I was 13 when my father boughta 57 chevy statoin wagone, it was nice a a way in the 40,000 soon 51 years ago the power glide automatic gives out was it to smaall for the asume the 283 eight?? for GM was knowen for undersizzed transmisions then not long after ahead gasket fails adn gthe recaomned a vavle gringing I wish I could have seeb ut taken apart Oh I was in Hawia 19 years ago Iwished this car terned in to a lot I would tell the driver the same color
@SUPERDAVIDLEVINE Hey, SuperDavid! Those powerglides were pretty beefy, the main criticism was they were slow...only being two speeds. The 283 shouldn't have been too much torque for it..but the failure of the head gaskets definitely is a problem. Many a car was scrapped when that happened...today the engine would probably just be replaced with a crate engine. I'd love to go to Hawaii! Thanks! :) Jack
Hey, Jack! This is a beautiful car, I love the red/white colour combination, I think the '54 could be one of the most under-rated of all Bel-Air's since they're never usually mentioned all that often in any of the usual literature, certainly don't seem to be as popular as the later Bel-Air's!
@drewerz01 Hey, Mike! I agree about the color combination..very cool. I think the 54 was in the unfortunate position of being just prior to the 55, the year of tremendous styling change and the introduction of the Chevy V8..not an enviable position! They tended to be lumped with all that preceded the 55, kind of old school..while the 55 was a landmark for the new school of longer, lower, more powerful. Thanks! :) Jack
@Seattlecarnut Yeah, Jason...I dubbed so many videos, I had a brain freeze! At least the title and writeup are correct. When you get to be as old as I am, the decades tend to mix together! Thanks! :) Jack
@raconter1 LOL! Yeah. I think it happens to everyone now and then. Why turn signals were optional rather than standard on cars of this vintage is beyond me. The same goes for reverse indicator lights. You want people to see that you're backing up.
@Seattlecarnut Hey, Jason! Yeah, I do believe the car companies were just in a rut with pricing at the time...they were used to adding options piece by piece....and that was responsible for a lot of the profit on cars. The stripped base sedan wasn't very profitable...the extras were where the profits lie. I remember heaters being optional! Thanks! :) Jack
@raconter1 It's one thing to make certain things optional for the customer to buy if he/she wants, like a radio and automatic transmission. But there are things that make a car safer than would otherwise be that should've been included as standard equipment. Things like turn indicators, stiffer suspension, seat belts, etc.
@Seattlecarnut Hey, Jason! Ford tried selling safety with their 1956 models...padded dash, deep dish steering wheel, improved door locks, padded visors, seat belts..and found that it didn't sell! People at the time didn't want to be reminded that their car could become a burial vault! I remember clearly though there was some concern..they referred to the front passenger seat as the "death seat". It was a struggle to get people to use seat belts...it still is! Thanks! :) Jack
@raconter1 Perhaps because they tried to push safety down our throats, instead of letting us find out for ourselves about them. Or better yet, perhaps Ford should've demonstrated how the safety features work to protect the occupants. And in turn, show us how to properly use them.
@Seattlecarnut Hey, Jason! I just don't think the time was right for safety features...people didn't want to hear about crashes...Tucker had many safety features in 48 like padded dash, pop out windshield..and so did Kaiser..but that stuff never caught on. When seat belts were mandated, in the early 60's, people were confronted with safety issues...many chose to ignore the belts, but at least some got in the habit of using them....I installed them in our new 61 Falcon. Thanks! :) Jack
@raconter1 It's always the govt. that makes safety required by law. That I've always despised. I've worn safety belts since 1985, and I've been glad I did.
LOL...did he just say "1964 Chevy"? Not quite! And I'm not sure, but I believe that reverse lights were still an option in '54. Hell, I'm not even sure that turn-signals were mandated yet! It was as recent as 1950 that only one brake light was required, so go figure. Does anyone know where I can see a video that shows a car with a 2-speed tranny driving? I've never heard one shifting before, now that I think about it. Beautiful car, anyway! =)
@justforever96 Hey, Johnny! Yeah, I got a little confused, making several vids at the same time. I'm trying to think back, but starting in 53, the reverse lens was the bottom part of the tailight..and the same for 54, but it lost the separate brake light in the middle. So I would say that all 54's had the same lens, red on top, for running and brake light, and clear on the bottom for reverse..the one on this car is a custom type, all red. At this point, I think turn signals were std. Thnx!
@raconter1 Yeah, you're probably right; the Bel-Air was pretty much "top-of-the-line" for a Chevy, wasn't it? I suppose it would have reverse lights as standard. But on a base-model, maybe not. My buddies 1950 Chevy panel-truck is about as base as it gets; I-6, 3-speed manual (I think), steel rims, no heater or radio, and a single brake light on the rear door. As far as I know it's pretty much exactly as it left the factory, which makes it cooler to me than if it was modified and V8-powered.
