http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2009/01/28/the-59-chevy/ Yesterday's tomorrow, today. Fri, 10 Feb 2012 14:33:22 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.4 http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2009/01/28/the-59-chevy/comment-page-1/#comment-1087380 olmon Tue, 19 Apr 2011 09:02:43 +0000 http://blog.modernmechanix.com/?p=6866#comment-1087380 When I look at the rear of that car in the picture, my feeling is the same as it was when I first saw them in the fall of 1958. That is the ugliest damn car to ever wear the Chevrolet nameplate. (Ford did out sell Chev in 1959 & I attribute the styling for that even though the 59 Ford was a rather ugly beast too. The Ford definitely drove and handled better) When I look at the rear of that car in the picture, my feeling is the same as it was when I first saw them in the fall of 1958. That is the ugliest damn car to ever wear the Chevrolet nameplate. (Ford did out sell Chev in 1959 & I attribute the styling for that even though the 59 Ford was a rather ugly beast too. The Ford definitely drove and handled better)

]]> http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2009/01/28/the-59-chevy/comment-page-1/#comment-1066883 HB Wed, 25 Mar 2009 01:49:13 +0000 http://blog.modernmechanix.com/?p=6866#comment-1066883 This was definitely the ugliest car Chevrolet ever produced. They went from the classic 57 design to this aberration in only 2 years. I often thought that if someone customized the car by removing those 'toenail' fins and smoothing out what was left, it would have improved the appearance where the car could have been considered average looking. This was definitely the ugliest car Chevrolet ever produced. They went from the classic 57 design to this aberration in only 2 years. I often thought that if someone customized the car by removing those ‘toenail’ fins and smoothing out what was left, it would have improved the appearance where the car could have been considered average looking.

]]> http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2009/01/28/the-59-chevy/comment-page-1/#comment-1065406 Nomen Nescio Sun, 01 Feb 2009 00:13:00 +0000 http://blog.modernmechanix.com/?p=6866#comment-1065406 with the back bumper shaped like that, how did anybody ever load anything INTO that trunk? with the back bumper shaped like that, how did anybody ever load anything INTO that trunk?

]]> http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2009/01/28/the-59-chevy/comment-page-1/#comment-1065261 Jari Thu, 29 Jan 2009 18:37:26 +0000 http://blog.modernmechanix.com/?p=6866#comment-1065261 That Chevy's rear MUST have been the inspiration for Farscapes Dominar Rygel XVI's eyebrows. That Chevy’s rear MUST have been the inspiration for Farscapes Dominar Rygel XVI’s eyebrows.

]]> http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2009/01/28/the-59-chevy/comment-page-1/#comment-1065211 StanFlouride Wed, 28 Jan 2009 15:42:42 +0000 http://blog.modernmechanix.com/?p=6866#comment-1065211 I think McCahill would have appreciated the improvements in handling, production quality, safety, and fuel consumption. But he'd have hated the fact that for the most part today's cars have all the style of a used bar of soap. I think McCahill would have appreciated the improvements in handling, production quality, safety, and fuel consumption. But he’d have hated the fact that for the most part today’s cars have all the style of a used bar of soap.

]]> http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2009/01/28/the-59-chevy/comment-page-1/#comment-1065207 Jerry Wed, 28 Jan 2009 15:19:12 +0000 http://blog.modernmechanix.com/?p=6866#comment-1065207 "Spaceship 1989" -- I love it. And what would have McCahill (who died in 1975) have thought of the cars of the real 1989, or the cars of today? “Spaceship 1989″ — I love it. And what would have McCahill (who died in 1975) have thought of the cars of the real 1989, or the cars of today?

]]>