I live just north of Detroit , when i was 13,14, 15 or so i had a chance to see one of these . It was driven on the street and parked two doors down from my grandmas in Gross Point Woods. I was of the age that i knew what it was and the sound was really something to hear. That was the only time i saw it , someone had it for the weekend i'm guessing.
To all who wonder why oh why? Because all car manufacturers have corporate policies that state all prototype vehicles are to be destroyed beyond a usable point after the research program is over. These vehicles are not allowed for sale or on the road, and do not even have VINs. This is all based off of liability, as dictated by their lawyers. Some do escape their fate, as with around 3-5 of these. Chrysler has 1 or 2 I hear, and a museum in Kansas has 1. NATMUS in Auburn, Indiana has an engine.
So the bodies had to be destroyed because they were imported from Italy-what happened to the the engines/transmissions?
AFAIK,they were destroyed,too.
What was the excuse there?
In the full version,some engineers were seen crying nearby.I'm sure they would have removed them for free.Litigation was not as big a problem then as it is now.
The cars were made in Italy. The US Customs Service charged Chrysler duty based on the total development cost of the project which amounted to millions of dollars per car. The only way to avoid the huge expense was to destroy them.
@robert3302 nobody outside of the company would have needed to know that number they could have been sold internally for a dollar and avoided crushing valuable research. chrysler was bribed into not making these for a reason.
Thats not quite right, the bodys were italian, but the engine and assembly were all american, the wikipedia page on them though not athoritative says they were scrapped not due to the import taxes but as standard procedure in the automobile world of the time and even today with the prototype cars, sad but true.
on the bright side the turbine studies went onto helping develope the turbine for the m1a abrams tank for the usa when it was sold to general dynamics by chrysler defence.
people didnt really realise they would be so desireably in the future they also wouldnt sell concepts to the publie for fear of being sued if someone got hurt driving a non crash tested vehicle
@kamikazeOS They actually continued working on the engine - the program wasn't cancelled until 1980 - but the cars had served their purpose. All development prototypes get destroyed eventually, it's sad but true.
@kamikazeOS Lawyers and Liability Lawsuits are the reason why limited-run Test & Development Cars like the Chrysler Turbine & the General Motors EV-1 are routinely destroyed. No other good reason. Lawyers and Liability Lawsuits. That's all.
Same thing happened to the Avro Arrow, the Canadian Jet interceptor, CF-105, that was revolutionary in it's day. Destroyed, cut up into little pieces, blueprints destroyed, all traces destroyed.
Yes i is sad that 49 of he original 55 were destroyed. Of the 6 remaining 3 are operational. Everyone that's hollering why would they destroy them seems to forget that they were a concept or prototype car. That's what happens to most concept cars in the end. Most concept cars are never seen by the general public. The Turbine car was a bit different in the fact that real world people got to drive one for a year and report to Chrysler about the cars.
@Checkerholic Actually, I've read that there are 9 documented survivors, although some sources say 10 or even 11 (which I suspect is wishful thinking for the barn-find fantasy aspect of it.)
There is one of these at the Peterson Automotive Museum in L.A. An amazing place full of amazing cars. They also have the LAST EV-1, and many other rare cars. The turbine has it's own little corner, with a great display on how it worked. The problem with turbines were that they were VERY loud, and took a while to get up to speed. Nice idea, but not great in this application!
Why didn't they just transplant 383s in place of the turbine engines and sell those beautiful cars to willing buyers for $10,000 apiece (in 1966 dollars)?
I realize that the turbine engines couldn't be warranted, and that Chrysler needed to avoid liability, but without the turbine engines the cars themselves are completely conventional and could've been sold.
@odantoro That was the reason for Chrysler destroying those cars. They were afraid that people would change the engine and so on. If you want to know more go to jay lenos garage . com
@Auggie56 Right, but I'm talking about selling them to extremely wealthy collectors who wouldn't be worried about the expenses. It would've been worth it to have preserved those beautiful bodies. I think it's a bit of an unwarranted assumption to claim that "no two were alike". I've seen three or four of them & they all appear to be identical. Ghia had to work to jigs & consistent specs to make everything fit to production-like tolerances (to avoid complaint from the surveyed consumers.) Cheers
Love 'em or hate 'em, you've got to admit that both the Chrysler Turbine Car was an engineering marvel. Watching this is like watching engineers' hopes and dreams being crushed. Look at the styling of those cars. Destroying them is like destroying the hopeful futurism of the 1950s. Kind of reminds me of the EV-1 crushing.
commies keeping good things from the people turbine would have upset the balance of power.detroit would have been shut down oh wait it is shut down fucking commies
@MrDaleaaaa It aint the commies that are doing it to us. Its the so called conservative business men that run the oil companies and vote for the GOP.Would have bitten deep into their bottom line.Comunist aint got nuthin to do with it.
@fenderstratguy There is a huge weight difference between an M1 tank and the Chrysler Turbine cars.Anything that keeps us on the crude oil teet is good for big oil.Rockefeller bought the rights to a carburetor that could achieve 50 mph decades ago. Hydrogen fuel cel cars could get 5k on one bottle.Algafuel is already being bought and used by the Navy. Diversification is the key to our fuel needs.
These were low emission engines concerning unburnt hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide but could not meet the regulations relating to nitrogen oxide output. simply Chrysler were not allowed to sell them. still a crying shame to see them destroyed. for me its one of those unattainable dream cars like a Tucker.
RELAX PEOPLE.... THEY ARE JUST CHRYSLER CARS. THIS IS WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN TO EVERY PIECE OF SHIT THAT COMES OFF THE LINE AT DODGE- STRAIGHT INTO A CRUSHER!
