediately first hit- not unlike a new Silverado gM pick up

[@paulsheehan5010]

Chevys, only had a two speed automatic, no mid range passing power.

[@jimdodge5766]

I had a 326 Lemans with a 2 speed power glide it would run 72 mph in 1st gear.true story

[@KDoyle4]

@@jimdodge5766 Unless you had a Canadian Pontiac, the 2-speed transmission in your LeMans was a Super Turbine 300, a much more efficient transmission than a Powerglide.

[@g-mang-man7924]

All of the Big Fords from 60 to 64 all look way better than the Chevrolets

[@I-Libertine]

I dunno: I'm a Ford fan, but side by side? Hmmm...

[@commonyetrare]

Your delusional, what about the 64 Impala, that is one of the most beautiful cars ever made.

[@JackF99]

Especially 1961- if you look at the Galaxy, the T-bird, the Lincoln. All absolutely stunning.

[@JackF99]

@@tomservo56954Virgil Excess was still over at Chrysler trying his best to completely separate Form from Function once and for all.

[@tomservo56954]

@@JackF99 My error...reposting a correct comment.

[@tomservo56954]

Ford finished ahead of Chevrolet for 1961, with Rambler 3rd, just ahead of Pontiac.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

In 61? I thought in 60.

[@joeapplebaum3763]

I always wanted a ‘61 Chevy until I saw this video. Ford sold me!

[@autochronicles8667]

61 Chevy is still pretty nice :)

[@mikedrown2721]

Don't get T-Boned in the chev or you DIE. I like the 🇨🇦 Meteor better

[@sketchydustin8372]

Dont jack it up either...

[@jamesbosworth4191]

Wish I could find a Meteor convertible!

[@tomservo56954]

@@jamesbosworth4191 American or Canadian?

[@mikedrown2721]

​@@tomservo56954🇨🇦

[@jamesbosworth4191]

@@tomservo56954 Canadian. I don't think there was a 61 American Meteor.

[@rondpert5167]

Too much to say, except, where are all those Fords now?

[@autochronicles8667]

They are around, certainly rarer but 61 Chevys are rare also.

[@tonycolca2241]

The labor costs to work on a ford are higher than ford. I'm talking 1961.

[@autochronicles8667]

labor costs would be pretty darn close I would think.

[@tonycolca2241]

@@autochronicles8667 I meant to say chevys were cheaper to work on than ford's I was working as a mechanic back then. Let me give you a good example to pull the transmission out of a 1941 to 1948 ford you had to take the entire rear end out housing springs everything then you had to remove the front seat in the car lift carpet or rubber mat remove 6 bolts from access panel and remove transmission from inside of car. I even asked can it not be done any other way relay was you can try but you will wind up doing all that anyway when people got the labor bill they were not happy we referred ford's elsewhere.

[@antoniohosino145]

THE FORDS LOOK LIKE COP CARS OR GRANDMA & GRANDPA MOBILES !! THE 1960 / 61 WERE SPORTIER LOOKS CARS WITH A HUGE ENGINE CHOICE !!!

[@I-Libertine]

He says "Corvair" like it's a *bad thing! 😂

[@sketchydustin8372]

wait was it good? :) I have yet to hear that :)

[@jamesbosworth4191]

He was trying to imply that the 61 Chevy's styling was following the lead of their Junior car, the Corvair, and copying a Junior model has always been a big no-no.

[@tomservo56954]

@jamesbosworth4191 The Corvair was cutting edge at the time...

[@jamesbosworth4191]

@@tomservo56954 It was, but it was still the Junior model, meaning smaller cheaper model. A convertible would sure be nice though!

[@sergeantmasson3669]

Fords then far better than Chevy and still are, period.

[@terryturman8495]

This is gonna be the funniest thing I've ever seen.

[@autochronicles8667]

Hey that Ford is NICE mister :)

[@paulsheehan5010]

Chevy had a 409 c.i.d.

[@autochronicles8667]

They did but it was mid year so doesn't really count... they realized Ford\Mopar had skunked them. Only by special order if the dealer had high sales... And it was 360 hp and they only sold like 1000 of them... so they were VERY hard to get... The 413 was putting out 380 with the dual quad... and 62 the Max Wedge would go nuts at 425 hp... So Chevy was playing catch up

[@KDoyle4]

The 409 was not released until the end of the 1961 model year.

[@bonessixtyone]

61 Chevy is a way better looking car than the Ford.

[@LanceisLawson]

The 1960 Fords were horrible rust buckets! The Ford PR department really had to scrape the bottom of the barrel to come up with the superior details of Ford. The Ford tail fin park aiming was laughable.

[@autochronicles8667]

They needed FLUSH AND DRY rockers like chevy! :)

[@fob1xxl]

Fords always looked nicer than Chevy's.

[@autochronicles8667]

eye of the beholder :) Gimme a 60 Ford or Edsel :)

[@motorradmike]

This is hilarious.

[@Kevin-jb1gj]

I love the Plymouths styling better

[@mattfarahsmillionmilelexus]

The '61 Plymouth? Really?

[@tomservo56954]

@@mattfarahsmillionmilelexus Taste is subjective and individual

[@autochronicles8667]

it was space age :) and very different... rocket ship

[@jamesbosworth4191]

@@mattfarahsmillionmilelexus Now that is a car that is an acquired taste!

[@JackF99]

There's no question that the Ford is a better looking car but does the narrator have to describe what we can see as if we were all blind?

[@autochronicles8667]

Monday morning, you show up at the dealership and you just woke up, got your coffee and you are half awake :) Probably smoking a cigarette in the show room :) And you have to remember the sales pitch movie your boss showed you... I found this video really interesting because Ford went deep into every small feature in its comparison. The video title included "trifles" :) so they went after each small feature.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

That's how advertising and promotion work.

[@matrox]

The Chevy looks better though. The Chevy looks sporty, the Ford looks boring. Now move to the 64 and 65 Galaxies and we can talk cool.

[@autochronicles8667]

Cmon it's a Corvair! :)

[@nigelstewart4736]

Some hilarious hair splitting propaganda going on there.

[@autochronicles8667]

yeah a lot of these videos are getting down... but hey if you are selling them... you want all the ammo you can get.

[@StephenViola-ib8dq]

This is all Ford propaganda!! Trying to outsell Chevy!!

[@autochronicles8667]

yeah GET out there and sell sell sell!

[@dyer2cycle]

Sorry, the '61 Chevy is a far more attractive car than the '61 Ford...I always thought the '61 Ford fins/tail lights(and the '62-'63 Fairlane) were a return to the '57 look after looking different in '58, '59, and '60...same in '62, Chevy far better looking..in fact, all GM '61-'62 cars were attractive..'63 Galaxie was the best looking of the early-mid '60's Fords, only year in that time frame Ford came close, IMHO...

[@denislandry7577]

Lol

[@Foreman4million-ts1oq]

Still won't buy a ford though

[@Foreman4million-ts1oq]

There both great cars tho

[@vincem1957]

A car has a style and ford always came short compared to chevys...

[@johndudgeon7954]

You by

[@vincem1957]

Me by? What? Is that an answer?

[@robertschrans5700]

What's with the fucking Bell

[@Wori17ben]

That's to tell you to move to the next slide

[@autochronicles8667]

yeah kind of hard to cut out :(