Comments about this vehicle

Author	Message
ahight ◊ 2007-07-19 22:06	submitted by dwayne:
stpaulcarguy ◊ 2007-07-20 03:17	It's a shame they smash it up.
58pacer ◊ 2008-05-10 01:48	Sigh...one less 1959 Ranger four-door sedan in the world...nobody will miss it. Only thing worth saving on it was the hooded mirror. Notice the license plate...1963 California ACA 567. Plate was issued out of the Chico DMV.
stpaulcarguy ◊ 2008-08-15 07:16	58pacer wrote Sigh...one less 1959 Ranger four-door sedan in the world...nobody will miss it. Hey pacer. . SHUT UP YOU DUMBASS!!!!
Ray B. ◊ 2008-08-15 10:05	stpaulcarguy wrote Hey pacer. . SHUT UP YOU DUMBASS!!!! Same.
58Roadmaster ◊ 2008-08-20 07:38	[58D]. Well they did make 12,000 of this style, which is like a million in Edsel figures! If someone had a gun to my head and told me to pick an Edsel to destroy, I would have to choose this one! [bends over for inevitable tounge lashing]
Skid ◊ 2009-01-05 17:48	58pacer wrote Sigh...one less 1959 Ranger four-door sedan in the world...nobody will miss it. I miss it. An irreplacable piece of cultural and historical significance destroyed for no reason at all.
Pibwl ◊ 2009-01-05 18:04	Maybe it's weird, but I think Edsels were one of most interesting American sedans of the 1950s - at least they had unique style. Pity.
58pacer ◊ 2009-01-24 08:39	Sorry, fellas, nobody loves Edsels more than I do. But you gotta realize these cars survived at a far greater rate than people who want to own them. Four-door sedans are (ho-hum) soooo boring, and most of them will be parted out to provide support for more exciting body styles. On top of that, the Corsair trim package is the hot number for 1959 Edsel, and Rangers have to take a back seat. Now add to that the fact that so many Ranger 4-door sedans were produced...the single most common model and body style of any Edsel produced! Okay, I'm off the soap box. But permit me to relay a message from a good Edsel friend from the not-so-distant past who told me "You can't keep 'em all, just the best ones. The rest are parts."
Skid ◊ 2009-03-29 12:19	So it's okay to destroy, just because it's the lower of the two models offered that year? And it's "boring" because it has two extra doors? The wanton destruction of any decent condition Edsel is inexcusable. Period.
66Sprint200 ◊ 2009-06-16 22:42	58pacer wrote Sorry, fellas, nobody loves Edsels more than I do. I have to fight you on that one. My first car when I was 14 in 2005 was a 1959 Edsel Ranger 2 Door Sedan. My dad sold it to the scrap yard last fall for $75. I was heartbroken. Now that I have graduated high school, this weekend I am picking up my 3rd car (2nd I still have, a 1966 Ford Mustang with the 200CID straight six), a 1958 Edsel Corsair. My neighbor is giving it to me as payment for helping him fix up his house. The 58 will be going to college with me in the fall. I am going to college for automotive restoration. I still have a bunch of the parts, including the pickle with its original green paint from the 59. -- Last edit: 2009-06-16 22:47:00
stpaulcarguy ◊ 2009-08-28 07:07	58pacer wrote "You can't keep 'em all, just the best ones. The rest are parts." pacer, again, SHUT UP! even if people do take your dumbass advice and scrap out and smash up 4 doors. they're automotive history too. the beauty of a 4dr is no one sees it coming. hardly anyone does em. and that makes em more appealing, but perhaps thats just my opinion.
Commander 57 ◊ 2009-08-28 15:47	I PREFER 4-door cars! Always have. The stately symmetry of a 4-door sedan appeals to me. The wanton destruction of ANY antique car is a crime against cultural history. Once gone, you can never get them back.
Kooshmeister ◊ 2009-08-28 16:08	I also prefer four doors to two. Mostly because two-door cars' doors tend to be longer and I find long front doors unappealing, visually.
