Model History: Chrysler Imperial

[@davidtosh7200]

In 1955, Imperial is a separate make instead of Chrysler’s top of the line model and more cost then a New York and Windsor in that order.

[@thehopelesscarguy]

Yes.

[@brianmoore6306]

Love the Imperials. Great history of this make/model. I'm a big fan!!!

[@thehopelesscarguy]

Cool.

[@cliftontorrence839]

I got to ride in a low mileage Grandma's 1958 from LA to Knoxville,TN. That was summer 1967. I never forgot the amazing Imperial.

[@thehopelesscarguy]

That is the car for a ride like that.

[@billhowes7937]

Imperial was one of the best looking cars ever made. I drove a Lincoln Continental ('62) two T-Birds and four Cadillacs but the Imperial had them all beat style wise . .

[@DavidHall-ge6nn]

Wonderful video documentation of one of my favorite makes! An elegant expression of engineering excellence and (often) styling excess, Imperials were sadly underrated in their day and elicit an "I remember when" sigh today, especially while viewing these absolutely stunning photographs. Thank you!

[@thehopelesscarguy]

Thanks. Imperials were often under rated and never really had the status of their competitors. I think much of that was that they were considered to be "just" Chryslers by many.

[@asparagusjones1775]

Love the Airflow's, Great styling and the windshields opening up, very cool design. And the later swivel seats, some very cool designs.

[@thehopelesscarguy]

Swivel seats need to make a comeback.

[@randyrobey5643]

These are wonderful cars that were fully competitive with the competition in most areas and superior to the competition in many ways.

[@thehopelesscarguy]

4 out of 5 doctors preferred Imperial to Cadillac or Lincoln.

[@michaelshaules3197]

great, most Imperial videos do not cover the early years, really enjoyed it, thanks

[@thehopelesscarguy]

Glad you enjoyed it

[@raymondhaley6185]

It wasn't a Cadillac or Lincoln, but at the same time, Chrysler imperial was the only flagship sedan that later shared it's drivetrain with chargers, roadrunners, barracuda, and Challenger, furthermore because it's horsepower imperials, could do what Cadillac and Lincoln couldn't do, and that it could do tire burnouts.

[@thehopelesscarguy]

4 out of 5 Drs preferred Imperials.

[@somersetdc]

A very well done presentation...thanks!

[@thehopelesscarguy]

Thank you.

[@thomasomalley7745]

I remember when I was young watching a mid- 60s Elvis rom-com movie, nothing great, but what remember was Presley cruising down the Blvd in a (66?) Drop top Chrysler cream yellow Imperial with the continental package in back. That was when I fell in love with Imperial. Being in New England,you didn't see many of them , mostly Caddy's and Lincolns for big luxury boats. Still, whenever I see that movie scheduled I turn it on just for those scenes. The King cruising in a rag top Imperial doesn't get any better.

[@thehopelesscarguy]

What movie is that?

[@thomasomalley7745]

@@thehopelesscarguy not sure if it was Spinout, Clambake, or double trouble. But it was in that time period.

[@charmainejames9539]

1963 Imperial convertible prominently featured in Doris Day/ James Garner film "Move Over Darling " In one scene of the movie, Doris Day goes through an automatic car wash with the top down!

[@edwardallan197]

Totally fascinating progression.....

[@thehopelesscarguy]

I think so, but I'm into that sort of thing.

[@OLDS98]

Very good video. You covered everything. I liked the footage and information. Imperial indeed. I recall the models from the mid 1960's, 1970's and 1980s and 1990's. I liked the ones from the 1990's with the better horsepower, but the issue was quality. I remember being confused by the mid 1970's models because they became New Yorkers. The New Yorker and this car were indeed close over many years especially in the 1970's and 1990's. It was really evident in the 1990's with New Yorker Fifth Avenue and Imperial. The new 1994 modes became New Yorker and LHS. I often wonder if LHS could have been Imperial.Thank you so much.

[@thehopelesscarguy]

Thanks. I have wondered how the LHS would have done if it had been called Imperial.

[@OLDS98]

@@thehopelesscarguy Me too.

[@GaryGrube1]

1960 - 1976 Imperials where the most beautiful American Luxury cars. After that the styling began to melt into anonymity. To me, the Imperials of the '60s were the very pinnacle of American Luxury cars.

[@thehopelesscarguy]

They had a presence.