I rode in one when I was 7 at the New York City Worlds fair on a track Chrysler had; the most awesome car I have ever seen and a life experience. Look at the garbage they are making today while they destroyed the most awesome car they have ever produced
@s10996 i was joking... but these things were insanely impractical, the engines churned like 23 000 rpm in the city lol they wernt exactly well thought out machines
I don't think you heard me, Akku, I said those cars are culturally irreplaceable. People for generations to come will, when asked what they believe was the greatest auto ever built, will pull out the Chrysler Turbine as an easy choice, for want of a better one. There isn't an auto museum on the planet who wouldn't slit their wrists open to get one into their collection. As I said....High Art.
The big five (at that time) have all done this to varying degrees. This merely guarantees that Chrysler has EARNED a well deserved failure - US DOT notwithstanding, government bureaucrats who mandate this happen EARN every letter bomb sent to them.
I tell you it's a real shame to see those cars get destroyed instead of ending up in the homes of collectors or people who appreciated them for what they really were. We may not be able to bring them back, but it would sure be cool if someone re-produced them in a kit-car form. Sure you probably wouldn't be able to buy a turn-key model with a turbine engine, but who says you can't put one in yourself? I'd still be happy with one with a Hemi-v8.
I hope that everyone involved with the destruction of these rare cars died of a long-term cancer that wracked their bodies in excruciating pain. What a waste.
Not unlike the Obama "bucks for schmucks" where cars that we would have LOVED to have had, were met death having liquid glass introduced into their crank cases.
I have a few of the actual turbine wheels, The actual probes used in testing, I believe to test wind pressure/volume, and a un-touched case of promo models. My Grandfather worked on the Turbine project back then and developed the probes used in testing, and for our family, these cars marked a part of our history. Such a sad sight, but whats been done has been done.
heliarche - These engines actually have Fewer moving parts than a piston engine. The reason funding was stopped by the gov't., was to keep the playing field level; a successful Chrysler turbine would have bankrupted the other car companies, as they tried to develop their own. The engines actually had fewer moving parts than a piston engine, and needed a conventional spark plug for ignition. The only remaining problem, was the lack of " parasitic drag" during decelleration.
@MrAlexprm No, they were phased out due to upcoming EPA regulations-- the death of most turbine cars in the 60s and 70s (including commercial duty) was due to poor emissions and fuel economy at lower speeds.
Oil companies truly had nothing to do with the demise of gas-turbine cars.
Absolute blasphemy. No wonder nobody wants to build new and innovative cars in America anymore. They have to pass muster with the bean counters and corporate pinheads, most of whom know nothing about cars and are scared of anything different and interesting. Thank God at least a few of these cars survived, and there is at least one that runs that I know of.
Absolute blasphemy. No wonder nobody wants to build new and innovative cars in America anymore. They have to pass muster with the bean counters and corporate pinheads, most of whom know nothing about cars and are scared of anything different and interesting. Thank God at least a few of these cars survived, and there is at least one that runs that I know of.
@Andacar62 Actually, that's not quite correct in this case. The cars were destroyed because the bodies were built in Italy by Ghia. To have kept the cars on the road or even to have kept them for more internal testing would've resulted in monumental tax liabilities. The crushing was filmed as proof for the IRS that the cars, and any "value" were destroyed.
Hmm. General Motors did the same to that electric car they made. Is it some sort of American tradition to build something awsome and then geting nervous about it and scrapping the production and already made cars.
@Sohave The EV-1s were taken back because they served their purpose, among them that at the time (1998-2002) the batteries and electric motors weren't quite to the point of being viable. While they worked well, they weren't good enough; we're now seeing several years of refinement with vehicles like the Nissan Leaf and Chevy Volt. The other issue was, and still is, cost. The batteries and electric motors are a ways off from being truly inexpensive. The conspriacy theorists refuse to accept this.
@charlie8575 Now that you bring it up. I am actually doing an EV convertion out of an old gasolin car " electrictrabant (dot) blogspot (dot) com No the motors are not more expensive. I got a brand new 24 KW for 1300 USD. If they are masproduced at a large scale they can be made even cheaper because they got less parts. only sligtly expensive material is some copper coils. but the rest is pretty light. The batteries for EV1 was NiMH which was cheaper than the often used Lithium.
@Sohave As well as the far left documentarians that had people crying about not having their EV-1s anymore. Yes, people liked them, but if General Motors released those cars at the then-current state-of-the-art, they wouldn't have held up well enough to be viable for the market, and would have cost a fortune to produce, with expenses high enough to void any return. I think, however, in the next few years, we'll see more all-electric cars. The Leaf and Volt will be important bellwethers.
@charlie8575 Well if people like a product then why not make them have that, that is how you make money. product. people knew the range of the car. And you wont convince me that an electric car demands more maintenence noir breaks down more often than a regular car. You should check out evalbum (dot) com and see what people are making themselves in their garages and how their electric cars fulfill their needs. Yes I agree we will se more electric cars in the next few years.
This is the most horrifying thing I have ever seen! I don't even know that much about the Chrysler Turbine cars, and this is probably the reason! :'-( This is why American manufacturing has sucked complete dick since 1970. And Unions. Mostly unions. fuck
@LegalizePsychedelics I now understand part of the reason why Pontiac rebadged some Holdens to fill out their lineup. GM Holden, the smallest and least known about division, was given the job of designing GM's Zeta platform, their world rear drive platform. So far, only two cars use it; the current Chevy Camaro, the Holden Commodore and its international versions; The Pontiac G8, Chevrolet Caprice and Chevrolet Lumina.
@knightjp007 The problem was the government with growing emissions and efficiency laws.There was just not enough public interest in them at the time to make research into practicality worthwhile.Also they had such a complicated startup procedure, if you weren't on your game you'd ruin the engine.