58pacer ◊ 2010-10-22 07:03	You can like what you like. I'm not advocating destroying four-door sedans. Some of you put words in my mouth. But so what if I do say that? There's no guarantee in this world that you will not read things with which you disagree. Grow up and learn to be tolerant of others' opinions. I happen to own three Edsels, all scarce or desirable models, one from each junior series plant. A Pacer convertible from San Jose, a Bermuda wagon from Mahwah, and a Roundup wagon from Louisville. I bought the convertible when it was barely 20 years old . . . just a used car. I've driven it coast-to-coast twice. I bought the Roundup four years later. I drove an Edsel daily to work for over 12 years. My wife has driven my two complete, running Edsels across town and on the open highway. I've had my Edsels on national television at least a dozen times, some local as well, and I was either driving them or talking about them in most of those instances . . . national radio, too. But facts is facts . . . don't shoot the messenger. There are more Edsels still in existence than people who want to own them. I am on a first-name basis with two fellows who each own over a hundred. One owns nearly two hundred! You ever try to buy NOS Edsel parts??? I've lost track of where my local Edsel dealer moved to. If it weren't for people choosing which to restore and which to part, we wouldn't have anything to keep the good ones going!!! It's an unpleasant reality, but somebody has to play God ;-) Who the hell are you all to tell me what I can or can't say about my favorite car? Why don't you use some of that energy to save a couple more yourselves instead of crabbing about "wanton destruction". Sheesh! There are Edsels rotting under trees all over the place . . . which is worse? At least this one gave its life for public exposure. How many youngsters got the hots for Edsels as a result of this movie and others like it? We old fogies aren't going to live forever. Somebody's got to beat the drum so our cars have some warm, loving places to go when we die. You must be Communists to think like you do. Or even worse, Democrats! But to be fair, even noted liberal Garrison Keillor had the sense to utter the following: "The most un-American thing you can say is 'You can't say that.'" -- Last edit: 2010-10-22 07:53:17
antp ◊ 2010-10-22 15:41	58pacer wrote How many youngsters got the hots for Edsels as a result of this movie and others like it? Like "Christine" and "Back to the Future" probably made lots of new fans of the Plymouth Fury and the DeLorean, to help to restore/maintain the remaining cars -- Last edit: 2010-10-22 15:41:46
Commander 57 ◊ 2010-10-22 17:20	I think it's the opposite. I feel such movies create enjoyment (thrill) at the sight of the destruction of cars which in turn causes the movie makers to destroy more to feed that desire. Just look how many cars Hollywood destroys every year, often rare collectible models. Unlike endangered animal species which can regenerate themselves under protection, once all the antique cars are gone they are gone forever. (Would we want to see the wanton destruction of a Rembrant painting presented for a thrill?) -- Last edit: 2010-10-22 17:23:37
58pacer ◊ 2010-10-22 17:58	So now the thought police is telling us what are appropriate and inappropriate subjects and situations for depicting in film? Violence and destruction can be simulated, and it has the same impact on the mind. "Hidalgo" depicted animal cruelty and mortal injury. Did that make people want to kill and maim horses? Of course, no animals were harmed, etc., etc. "Tucker: The Man and his Dream" showed what appeared to be a rolling Tucker automobile. According to Skinned Knuckles magazine this month, it was actually a specially rigged and disguised 1940 or 1941 Studebaker 4S. Did this movie inspire destruction of either Studebakers or Tuckers? Any publicity is good publicity. If we don't get the younger generation interested in old iron, our precious babies will rot under trees when we're gone, simply for lack of love, and nobody will notice. Examples which are high in production and survival rate, but low in collector demand, occasionally sacrificed for the art of film is a small price to pay for the young fans it can generate. If the demand exceeded the supply, the Edsel would begin to rise in value and possibly reach the point where Edsel wrecks in movies would be simulated with disguised whatevers (fill in the "whatevers" with whatever make you happen to hold great disdain for). And remember, even if you can inspire one more young mind attached to an able body to want to own and drive your favorite marque, there's still no law preventing him/her from chopping and modifying it until it's barely recognizable, or from wrecking it in a fit of youthful exuberance. 1958 Edsels with their big V-8's as standard equipment are particularly vulnerable to the latter. Distinctive, culturally and historically significant architecture is frequently protected by law. There are three Frank Lloyd Wright houses in LA that are vacant and deteriorating because nobody wants to live in them, and they are not allowed to modernize them so the houses are livable under today's standards. Do that to antique automobiles, and they will disappear from the landscape faster than ever because next to nobody will be able to enjoy them, or want to, given the protectionist attitudes many of you profess. -- Last edit: 2010-10-22 18:30:28
Commander 57 ◊ 2010-10-22 18:24	<< Chuckle >> It's funny how expressing a simple opinion can engender such an angry response full of assumptions. We are not talking "thought police". I did not in any way suggest any laws be passed to protect cars. I merely expressed my opinion that a constant stream of vehicular destruction is not the way to make people (young or old) appreciate and want to preserve antique vehicles (a very REASONABLE position, I believe). Doesn't it make sense that young people would be more likely to collect, restore and revere old cars if they were presented with respect and as having intrinsic value, rather than as worthless objects to be abused a destroyed for a cheap thrill? Certainly makes sense to me. -- Last edit: 2010-10-22 18:27:40
58pacer ◊ 2010-10-22 18:38	Sorry, I didn't mean for all that to be aimed at you, Commander. I was chafing more at the verbal abuse I took at the top of this discussion. And I assure you the only anger here is in the eyes of the reader. But, unfortunately respecting old cars doesn't by itself make a good plot line. Many of these films are period pieces set in times when these were just run-of-the-mill used cars, subject to the whims of their drivers. Said drivers were frequently involved in crime or passionate situations where the car meant nothing. It's just good film-making. If you don't present pathos, you won't have anybody watching anyway.