[@RichardinNC1]

Nice summation of the Imperial history. One error I saw, the pic @ 11:53 is a New Yorker. The 74 & 75 Imperial had the vertical taillights (and waterfall grille with hidden headlights). The styling was virtually unchanged when becoming the New Yorker in 1976. I was always a fan, especially of the 69-75 styling. Even found Imperial seats that fit in my Dodge Monaco with slight modification to the rear back cushion.

[@thehopelesscarguy]

Thanks for the info!

[@johneckert1365]

Yup ☝️ When the Imperial became the New Yorker Brougham in 76, the 74-75 New Yorker body became the 76-78 Newport. Town & Country also got that body. Damn, a Town & Country with the 76-78 New Yorker front end would've been sexy! 🥵🥵🥵

[@Primus54]

Unfortunately, Chrysler is following in the footsteps of other manufacturers and stepping away from sedans and, eventually, internal combustion engines. Great video, as always.

[@thehopelesscarguy]

It will be sad to see the 300 go, it is one of the few new vehicles I would consider.

[@Primus54]

@@thehopelesscarguy I’m with you. Closest thing we old timers have to the great, full-size sedans of yesteryear. And other than Bentleys, looks like no other car on the road. 👍

[@nephi5059]

Wow. I really liked your comment. Ditto. No sedans. No gasoline engines. I've never understood TRUCK (SUV) as luxury car. Build it and they will come, proving how easy MIND CONTROL is. Chrysler going all EV due to it's European wonk owner. Can you believe Challenger/Charger as EV muscle car. I suspect we will see next year the REDUX of Edsel. Collapse of Chrysler , no gasoline engines...which Americans still love. Biggest automotive disaster in history. No guy is gonna buy EV. " MUSCLE " car. However liked most Imperials. 64-66 by far favorite. 67-68 liked. The fuselage styling was OK. Too gigantic. Frank Sinatra IMP cool looking. K car as luxury. Later. Wow.

[@thehopelesscarguy]

@@nephi5059 Considering how much they are shoving the EV down our throats, they really aren't selling. If you look at the top 10 selling EVs from last year, the #3 through 10 have sales figures that would get most cars cancelled. As far as luxury trucks, we used to call them "Cowboy Cadillacs", but I guess trophy wives have to drive somethings.

[@dicksanders8206]

Well said@@nephi5059

[@auntbarbara5576]

Splendid video, really enjoyed, thank you Mr HGC!!

[@thehopelesscarguy]

Thank you.

[@pierredecine1936]

As a long-time Chrysler buff, I enjoyed that - I have a 1996 Caprice now ...

[@thehopelesscarguy]

Thanks. Nice.

[@pierredecine1936]

@@thehopelesscarguy indeed - it has been owned by my Uncle, who is now 92, since new... we have been restoring it for 6 yrs. Final year, last body on Frame large Chevy -265 F.I. motor - 200 hp

[@OsbornTramain]

Very nice Video, Imperial is one of my favorite Brands. I would just disagree with you on the point at 12:44 where you say that Chrysler wasn't a Brand anymore. Being an Employee at the time, it indeed was a separate brand. There were only 250 dealers that were given Imperial Franchises. The VIN number itself also separated it from the Chrysler Brand. It was produced on a separate line in the manufacturing facilities and the only Employees that could become Imperial Assembly workers had to have had at least 20 years of Chrysler experience. Chrysler went out of it's way to make the Imperial a new brand, but sadly, timing is everything as you say and it wasn't meant to be. BTW, the car literally shares nothing with the Cordoba, only that it was the same plateform used by the Mirada and Cordoba and derived from the M body and F body platform

[@thehopelesscarguy]

Thanks. I will take your word on that. I suppose I could have worded it differently, but the separation of Chrysler and Imperial was certainly more defined during some periods than others.

[@johneckert1365]

In all honesty, that 81 Imperial was just a fancy Volare. Just like Caddy's Seville was a fancy Nova, and Lincon's Versailles was a fancy Grenada 🤭🤭🤭

[@RaymondHaley-bi8lx]

What the kids of don't know is, that back early days of the industry land yacht, s and Blvd cruisers were once the make shift hotrods and drag cars of the time, the kind of car/s you don't use as stunt cars such as jumping over bridges or drifting, and yet they were powerful without the aid NOS kit and a turbo charger V8,s were powerful without computers.