A very, very heavily optioned 54 sports coupe. The 53 and 54 Bel-Air sports coupe had the inside rear mirror on the dash. The first Bel-Air was 50 when it was just a 2 dr hdtp in the special deluxe range and became a full line in 53. The scale model in the back window is actually a 53 but they looked almost identical except for the tail lights and parking lights.
@cheddyrod Hey, Chester! I think they did a good job making the car look progressively more stylish...I wonder how many would have postponed buying a car if they had had a hint of what awaited in 1955...not only style wise, but power wise! Thanks! :) Jack
This is the First year of the bel-airs the 54 and its a Nice one you don't see them as much as the others, good for a change. I see you did alot of 1960's Cars Videos your still saying 60 LOL
@cheddyrod really ? It must have been a typo when I read that the 54 was the first year of the Bel-airs and yes here it is 54 was first year of bel airs mmm ? well that book needs a correction I guess they missed the one LOL Thanks. I have a great memory when it comes too reading
@jojocats2 Hey, John! My pleasure...this was a nice family cruiser and it had some style...the year before the Chevy V8 was unleashed, and changed everything! Thanks! :) Jack
I was 13 when my father boughta 57 chevy statoin wagone, it was nice a a way in the 40,000 soon 51 years ago the power glide automatic gives out was it to smaall for the asume the 283 eight?? for GM was knowen for undersizzed transmisions then not long after ahead gasket fails adn gthe recaomned a vavle gringing I wish I could have seeb ut taken apart Oh I was in Hawia 19 years ago Iwished this car terned in to a lot I would tell the driver the same color
SUPERDAVIDLEVINE 4 months ago
@SUPERDAVIDLEVINE Hey, SuperDavid! Those powerglides were pretty beefy, the main criticism was they were slow...only being two speeds. The 283 shouldn't have been too much torque for it..but the failure of the head gaskets definitely is a problem. Many a car was scrapped when that happened...today the engine would probably just be replaced with a crate engine. I'd love to go to Hawaii! Thanks! :) Jack
raconter1 4 months ago
Did he say it was a 1964? Lol
marcortiz83 5 months ago 2
@marcortiz83 I sure did...when you get to my age, you start to mix the decades up! At least the written stuff is correct! Thanks! :) Jack
raconter1 5 months ago
Hey, Jack! This is a beautiful car, I love the red/white colour combination, I think the '54 could be one of the most under-rated of all Bel-Air's since they're never usually mentioned all that often in any of the usual literature, certainly don't seem to be as popular as the later Bel-Air's!
drewerz01 1 year ago
@drewerz01 Hey, Mike! I agree about the color combination..very cool. I think the 54 was in the unfortunate position of being just prior to the 55, the year of tremendous styling change and the introduction of the Chevy V8..not an enviable position! They tended to be lumped with all that preceded the 55, kind of old school..while the 55 was a landmark for the new school of longer, lower, more powerful. Thanks! :) Jack
raconter1 1 year ago
Jack, my Dad had a 4-door 54 BelAir. Love this car, thanks for the memories.
55lincoln 1 year ago
@55lincoln Hey, Warren! Glad I could supply the memories! Thanks! :) Jack
raconter1 1 year ago
LOL! A 1964 Chevy? It looks more like a 1954, Chevy. Nice looking car.
Seattlecarnut 1 year ago
@Seattlecarnut Yeah, Jason...I dubbed so many videos, I had a brain freeze! At least the title and writeup are correct. When you get to be as old as I am, the decades tend to mix together! Thanks! :) Jack
raconter1 1 year ago
@raconter1 LOL! Yeah. I think it happens to everyone now and then. Why turn signals were optional rather than standard on cars of this vintage is beyond me. The same goes for reverse indicator lights. You want people to see that you're backing up.
Seattlecarnut 1 year ago
@Seattlecarnut Hey, Jason! Yeah, I do believe the car companies were just in a rut with pricing at the time...they were used to adding options piece by piece....and that was responsible for a lot of the profit on cars. The stripped base sedan wasn't very profitable...the extras were where the profits lie. I remember heaters being optional! Thanks! :) Jack
raconter1 1 year ago
@raconter1 It's one thing to make certain things optional for the customer to buy if he/she wants, like a radio and automatic transmission. But there are things that make a car safer than would otherwise be that should've been included as standard equipment. Things like turn indicators, stiffer suspension, seat belts, etc.