Still, it's such a shame we don't have these today.
...howled like a vacuum-cleaner sucking in hairballs, lousy acceleration ... uh, right. There's no way those things were going to sell versus V8s. Styling? They look decent compared to today's minivans, but were bland compared to other cars being sold in the 50s.
They were destroyed for insurance purposes, it sucks but they were allowed to keep a handful Chrysler wanted to cover their ass liability wise the book said 40 were made for "consumer evaluation" and 7 were saved maybe 4-5 survive today
Pathetic...they should be doing this to all those modern imported crap cars. The TC's had STYLE and were SMOOTH SWEET cars. I agree, monkeys must have been running the company back in '67.
Its crazy, but most of the "experimental" or prototype cars auto mfgrs make are ordered destroyed, but some have escaped. Most say its because they arnt "road worthy" B.S.!!!!!! Kills me to see this. Some of us (like me!!) would love to have a one off car like these.
I've read that the government changed the rules for this program, and Chrysler was going to have to pay import duties on all of the design and engineering work in addition to the taxes on the imported bodies. There's no way they could afford nor justify paying all of that so they had no choice but to destroy them. I can't remember where I read the article, but it implied that someone in the government had it out for Chrysler and was trying to force them to fail. Who knows what really happened?
I'm still trying to understand the mindset of Chrysler Executives in the early 60's. When you only build 55 examples of something totally unique and one of a kind, do you not realize that it will become a "collectible"? There are probably more existing Tucker's than Chrysler Turbines! Was there a safety issue that could have been a liability for Chrysler? What a shame!
@bryanttillman thats is why they needed the bail out..even if these cars were not suitable they could have acheived valuable income by selling the R/D needed to develop further roadmobile micro turbine engines..morons..absolute morons
@CuyahogaMustang Sorry! But could they do that? The Chrysler Turbines were destroyed in the 1960s. Honda and Toyotas started to be exported to America in the 1970s, so how is that going to work? Whilst we are talking about Chrysler, they destroyed the Rootes Group over here in the UK.
@vwbusssesareforever I don't think you heard me, Akku, I said those cars are culturally irreplaceable. People for generations to come will, when asked what they believe was the greatest auto ever built, will pull out the Chrysler Turbine as an easy choice, for want of a better one. There isn't an auto museum on the planet who wouldn't slit their wrists open to get one into their collection. As I said....High Art.
@CuyahogaMustang I drove a Honda Accord from 1990. It was great. Coming from someone with "mustang" in their name, no wonder you are biased towards efficiency.
I can't believe they crushed those magnificent cars! I remember seeing one parked on the street in Chicago back in 1963. I was mesmerized by it. There's one in the Henry Ford Museum at Greenfield Village, but I don't know if it's functioning. What a shame.
Out of 55 made, 46 were crushed. Chrysler still owns two, another three are owned privately (Jay Leno is one such owner), and the other four are in various museums.
Here in St Louis Mo The Musuem of Tranportation has the ONLY functional Chrysler Turbine car in the world!!! Runs and drives!! Sad Chrysler crushed all the those back then.
Chrysler had them circling on a small walled in display track at the New York Worlds Fair in 1964 and 1965. I remember seeing one as it circled in the Disneyland like track as it made it's periodic demo run. I would have loved one - who wouldn't! But I think there were problems with the turbine coping with the constant cycling of accelerating/decelerating of urban driving. It was inefficient and slow to "spool up" in take off - made too much heat or something. Application was a failure. Sad!
They destroying Americas Automotive Future.Americas Automobile Manufacturer never producing Turbine Cars and America lost his Automotive leadership in the World and so the Manufacturer going Bankrupt.
Yes they did have a turbine engine in them. I am 58 now and in St. Louis, Mo. in about '62 or '63, Chrysler had a showing of the car I was 11 or 12 at the time. The engine would run on any combustable fluid so they said. It also ran so smooth that the Chrysler Rep. stood a nickle on edge on the engine, it never fell over. As I recall the problem they had was the high rpm, and very specialized ceramic parts in the engine. It was a pretty car and definately unique!
I just remembered the viewing was held at the Northwest Plaza near the St. Louis International Airport. Of the era, all of the auto manufacturers had body stylings that took design elements from jet fighter aircraft. Note the sleek body, the interior, the front and the rear of the vehicle. To see it in person you thought that you could fly.
Looks like the turbine engines were pulled. What did Chrysler do with them? I would guess they were thrown into a different smelter because of the different alloys.
There just aren't enough expletives in the English language to express my disdain for this horror.
Sickening to see such innovative and incredible cars being systematically butchered in that manner, for nothing... It is my sincere hope that somewhere in Hell there is an exec whose expensive suit is melting onto his skin for this automotive holocaust.
We may crash cars for a living but never a classic
Willitmakeitcom 4 days ago
I live just north of Detroit , when i was 13,14, 15 or so i had a chance to see one of these . It was driven on the street and parked two doors down from my grandmas in Gross Point Woods. I was of the age that i knew what it was and the sound was really something to hear. That was the only time i saw it , someone had it for the weekend i'm guessing.
rotax7804 1 week ago
To all who wonder why oh why? Because all car manufacturers have corporate policies that state all prototype vehicles are to be destroyed beyond a usable point after the research program is over. These vehicles are not allowed for sale or on the road, and do not even have VINs. This is all based off of liability, as dictated by their lawyers. Some do escape their fate, as with around 3-5 of these. Chrysler has 1 or 2 I hear, and a museum in Kansas has 1. NATMUS in Auburn, Indiana has an engine.