[@thehopelesscarguy]

They were certainly a more common source of big cubes.

[@rbleslie1971]

Great review of the key points.

[@ramblerdave1339]

My grandmother had the ' 53 hardtop, in Maroon with white top, and maroon leather. I was amazed by the power vent windows (still am), and as a small child, the doors were too heavy for me to open! Always had a soft spot for Imperials after that. A girl that used to drive me home from High School, had a '57 Imperial 2dr Hardtop, in pink metallic. I was big enough to open my own door, on that one! 😂

[@thehopelesscarguy]

I understand. The first kid in my neighborhood to get a car got a 65 T-bird and everyone was fascinated by the power wing windows.

[@williamg2552]

From Wikipedia: “For the 1955 model year, the Imperial was launched and registered as a separate marque (make), apart from the Chrysler brand. It was a product of the new Imperial Division of Chrysler Corporation, meaning that the Imperial would be a make and division unto itself, and not bear the Chrysler name. Chrysler Corporation sent notices to all State Motor Vehicle Licensing agencies in the then-48 states, informing them, that the Imperial, beginning in 1955, would no longer be registered as a Chrysler, but as a separate make .”

[@thehopelesscarguy]

Yeah?

[@williamg2552]

@@thehopelesscarguy It’s true . See Wikipedia, better yet go to Google, and enter THIS : “ Imperial-Separate Make, 1955.” See how many HITS you’ll get.

[@williamg2552]

How do you know that it’s not just the OPPOSITE? That the 1955 C-300 wasn’t sharing the IMPERIAL’S grille ? I say: “Which car came out FIRST ?” IMPERIAL ? (1926) or 300 ? (1955) People also say the SAME THING about the Chrysler New Yorker : that the IMPERIALS “Borrowed” certain things from THAT car. I SAY: “Which Car came out FIRST” The IMPERIAL? (1926?) or the New Yorker ? (1939) so It seems to Me that those OTHER cars copied from the CAR that was introduced FIRST: The Incomparable IMPERIAL !!

[@thehopelesscarguy]

@@williamg2552 I am aware, and it was even stated in the video, hence the question mark.

[@impsrule60]

@williamg2552 Thank you for posting these additional facts. This was quite a good video overall and clearly done with good intention by @thehopelesscarguy But there is often a tendency to dismiss the Imperial Division (1955-75) because the effort wasn't the sales success that was hoped for. But not winning the championship doesn't mean "it's not a football team." Look, I love Imperial's. I've owned two 1960's, a 1967... In fact, I owned the gold '66 LeBaron pictured in this video until this past June. Chrysler Corporation's first mistake was in waiting 28 years to launch Imperial Division as a separate marque. Imagine if Toyota had sold a "Toyota Lexus" model for 30 years before spinning it off? Two generations of consumers were used to saying "Chrysler Imperial." Mistake two: allowing the Chrysler 300 (...which wasn't introduced until January, 1955) to 'borrow' the grille from Imperial just three months after the luxury car was introduced. Most non-Imperial fans say: "So what? Imperial was just a Chrysler!" Marketing a luxury car is ALL "illusion". There is no 'practical' reason to spend thousands more on a DeVille when the Electra or 98 is just as nice and based on the same platform. Prestige is a perceived value. All of the marques shared certain components. Imagine if GM had allowed the 1953 Buick Skylark to "borrow" the Cadillac grille to enhance Buick's cachet? Never! Smart product planners go to great lengths to retain the illusion of great difference. Chrysler Corporation seemed to 'waffle' from the beginning. I think that Chrysler Corp. seemed uneasy from day one about allowing "Imperial" to eclipse the eponymous "Chrysler" Division as its most prestigious brand. That being said, their uncertainty and poor brand management doesn't change the fact that Imperial became a separate marque for 1955 and remained so thru 1975: lack of marketplace success notwithstanding.

[@LyallAbbott58]

Always for the most part liked all Chrysler products

[@thehopelesscarguy]

The good, the bad and the ugly.

[@slottibarfast5402]

There were a lot of great designs in those 50s cars but I don't know what the thought was behind the turn signals on top of the fins . Looks like how you would put turn signals on a tractor. I guess we were sending rockets into space and cars picked up on those designs. Very smooth ride as you drove to the bridge to dump the body in the trunk into the river.

[@bernardfitzgerald6117]

Terrific work Accurate and precise Stress on images of the subject ,rather than the narrator truly appreciated

[@thehopelesscarguy]

Thanks, I'm learning as I go.