Seattlecarnut 1 year ago
@Seattlecarnut Hey, Jason! Ford tried selling safety with their 1956 models...padded dash, deep dish steering wheel, improved door locks, padded visors, seat belts..and found that it didn't sell! People at the time didn't want to be reminded that their car could become a burial vault! I remember clearly though there was some concern..they referred to the front passenger seat as the "death seat". It was a struggle to get people to use seat belts...it still is! Thanks! :) Jack
raconter1 1 year ago
@raconter1 Perhaps because they tried to push safety down our throats, instead of letting us find out for ourselves about them. Or better yet, perhaps Ford should've demonstrated how the safety features work to protect the occupants. And in turn, show us how to properly use them.
Seattlecarnut 1 year ago
@Seattlecarnut Hey, Jason! I just don't think the time was right for safety features...people didn't want to hear about crashes...Tucker had many safety features in 48 like padded dash, pop out windshield..and so did Kaiser..but that stuff never caught on. When seat belts were mandated, in the early 60's, people were confronted with safety issues...many chose to ignore the belts, but at least some got in the habit of using them....I installed them in our new 61 Falcon. Thanks! :) Jack
raconter1 1 year ago
@raconter1 It's always the govt. that makes safety required by law. That I've always despised. I've worn safety belts since 1985, and I've been glad I did.
Seattlecarnut 1 year ago
@Seattlecarnut Hey, Jason...I don't go anywhere without wearing seatbelts....very important safety device!
Thanks! :) Jack
raconter1 1 year ago
@raconter1 Neither do I. I've had my share of accidents while driving, and if it weren't for seat belts, I wouldn't be sitting here typing this.
Seattlecarnut 1 year ago
LOL...did he just say "1964 Chevy"? Not quite! And I'm not sure, but I believe that reverse lights were still an option in '54. Hell, I'm not even sure that turn-signals were mandated yet! It was as recent as 1950 that only one brake light was required, so go figure. Does anyone know where I can see a video that shows a car with a 2-speed tranny driving? I've never heard one shifting before, now that I think about it. Beautiful car, anyway! =)
justforever96 1 year ago
@justforever96 Hey, Johnny! Yeah, I got a little confused, making several vids at the same time. I'm trying to think back, but starting in 53, the reverse lens was the bottom part of the tailight..and the same for 54, but it lost the separate brake light in the middle. So I would say that all 54's had the same lens, red on top, for running and brake light, and clear on the bottom for reverse..the one on this car is a custom type, all red. At this point, I think turn signals were std. Thnx!
raconter1 1 year ago
@raconter1 Yeah, you're probably right; the Bel-Air was pretty much "top-of-the-line" for a Chevy, wasn't it? I suppose it would have reverse lights as standard. But on a base-model, maybe not. My buddies 1950 Chevy panel-truck is about as base as it gets; I-6, 3-speed manual (I think), steel rims, no heater or radio, and a single brake light on the rear door. As far as I know it's pretty much exactly as it left the factory, which makes it cooler to me than if it was modified and V8-powered.
justforever96 1 year ago
A very, very heavily optioned 54 sports coupe. The 53 and 54 Bel-Air sports coupe had the inside rear mirror on the dash. The first Bel-Air was 50 when it was just a 2 dr hdtp in the special deluxe range and became a full line in 53. The scale model in the back window is actually a 53 but they looked almost identical except for the tail lights and parking lights.
cheddyrod 1 year ago
@cheddyrod Hey, Chester! I think they did a good job making the car look progressively more stylish...I wonder how many would have postponed buying a car if they had had a hint of what awaited in 1955...not only style wise, but power wise! Thanks! :) Jack
raconter1 1 year ago
This is the First year of the bel-airs the 54 and its a Nice one you don't see them as much as the others, good for a change. I see you did alot of 1960's Cars Videos your still saying 60 LOL
1968DodgePolara 1 year ago
@1968DodgePolara It was 53 that Bel-Air became a model range.
cheddyrod 1 year ago
@cheddyrod really ? It must have been a typo when I read that the 54 was the first year of the Bel-airs and yes here it is 54 was first year of bel airs mmm ? well that book needs a correction I guess they missed the one LOL Thanks. I have a great memory when it comes too reading
1968DodgePolara 1 year ago
@1968DodgePolara Yeah...my favorites are the 60s cars, but I still love those 50s too! Thanks! :) Jack
raconter1 1 year ago
Beautiful Bel Air, Jack! The red and white upholstery makes it look extra classy. Thanks for sharing.--John
jojocats2 1 year ago
@jojocats2 Hey, John! My pleasure...this was a nice family cruiser and it had some style...the year before the Chevy V8 was unleashed, and changed everything! Thanks! :) Jack
raconter1 1 year ago
nicee ! i love your videos jack!
wardawg07 1 year ago
@wardawg07 Hey, Warren! I really appreciate the comment! Thanks! :) Jack
raconter1 1 year ago