CornerstoneAutoLLC 1 month ago
hey at least they recycled the engines so it not much of a loss although you could refit a more efficient engine and still maintain the looks
lamoboy 1 month ago
That is truly a nightmare
MrDasher01 1 month ago
So the bodies had to be destroyed because they were imported from Italy-what happened to the the engines/transmissions?
AFAIK,they were destroyed,too.
What was the excuse there?
In the full version,some engineers were seen crying nearby.I'm sure they would have removed them for free.Litigation was not as big a problem then as it is now.
There is no excuse for this.
No wonder the world is in economic crisis.
jetpoweredgriffin 1 month ago
what was the point in this?
blue68falcon 1 month ago
Just another reason I won't buy Chrysler products. Stupid people running a stupid company.
ArniepII 2 months ago
Our political lab rats hard at work...;
rattmaddnes 3 months ago
I thought it was tough to watch videos of women with huge, jiggling breasts getting breast reductions!
This...is.... even WORSE....!! Oh the humanity! *sniff ...sob... sniff*
PS I heard that by 1964 the operation of these turbine engines were vastly improved, but obviously someone shut them down fast.
Where did this amazing but sad video come from?! Incredible footage.
HigherWisdom 4 months ago
Cash for clunkers...will be treated the same way by history.
randommagnum 4 months ago 2
FFFUUUCCCKKK!!!
HeroSavage 4 months ago
The cars were made in Italy. The US Customs Service charged Chrysler duty based on the total development cost of the project which amounted to millions of dollars per car. The only way to avoid the huge expense was to destroy them.
robert3302 5 months ago
@robert3302 nobody outside of the company would have needed to know that number they could have been sold internally for a dollar and avoided crushing valuable research. chrysler was bribed into not making these for a reason.
circusboy90210 4 months ago
@robert3302 Politics definitely at play.
MotorsportLegends 4 months ago
Thats not quite right, the bodys were italian, but the engine and assembly were all american, the wikipedia page on them though not athoritative says they were scrapped not due to the import taxes but as standard procedure in the automobile world of the time and even today with the prototype cars, sad but true.
on the bright side the turbine studies went onto helping develope the turbine for the m1a abrams tank for the usa when it was sold to general dynamics by chrysler defence.
manga12 4 months ago
It's quite a shame that these innocent cars that were a step into the future (perhaps too far) went to waste.
TheTerraTitan 5 months ago
im going to be sick
55waltrip1 5 months ago
If they didn't crush them Chrysler would have had to pay heavy fees to the government.
MrSFSTUDIOS 5 months ago
NOOOOOOOO
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!
McVaio 5 months ago
people didnt really realise they would be so desireably in the future they also wouldnt sell concepts to the publie for fear of being sued if someone got hurt driving a non crash tested vehicle
deathrider1974 5 months ago
Just saw the one at Henry Ford Museum two hours ago.
sav0320 5 months ago
WHy destroy something that people put A LOT of hard work into..
carlover2013 6 months ago 8
@carlover2013 because someone didn't want a car that runs on anything ...just like they did with the electrical car EV-1
kamikazeOS 5 months ago 8
@kamikazeOS They actually continued working on the engine - the program wasn't cancelled until 1980 - but the cars had served their purpose. All development prototypes get destroyed eventually, it's sad but true.
SynthOno 4 months ago
@kamikazeOS Lawyers and Liability Lawsuits are the reason why limited-run Test & Development Cars like the Chrysler Turbine & the General Motors EV-1 are routinely destroyed. No other good reason. Lawyers and Liability Lawsuits. That's all.
ThatMiserableCat 3 months ago
why they destroy the cars?
miguel1717171 6 months ago 3
Same thing happened to the Avro Arrow, the Canadian Jet interceptor, CF-105, that was revolutionary in it's day. Destroyed, cut up into little pieces, blueprints destroyed, all traces destroyed.
fergusof 6 months ago 2
Chrysler sucks. They wouldn't know a good thing if it slapped them in the face.
taylorgpa 7 months ago
best thing they could have done . now they need to do it the rest of the chryslers in the world
junipertoy1 7 months ago
Yes i is sad that 49 of he original 55 were destroyed. Of the 6 remaining 3 are operational. Everyone that's hollering why would they destroy them seems to forget that they were a concept or prototype car. That's what happens to most concept cars in the end. Most concept cars are never seen by the general public. The Turbine car was a bit different in the fact that real world people got to drive one for a year and report to Chrysler about the cars.
Checkerholic 7 months ago 2
@Checkerholic Actually, I've read that there are 9 documented survivors, although some sources say 10 or even 11 (which I suspect is wishful thinking for the barn-find fantasy aspect of it.)
odantoro 6 months ago
Thats Depressing!
hhrtwo 7 months ago
I would have loved to atleast have the engine out of one
redghost105 7 months ago
There is one of these at the Peterson Automotive Museum in L.A. An amazing place full of amazing cars. They also have the LAST EV-1, and many other rare cars. The turbine has it's own little corner, with a great display on how it worked. The problem with turbines were that they were VERY loud, and took a while to get up to speed. Nice idea, but not great in this application!
bcgrote 8 months ago
How the hell could these guys even be paid enough to want to do that!!!!
herbienbrian2 8 months ago
buhuu!!!! now i have -4564565464646 IQ by gay people crushing cool cars!!
aezakmi5675675675675 8 months ago
i cant stand it!!! they are tearing apart a piece of automotive history!! the chrysler corporation employees are retards
legodude64100 8 months ago
Damn.....for a person who loves cars that Hurts to see.
form109 9 months ago
Why didn't they just transplant 383s in place of the turbine engines and sell those beautiful cars to willing buyers for $10,000 apiece (in 1966 dollars)?