[@Friedbrain11]

I had a '63 Imperial LeBaron that had a dual inline 4 bbl on a 413 with 10.25:1 compression. It was a wonderful engine and topped out at 130mph :) The car was optioned out and I really wish I had it back. It was a gold color with a gold brocade cloth interior and it was a beauty! Options included an actual tire mount for the trunk lid so a tire was actually mounted in the Continental bump:) To me the last real Imperials were the '63 years and after that they were more like a Lincoln wannabe that was not a real Imperial.

[@ramblerdave1339]

The Chrysler 300 used the Imperial grille, not the other way around, none of the other Chrysler models had it.

[@thehopelesscarguy]

Isn't that what I said? Guess not.

[@collinsje5]

To me, the rear of the 1964 Imperial was the most distinctive and luxurious looking. We never had Imperials, because my Greatest Generation father was a GM man - mainly Pontiac. His Boomer son (me) is now a Toyota guy after suffering through 3 dismal Chevrolet products in the 1970s.

[@Mike_Collins392]

The claims that Chrysler made at the time regarding the 413 vs 392 were just way far out from the truth. A 392 and 413 weigh about the same ( the 413 block is much heavier ). By 1963 circle track racers ( Chrysler ) were begging to go back to the 331 and 354 engines ( at the height of the " Max Wedge " program ). The 392 was powering dragsters going faster than scientists thought possible by 1963. Staying on topic , 1956 Imperial ( 354 ) valve covers are stamped " Chrysler FirePower " . 1957 - 58 ( 392 ) valve covers are stamped " Imperial " . I bought a 56 Imperial back in 1989 . The car was trashed , barely drivable ... the floor was completely rusted out everywhere. But the engine ran so strong . I had to drive it 15 miles afraid to rest my feet ( and looking down and seeing asphalt ). I still have the engine along with some other early FirePower 331 and 392 . Fantastic engines , works of art when you see the internals up close.

[@thehopelesscarguy]

My personal experience with the first gen Hemi is limited to a 392 powered 56 F-100 that was used as a bump starter. Meaning I can't really dispute the claims one way or the other, so I'll take your word for it. Although I suspect Imperial buyers were somewhat less concerned about the racing potential of these engines. There was a guy near Emmett Idaho that had a yard full of Real Imperials that were almost all basket cases he bought on Ebay, and was slowly stripping off the usable parts to resell. Including one convertible he believed Doris Day drove through a car wash in a movie. Few had floors, but I think many still ran.

[@johneckert1365]

I have a 354 Hemi with "Chysler Industrial" valve covers. It was on a stationary water pump at a cranberry marsh.

[@johneckert1365]

@billmcdevitt1298 The 413 lived on as an industrial engine through the mid 70's.

[@amandab.recondwith8006]

The 80s were a NIGHTMARE! My dad drove a Mark V Lincoln Continental. The front hood was so long, it was like driving an International Harvester tractor! But it was white with a white leather interior. Absolutely gorgeous. The father of a girlfriend drove a '66 Imperia, and even though it was 12 years old, it was dependable, powerful and so plush, it was like sitting in a limousine.

[@billyjoejimbob56]

Thanks for the trip down memory lane. I purchased an all black base model '57 sedan in 1979. The beautiful original coral pink sedan shown at 7:12 in the video belonged to a neighbor of mine until recently. IHMO this was the peak year for Imperial. 392 Hemi, Torqueflite, torsion bar suspension, and styliing that was never surpassed. Unfortunately, Chrysler could not afford afford to match the luxury grade materials and build quality needed to compete with Cadillac. The styling became gimmicky, and the differetiation from mainstream Chrysler products declined. The brief attempt to revive the marque in the early 80s was admirable but the rebodied Cordoba platform fell short of the refinement level needed. Still... the car looked better than the bustleback competitors, Cadillac's Seville and Lincoln's Versailles.

[@thehopelesscarguy]

I think 59 is my favorite.

[@moore2522]

I love the thoroughness of your model lineup format. 1960 Imperial was my boyhood wet dream. I vaguely remember the print ads showing a red LeBaron coupe at a race track somewhere-Churchill Downs? Anyway, the late '50-early 60's are the years that I love. Chrome and fins forever! Just a small technical note; may I suggest that you use some sort of sound deadening to cut out that short room echo in your audio, it's a bit distracting in an otherwise great historical look. Keep up the good work!

[@thehopelesscarguy]

Thanks. I have a tribble over the mic, but I think I'm going to have to move things around a bit when I record.

[@thebestisyettocome4114]

I've owned the 1969 Imperial LeBaron four-door. A 1982 The Frank Sinatra edition of The Imperial. And the 1993 The Imperial. The 1969 by far was the best.

[@thehopelesscarguy]

That would be my choice of the three.

[@luislaplume8261]

I will never forget the Chrysler Imperial car near the beginning of the movie Back from Eternity made in 1956 that showed the outside tailights above the tailfins that I first saw on TV on the Late Show on WCBS TV ch.2 New York as a boy when the 11.30 PM news programme ended. That channel showed many movies that had the debuts of movie and TV stars and one of those people was Barbara Eden who was at the airport after the car parked in front the airport as a college girl photographer with her journalist freind. 😊

[@thehopelesscarguy]

It must have really stood out for you.

[@luislaplume8261]

@@thehopelesscarguy It is the only car that I know when I was a boy in NYC during the Mad Men era of the 1960s when I saw it in person, there was no other modern car like that. I even remember seeing the oldest car on our block in Woodside, Queens, NYC that was a 1940 black Chevrolet with running boards and a split windshield. There were still cars like that from the 1940s still around NYC in the 1960s once in a while! 😁

[@thehopelesscarguy]

@@luislaplume8261 Cool.

[@ruxrox]

67s were the first Imperials to be built on the NYer line.

[@peterking7202]

Amazing. As always.

[@thehopelesscarguy]

Thanks. Much appreciated.

[@nicevmax]

The 1981 to 1983 imperial was a beautiful car design, I believe its failure was more to do with the inadequate computers of that time to control the fuel injection properly. They ran badly and would even leave you stranded. There was a Frank Sinatra trim level that you could get in this car, Sinatra owned one and it left him stranded. He knew Lee iacocca and called him personally, can only imagine what that conversation was like.

[@thehopelesscarguy]

I heard that dealers didn't even know how to work on them and many ended up carbonated. Which sounds almost funny as easy as it is now to convert almost anything to FI.

[@johneckert1365]

The biggest problem was that the EFI system didn't have a "default" setting or like a "limp home" mode. So 1 little problem or sensor failure, and you were calling for a tow truck.

[@Mars-vx3jx]

"We're in the Imperial and we're last!!!". What movie is this line from and who said it?

[@thehopelesscarguy]

It's a mad, mad, mad, mad world. The mother-in-law.

[@carlweitzel1753]

Nice job. Thank you

[@thehopelesscarguy]

Thank you.

[@daviddisandro821]

beautiful cars

[@RaymondHaley-bi8lx]

This was the car that used a 392 hemi engine long before Dominic torretto was born or even before his parents were born.

[@thehopelesscarguy]

Well, maybe not his parents.

[@cmmolthr]

I know someone with a 1961 Imperial Crown convertible, which I've ridden in....NO Roadfeel at all!

[@thehopelesscarguy]

I think that was part of the plan.

[@jayartz8562]

I love the '53 to '56 and '71 to '73

[@thehopelesscarguy]

I like the 59

[@wildcolonialman]

Fabulous.

[@thehopelesscarguy]

Glad to hear it.

[@vassa1972]

Cool

[@thehopelesscarguy]

Thanks.

[@johneckert1365]

It bugs me that 67-73 Imperials were considered C-bodies. Besides engine & transmission, the Imperial chassis was very different from the real C-bodies (New Yorker, Monico, Newport, Fury, etc). Not even the wheels interchanged. Real C-bodies used the usual 4-1/2" bolt circle while 67-73 Imperials used 5"(smaller than 66-down 5-1/2" bolt circle.) The front frame stubs on 67-73 Imperials was way heavier and stronger than the real C-bodies. Different wheel base and width as well.

[@arnesahlen2704]

My uncle had a 1961 Imperial 4-door sedan (sort of dusty pink) once owned by Doris Day. Fab up close, but I do think the '60-63 design language a big disappointment after exquisite '57-59s.

[@uwusmolbean]

Mmmm, perial 🤩💖

[@thehopelesscarguy]

Made with aaah.