I realize that the turbine engines couldn't be warranted, and that Chrysler needed to avoid liability, but without the turbine engines the cars themselves are completely conventional and could've been sold.
odantoro 9 months ago
@odantoro That was the reason for Chrysler destroying those cars. They were afraid that people would change the engine and so on. If you want to know more go to jay lenos garage . com
ladabyturbo 8 months ago
@odantoro The body was hand made by Gia, and no two were alike. So getting replacement parts would be impossible, without great expense.
Auggie56 8 months ago
@Auggie56 Right, but I'm talking about selling them to extremely wealthy collectors who wouldn't be worried about the expenses. It would've been worth it to have preserved those beautiful bodies. I think it's a bit of an unwarranted assumption to claim that "no two were alike". I've seen three or four of them & they all appear to be identical. Ghia had to work to jigs & consistent specs to make everything fit to production-like tolerances (to avoid complaint from the surveyed consumers.) Cheers
odantoro 6 months ago
Love 'em or hate 'em, you've got to admit that both the Chrysler Turbine Car was an engineering marvel. Watching this is like watching engineers' hopes and dreams being crushed. Look at the styling of those cars. Destroying them is like destroying the hopeful futurism of the 1950s. Kind of reminds me of the EV-1 crushing.
MrHongKongBuffet 9 months ago 2
so hard to watch. thats like the same feeling as watching your own house burn down..
timsasnkybstrd 9 months ago
U'd think they'd sell the ones that were made. They must have been worth more sold to new owners than for scrap....
Shaggyshadric 9 months ago
It's a pity they've destroyed those low-emission cars...
baul104 9 months ago
commies keeping good things from the people turbine would have upset the balance of power.detroit would have been shut down oh wait it is shut down fucking commies
MrDaleaaaa 9 months ago
@MrDaleaaaa It aint the commies that are doing it to us. Its the so called conservative business men that run the oil companies and vote for the GOP.Would have bitten deep into their bottom line.Comunist aint got nuthin to do with it.
smoothie6ft3 9 months ago
@smoothie6ft3 M1 tanks use turbine engines - at 22,000 rpm, they use plenty of fuel even when you're at a red light.
I doubt very strongly oil companies would dislike them. As Jay says, in town your fuel mileage is terrible.
fenderstratguy 9 months ago
@fenderstratguy There is a huge weight difference between an M1 tank and the Chrysler Turbine cars.Anything that keeps us on the crude oil teet is good for big oil.Rockefeller bought the rights to a carburetor that could achieve 50 mph decades ago. Hydrogen fuel cel cars could get 5k on one bottle.Algafuel is already being bought and used by the Navy. Diversification is the key to our fuel needs.
smoothie6ft3 9 months ago
Fuck its painful to watch. So much work gone to waste.
Charles2337 9 months ago
These were low emission engines concerning unburnt hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide but could not meet the regulations relating to nitrogen oxide output. simply Chrysler were not allowed to sell them. still a crying shame to see them destroyed. for me its one of those unattainable dream cars like a Tucker.
mrspivvy 10 months ago
RELAX PEOPLE.... THEY ARE JUST CHRYSLER CARS. THIS IS WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN TO EVERY PIECE OF SHIT THAT COMES OFF THE LINE AT DODGE- STRAIGHT INTO A CRUSHER!
jsuds12 10 months ago
I rode in one when I was 7 at the New York City Worlds fair on a track Chrysler had; the most awesome car I have ever seen and a life experience. Look at the garbage they are making today while they destroyed the most awesome car they have ever produced
soccercleatscrush 11 months ago
its only a chrysler
cb7pwn 11 months ago
@cb7pwn these cars were and still are one of the most innovative cars EVER NO DESTROYING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
s10996 10 months ago
@s10996 i was joking... but these things were insanely impractical, the engines churned like 23 000 rpm in the city lol they wernt exactly well thought out machines
cb7pwn 10 months ago
They crushed GOLD
ggaudin1 11 months ago
I don't think you heard me, Akku, I said those cars are culturally irreplaceable. People for generations to come will, when asked what they believe was the greatest auto ever built, will pull out the Chrysler Turbine as an easy choice, for want of a better one. There isn't an auto museum on the planet who wouldn't slit their wrists open to get one into their collection. As I said....High Art.
I could care less for test protocols.
bryanttillman 1 year ago
this is worse than CASH for CLUNKERS.
Kara0ki 1 year ago
The big five (at that time) have all done this to varying degrees. This merely guarantees that Chrysler has EARNED a well deserved failure - US DOT notwithstanding, government bureaucrats who mandate this happen EARN every letter bomb sent to them.
DrMotorDude 1 year ago
Early cash for clunkers program?
bsmack66 1 year ago
fkin government putting their dirty hands into the commercial industry
goodkill1 1 year ago
You know what, fucking FUCK Chrysler for this. I will NEVER support their products for such a fucking accountants decision ever again.
Rydo182 1 year ago
hmm, a Chrysler "tripple stacker" Wow, what an eye opener!
F6HemiCharger 1 year ago
If they knew what they were doing...
DaBoogie049 1 year ago
I tell you it's a real shame to see those cars get destroyed instead of ending up in the homes of collectors or people who appreciated them for what they really were. We may not be able to bring them back, but it would sure be cool if someone re-produced them in a kit-car form. Sure you probably wouldn't be able to buy a turn-key model with a turbine engine, but who says you can't put one in yourself? I'd still be happy with one with a Hemi-v8.
pedalpunk57 1 year ago
I hope that everyone involved with the destruction of these rare cars died of a long-term cancer that wracked their bodies in excruciating pain. What a waste.
Not unlike the Obama "bucks for schmucks" where cars that we would have LOVED to have had, were met death having liquid glass introduced into their crank cases.