[@annebokma4637]

I will have a 60 and a 72 😍

[@thehopelesscarguy]

Nice

[@joeseeking3572]

Peanut gallery says .... this format really doesn't do justice to the varied history of Imperial. They went from true Classics (with CCCA designation) in the early 30's to mid-pried car (somewhere between the Special and Century) by 38. Then they were only Crowns with extended wheelbase immediately pre and post-war and not mass market at all. 50 brought back the driver imperial (not counting the Derhams in 49). You'd almost be better of starting there, or splitting it into pre and post 55.

[@thehopelesscarguy]

I kinda skipped through the late 30s and the 40s as it was.

[@vassa1972]

The model from the late 30's kind of looks like a Beatle

[@thehopelesscarguy]

It kinda does.

[@PontiacFan68]

Now they make Poogeots

[@thehopelesscarguy]

Is that an upgrade from Fiats?

[@PontiacFan68]

@@thehopelesscarguy How is it an Upgrade?

[@thehopelesscarguy]

@@PontiacFan68 Just asking.

[@PontiacFan68]

@@thehopelesscarguy It is a downgrade do you see any Poogeots and Citrëons or Renaults.

[@PontiacFan68]

@@thehopelesscarguy No French cars. In America

[@joehovanec1985]

If Chrysler does bring back the Imperial, they should have it built by Toyota. Chrysler does not or want to build reliable cars. Nobody who has had Chryslers in the past wants any more. We are tired of unreliable and cars that are designed to break all the time. Management has the designers design weak parts that are designed to fail multiple times. Then you bring the car in for repairs, and they don't assemble the parts right. And the problems just continue. Each time you buy one, you hope they have fixed the problems from before, but you soon learn they have designed a different set of problems into the car. You simply cannot buy a Chrysler product that is reliable with no built-in problems. Best to stay away from them.

[@Mark1405Leeds]

62 convertible quite cool looking - Later ones rather boring!👍 [1990's ones hideous!]

[@thehopelesscarguy]

There wasn't much a 62 Imperial could be mistaken for.

[@williamg2552]

There were NO Imperial Convertibles made in the 1990s.

[@mikerundall2456]

The body flexed terrible.

[@tracy4good]

THESE CARS are, were and will always be CHRYSLER IMPERIAL. It's rather unfair to dis-off Walter P in honor of some cheesey 1955 marketing ploy

[@thehopelesscarguy]

I feel the same way about Ram.

[@tracy4good]

@@thehopelesscarguy I remember when Ram was a Dodge response to the B Boys - Bronco and Blazer. Then in the 90s all of them were Rams. Too weird. The ubiquitous 4door trucks we have today were first seen in the early 60s as a crew cab Power Wagon. Dodge built the engines for the first Ford cars. Dodge has a good heritage and then some jerkoff at Daimler comes up with "Ram"

[@johneckert1365]

​@@tracy4goodYou're thinking "Ramcharger" Dodge's full-size SUV to compete with Blazer and Bronco was Dodge Ramcharger and Plymouty Trailduster. The name "Ram" went to 2wd pickups starting in 1981 and 4wd were named "Power Ram"

[@anastassiosperakis2869]

In 1982, my parents and I visited Washington DC for the first time, and were quests of a friend of mine and his wife in Arlington. The husband was a classmate of mine at MIT (Grad School) as well as a US Navy officer, as were his father and grandfather. His grandmother left him a 1965-7 Gray-Silver Imperial and we were given a night tour of the Capital's sights in that car. My parents and I easily fit in the back seat, and the hosts sat up front. The car rode very smoothly but otherwise unremarkably. I only think the Founding Fathers would rol over in their graves if they knew that, 150 years after the War of Independence, a car would be named... the "imperial" and have a version involving "Le Baron"! In case you wanted to see or buy that car, bad news. My friends were parking it on the street in Arlington, and one night some dumbass drunk or clumsy driver totaled it.

[@thehopelesscarguy]

The demise of many cars.

[@williamg2552]

Are you familiar with the events of 1955 ? And that a NEW AUTOMOBILE BRAND was born that year. ? PLEASE READ : en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_(automobile)?wprov=sfti1

[@thehopelesscarguy]

Actually, I've read that a few times.

[@drharmonica]

After its heyday in the 50s and 60s, the car kept getting uglier and uglier. The thrill had gone and the Imperial was no longer imperial but just another faceless tasteless uninspired brand

[@thehopelesscarguy]

I suppose.