Thunderchicken1997 1 year ago
Man! I'm still in tears!
sirmc2 1 year ago
Comment removed
mrdestoryit 1 year ago
WTF ! New cars ,,!
trenndo 1 year ago
the extinction of an already rare species
badgerbuddy 1 year ago
I have a few of the actual turbine wheels, The actual probes used in testing, I believe to test wind pressure/volume, and a un-touched case of promo models. My Grandfather worked on the Turbine project back then and developed the probes used in testing, and for our family, these cars marked a part of our history. Such a sad sight, but whats been done has been done.
Wyattriot77 1 year ago
And yet, if not for this destruction, the ones that are left would not be as dear (in any sense of the word).
homerthompsonman 1 year ago
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
youran1 1 year ago
what would win in a demilition derby? a prius or a chrysler. easy answer chrysler. bigger:chrsyler. what fits more people:chrysler see what i mean
79GMCVANDURA 1 year ago
@Kingmerik999 wrong youre a peice of shit whos prob some honda fagot ricer lover
Valis2008 1 year ago
Comment removed
mrdestoryit 1 year ago
heliarche - These engines actually have Fewer moving parts than a piston engine. The reason funding was stopped by the gov't., was to keep the playing field level; a successful Chrysler turbine would have bankrupted the other car companies, as they tried to develop their own. The engines actually had fewer moving parts than a piston engine, and needed a conventional spark plug for ignition. The only remaining problem, was the lack of " parasitic drag" during decelleration.
BlueHeavenBound 1 year ago
THE BIG OIL COMPANYS BEHIND THIS , SAME CASE WITH GM'S EV
MrAlexprm 1 year ago
@MrAlexprm No, they were phased out due to upcoming EPA regulations-- the death of most turbine cars in the 60s and 70s (including commercial duty) was due to poor emissions and fuel economy at lower speeds.
Oil companies truly had nothing to do with the demise of gas-turbine cars.
philyt 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Absolute blasphemy. No wonder nobody wants to build new and innovative cars in America anymore. They have to pass muster with the bean counters and corporate pinheads, most of whom know nothing about cars and are scared of anything different and interesting. Thank God at least a few of these cars survived, and there is at least one that runs that I know of.
Andacar62 1 year ago
Absolute blasphemy. No wonder nobody wants to build new and innovative cars in America anymore. They have to pass muster with the bean counters and corporate pinheads, most of whom know nothing about cars and are scared of anything different and interesting. Thank God at least a few of these cars survived, and there is at least one that runs that I know of.
Andacar62 1 year ago
@Andacar62 Actually, that's not quite correct in this case. The cars were destroyed because the bodies were built in Italy by Ghia. To have kept the cars on the road or even to have kept them for more internal testing would've resulted in monumental tax liabilities. The crushing was filmed as proof for the IRS that the cars, and any "value" were destroyed.
charlie8575 1 year ago
Hmm. General Motors did the same to that electric car they made. Is it some sort of American tradition to build something awsome and then geting nervous about it and scrapping the production and already made cars.
Sohave 1 year ago
@Sohave The EV-1s were taken back because they served their purpose, among them that at the time (1998-2002) the batteries and electric motors weren't quite to the point of being viable. While they worked well, they weren't good enough; we're now seeing several years of refinement with vehicles like the Nissan Leaf and Chevy Volt. The other issue was, and still is, cost. The batteries and electric motors are a ways off from being truly inexpensive. The conspriacy theorists refuse to accept this.
charlie8575 1 year ago
@charlie8575 Now that you bring it up. I am actually doing an EV convertion out of an old gasolin car " electrictrabant (dot) blogspot (dot) com No the motors are not more expensive. I got a brand new 24 KW for 1300 USD. If they are masproduced at a large scale they can be made even cheaper because they got less parts. only sligtly expensive material is some copper coils. but the rest is pretty light. The batteries for EV1 was NiMH which was cheaper than the often used Lithium.
Sohave 1 year ago
@Sohave As well as the far left documentarians that had people crying about not having their EV-1s anymore. Yes, people liked them, but if General Motors released those cars at the then-current state-of-the-art, they wouldn't have held up well enough to be viable for the market, and would have cost a fortune to produce, with expenses high enough to void any return. I think, however, in the next few years, we'll see more all-electric cars. The Leaf and Volt will be important bellwethers.
charlie8575 1 year ago
@charlie8575 Well if people like a product then why not make them have that, that is how you make money. product. people knew the range of the car. And you wont convince me that an electric car demands more maintenence noir breaks down more often than a regular car. You should check out evalbum (dot) com and see what people are making themselves in their garages and how their electric cars fulfill their needs. Yes I agree we will se more electric cars in the next few years.
Sohave 1 year ago
easily one of the best looking cars of all time to be produced in the US
kingdl72 1 year ago
This is the most horrifying thing I have ever seen! I don't even know that much about the Chrysler Turbine cars, and this is probably the reason! :'-( This is why American manufacturing has sucked complete dick since 1970. And Unions. Mostly unions. fuck
LegalizePsychedelics 1 year ago
@LegalizePsychedelics I now understand part of the reason why Pontiac rebadged some Holdens to fill out their lineup. GM Holden, the smallest and least known about division, was given the job of designing GM's Zeta platform, their world rear drive platform. So far, only two cars use it; the current Chevy Camaro, the Holden Commodore and its international versions; The Pontiac G8, Chevrolet Caprice and Chevrolet Lumina.
Mechknight73 1 year ago
HEY! - US DOT, ARE YOU WATCHING?! HOW ABOUT CRUSHING A RUNAWAY PRIUS?
DrMotorDude 1 year ago
what the hell
junieclay 1 year ago
How can they???
Such a great invention. It would have been great if Chrysler would have stood firm in getting these cars into the market.
knightjp007 1 year ago
@knightjp007 The problem was the government with growing emissions and efficiency laws.There was just not enough public interest in them at the time to make research into practicality worthwhile.Also they had such a complicated startup procedure, if you weren't on your game you'd ruin the engine.
Still, it's such a shame we don't have these today.
heliarche 1 year ago
why? is a historic machine!
megapelitax 1 year ago
obviously the mad scientist was disposing of his experiment gone awry.
eli85s 1 year ago
Comment removed
hestergt 1 year ago
ahhhhhhhhhh
321styles 1 year ago
should have been part of the original faces of death. that's horrifying.
MontrealMan1970 1 year ago
SICK!!!
CommercialVehicle 1 year ago
FUCKING BASTARDS THIS ARE AWESOME CARS AND THIS STUPID GUYS FUCK THE CARS BASTARDS
yannic2503 1 year ago
why they destoyed them?
arielatom03 1 year ago
Idiots at Chrysler. Scrapping a part of automotive history (and one of the few things that Chrysler built which was cool).
vladk86 1 year ago 9
@vladk86 Blame the Government, they thought it was dangerous and banned them from being sold to the public.
Boredout454 7 months ago
@Boredout454 they certainly wouldn't make the noise restrictions in place these days. man they're loud!
22ness0hayden 5 months ago
Downvoted because it made me cry. Literally.
jklsd 1 year ago 5
Nooooooooooooo!
XERyder 1 year ago
OMG! How much are the survivors worth?
AtheistOrphan 1 year ago
@AtheistOrphan From what I've read, they're worth around $200-250,000 each.
charlie8575 1 year ago
this is fucking horrible.
thegenrl 1 year ago
...howled like a vacuum-cleaner sucking in hairballs, lousy acceleration ... uh, right. There's no way those things were going to sell versus V8s. Styling? They look decent compared to today's minivans, but were bland compared to other cars being sold in the 50s.
mschneider18xx 1 year ago
They were destroyed for insurance purposes, it sucks but they were allowed to keep a handful Chrysler wanted to cover their ass liability wise the book said 40 were made for "consumer evaluation" and 7 were saved maybe 4-5 survive today
horseboyken 1 year ago
didnt chrysler do this withe their VOLT ?
frankmarist 1 year ago
B-H
Pathetic...they should be doing this to all those modern imported crap cars. The TC's had STYLE and were SMOOTH SWEET cars. I agree, monkeys must have been running the company back in '67.
gojoe283 1 year ago
Its crazy, but most of the "experimental" or prototype cars auto mfgrs make are ordered destroyed, but some have escaped. Most say its because they arnt "road worthy" B.S.!!!!!! Kills me to see this. Some of us (like me!!) would love to have a one off car like these.
blue95bird 1 year ago 6
Please post the video where they destroy all of the Huumers. Oh, that hasn't been done yet? What a bummer.
HunterMann 1 year ago 2
WHY THE FUCK??!?!???!?!??!?!?!
Zestava 1 year ago
I've read that the government changed the rules for this program, and Chrysler was going to have to pay import duties on all of the design and engineering work in addition to the taxes on the imported bodies. There's no way they could afford nor justify paying all of that so they had no choice but to destroy them. I can't remember where I read the article, but it implied that someone in the government had it out for Chrysler and was trying to force them to fail. Who knows what really happened?
odantoro 1 year ago
Suits are idiots
stansgarage 1 year ago
Why in the world?
teslapower220 1 year ago 4
That is just sickening
Binarykode 1 year ago 5
I'm still trying to understand the mindset of Chrysler Executives in the early 60's. When you only build 55 examples of something totally unique and one of a kind, do you not realize that it will become a "collectible"? There are probably more existing Tucker's than Chrysler Turbines! Was there a safety issue that could have been a liability for Chrysler? What a shame!
79roller 1 year ago
They destroyed them cause they deemed them an embaresment a failure an Not ever going to be built....so sad but they arent thee only one to do this.
roaddiablo 1 year ago
@roaddiablo How were they a failure ?
Auggie56 1 year ago
@Auggie56 I dont know, I think they were pretty neat. The suites said fail or something.
roaddiablo 1 year ago
NNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
iowa61 1 year ago 4
Sad...
TyLiermann 1 year ago
It's just a car.
23vin850 1 year ago
Comment removed
mrdestoryit 1 year ago
And they never needed a Recall... Thats why today Chrysler is owned by FIAT. Fucking Italian Automobile Trash.
mrjinggles 1 year ago
@mrjinggles
I once bought a fiat, biggest mistake I've made so far financially.
Man, 2 years of trouble and increasing agression by the seller. And it was newly bought.
Waste of materials.
SCRTChannel 1 year ago
fucking unbelievable....chrysler corp, were they always run by monkeys?
those cars were high art.
bryanttillman 2 years ago 42
And then we wonder why is american car industry falling apart. It seems they are really led by monkeys.
OldtimerMercedesBenz 2 years ago 2
@bryanttillman Blame stupid US voters that go voting like blind sheeps for decades let politicians f**k whole world.
If you still go voting after CIA did almost all attacks against US in past 60 yrs then it's your fault.
zabijaq123 1 year ago
@bryanttillman It is mandatory to destroy a car that was used to ANY type of tests.
akkudakkupl 1 year ago
@bryanttillman thats is why they needed the bail out..even if these cars were not suitable they could have acheived valuable income by selling the R/D needed to develop further roadmobile micro turbine engines..morons..absolute morons
mailnotwanted 9 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
good , they where ugly anyways.
stan420ok 2 years ago
it's only the bodies not the engines thank god
280aden 2 years ago
this is one of the most disturbing things I have ever seen on YouTube... I honestly am weak in the knees after seeing this.. :(
ProfessorIgor 2 years ago
Cash 4 Clunkers part 1!
Turbine could use diesel fuel, unleaded gasoline, kerosene, JP-4 jet fuel, and even vegetable oil?
vidiot242 2 years ago
Ohh... that is terrible!!!
itookmypills 2 years ago
They should be crushing all the Honda's
and Toyota's instead of a Chrysler Tur
bine car .
CuyahogaMustang 2 years ago 33
@CuyahogaMustang Agreed!!!!
GayUOPXBoy10 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@CuyahogaMustang Agreed!!
GayUOPXBoy10 1 year ago
@CuyahogaMustang Sorry! But could they do that? The Chrysler Turbines were destroyed in the 1960s. Honda and Toyotas started to be exported to America in the 1970s, so how is that going to work? Whilst we are talking about Chrysler, they destroyed the Rootes Group over here in the UK.
NCW250 1 year ago
@CuyahogaMustang I couldnt agree more!
vwbusssesareforever 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@vwbusssesareforever I don't think you heard me, Akku, I said those cars are culturally irreplaceable. People for generations to come will, when asked what they believe was the greatest auto ever built, will pull out the Chrysler Turbine as an easy choice, for want of a better one. There isn't an auto museum on the planet who wouldn't slit their wrists open to get one into their collection. As I said....High Art.
I could care less for test protocols.
bryanttillman 1 year ago
@CuyahogaMustang I drove a Honda Accord from 1990. It was great. Coming from someone with "mustang" in their name, no wonder you are biased towards efficiency.
DevonWhorton 11 months ago
I can't believe they crushed those magnificent cars! I remember seeing one parked on the street in Chicago back in 1963. I was mesmerized by it. There's one in the Henry Ford Museum at Greenfield Village, but I don't know if it's functioning. What a shame.
79roller 2 years ago 6
Only about 5 working ones are left in existence. 3 of them are owned and run by museums for show and 2 are owned by private collectors.
GunsOfThePhoenix 1 year ago
The crawford auto aviation museum has one of the engines that were removed when the cars were destroyed.
Phantomrig 2 years ago
Out of 55 made, 46 were crushed. Chrysler still owns two, another three are owned privately (Jay Leno is one such owner), and the other four are in various museums.
Chapelle69 2 years ago
Here in St Louis Mo The Musuem of Tranportation has the ONLY functional Chrysler Turbine car in the world!!! Runs and drives!! Sad Chrysler crushed all the those back then.
yellowford71 2 years ago
Jay Leno's runs and drives along with atleast 1 more.
Phantomrig 2 years ago
what are they doing that stupid idiots?
arkadya30 2 years ago
Death to Chrysler!
RotorDemon 2 years ago
The engines could have been improved. The bodies were works of art. This is like a crime!!!!!!!
73carolandme 2 years ago
whhyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
crystalscan2002 2 years ago
Jay Leno just got the one from Chrsyler.
robertdrake777 2 years ago
Monsters!
robertdrake777 2 years ago 2
There's one turbine car left (at least) on display at the Henry Ford Museum in Dearborn, MI. Great that they saved one for the "history books"
datacreed 2 years ago
I live and lived in Detroit and a Chrysler engineer had one that he drove around for awhile vack the. The turbine whined/hummed very distinctly.
christof139 2 years ago
Chrysler had them circling on a small walled in display track at the New York Worlds Fair in 1964 and 1965. I remember seeing one as it circled in the Disneyland like track as it made it's periodic demo run. I would have loved one - who wouldn't! But I think there were problems with the turbine coping with the constant cycling of accelerating/decelerating of urban driving. It was inefficient and slow to "spool up" in take off - made too much heat or something. Application was a failure. Sad!
ontcan1 2 years ago
They destroying Americas Automotive Future.Americas Automobile Manufacturer never producing Turbine Cars and America lost his Automotive leadership in the World and so the Manufacturer going Bankrupt.
koledapt 2 years ago 3
nnnnnnnooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
lamaquina01 2 years ago 4
did chrysler turbine had a turbine engine?????
i think it was just the name.
Machone7O 2 years ago
Yes they did have a turbine engine in them. I am 58 now and in St. Louis, Mo. in about '62 or '63, Chrysler had a showing of the car I was 11 or 12 at the time. The engine would run on any combustable fluid so they said. It also ran so smooth that the Chrysler Rep. stood a nickle on edge on the engine, it never fell over. As I recall the problem they had was the high rpm, and very specialized ceramic parts in the engine. It was a pretty car and definately unique!
1foxtrot70 2 years ago 2
I just remembered the viewing was held at the Northwest Plaza near the St. Louis International Airport. Of the era, all of the auto manufacturers had body stylings that took design elements from jet fighter aircraft. Note the sleek body, the interior, the front and the rear of the vehicle. To see it in person you thought that you could fly.
1foxtrot70 2 years ago
they had it, look it up idiot
K3N51NGTON 2 years ago
Looks like the turbine engines were pulled. What did Chrysler do with them? I would guess they were thrown into a different smelter because of the different alloys.
jtrisgood 2 years ago
poor little car
f18andmigrocks 2 years ago 3
There just aren't enough expletives in the English language to express my disdain for this horror.
Sickening to see such innovative and incredible cars being systematically butchered in that manner, for nothing... It is my sincere hope that somewhere in Hell there is an exec whose expensive suit is melting onto his skin for this automotive holocaust.
Ambassador72 2 years ago 2
why are they destroyed????:(
hendrikhelweg 2 years ago
to avoid paying import taxes on them... the bodies were made in Italy.
wmichswingers 2 years ago