dsl ◊ 2010-10-22 18:44	I think the key statement which defines what anyone can hope for is: 58pacer wrote There are more Edsels still in existence than people who want to own them. Unless that changes, Edsels and whatever else will always be vulnerable. We have similar in the UK - Morris Marinas being a nice example and Top Gear destroys quite a few for comic effect despite owners club protests. Perhaps antp is right that destroying a few onscreen can widen appreciation and attract positive support for preserving the remainder, but Marina values are still no more expensive than before and TG can carry on finding well preserved examples for minimal prices and continue to drop pianos on them. So be it - I couldn't care less about Marinas - shite cars. But I also realise I'm not totally consistent - I hate people destroying Hillman Avengers (eg Life on Mars), but have to swallow that to most folk Avengers are as mediocre and expendable as Marinas. Multiply all these inconsistencies out to reflect the idiosyncracies of car enthusiasts globally and it's only if you get a core stock left with a determined support that cars will survive for future generations (or a few ...um... "eccentrics" leap into action for eg the VW K70). How many Simca 1100s, Chrysler 180s or Talbot Tagoras are still alive in the UK, for instance? Sometimes, just kiss them goodbye - the gap they leave is conceptual not real. "Our precious babies will rot under trees when we're gone, simply for lack of love, and nobody will notice" - so be it, but car enthusiasm will adopt other targets in the next generation and preserve them (or at least protest about them). Values and emotions about cars are always evolving. I can't talk much about Edsels, but if the "Protect all Edsels/Marinas" movement is ever able to break out of the morass of similar claims it will need to convince many many more people of the car's significance over all the other competing claims so that demand/interest comes into line with the numbers still in existence.
Commander 57 ◊ 2010-10-22 19:51	I can understand both of your positions. But it would sure be nice if just for once Hollywood featured the careful preservation of an antique car rather than its mistreatment. I think THAT could help lead to more appreciation of our disappearing automotive cultural history.
atom ◊ 2010-10-23 00:32	/vehicle_173552-Ford-Gran-Torino-1972.html ?
58pacer ◊ 2010-10-23 02:26	Dsl, to heck with the Marinas. We've got to figure out how to save all those poor, old pianos! ;-)
dsl ◊ 2010-10-23 03:08	Well an impdb would be a start, and we need more of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmIK-d6yb-I&feature=related. But to paraphrase slightly there are also probably more pianos in existence than people who want to own them. You could even argue TG is making the world a better place by simultaneously solving the problems of surplus pianos and Marinas .....
jettalover ◊ 2010-10-23 05:24	58pacer, how do you know the plates were issued out of the Chico DMV office?
58pacer ◊ 2010-10-23 06:24	Because a dear California friend who happens to own a 1960 Edsel two-door sedan with deluxe interior (one of about 100 made) that was purchased by her father in New Jersey when she was five years old, also collects license plates. She dug up a distribution list of 1963-issue, black background with yellow characters, California plate letter combinations and where they went. ABA through ACH were sent to the Chico DMV office for local distribution. Of all the combinations AAA through KZF went to local offices for local distribution. KZG through NSZ were mailed out of Sacramento to anyone in the state who requested them that way (as my father did on his 1957 Buick Special 2S), and NTA through RDA went to the Los Angeles DMV offices, also presumably for local distribution. Combos beyond RDA were issued alphabetically and chronologically until the letter sequences were exhausted near the end of 1969. At that time, the blue background with yellow letter plates with reversed letter and number sequences were introduced, while the black and yellows remained valid, the first time that an old plate series was allowed to remain on the books. I'm working on getting a good fix on the distribution pattern for the 1956 yellow background with black character plates, and IMCDB helps my cause in a big way, especially those "Psycho" grabs! I've also picked numbers off old TV shows and from old-car fans' memories. It's a lot more difficult because these plates were all removed from service when the 1963-issue plates were sent out.
jettalover ◊ 2010-10-23 07:40	Great knowledge 58pacer. Thanks!
antp ◊ 2010-10-25 14:36	dsl wrote Perhaps antp is right that destroying a few onscreen can widen appreciation and attract positive support for preserving the remainder, but Marina values are still no more expensive than before Big difference between Christine/BTTF and TG: in latter one the car is described as shit, in the movies the cars were featured and appear as great cars. If Harry Potter used a Marina instead of an Anglia, I guess that many would have been saved (as I heard that after the Harry Potter movie, the Anglia became more sought after). There is a difference of a car well used (and then damaged/destroyed) in a movie, and a car just destroyed "for fun". -- Last edit: 2010-10-25 14:37:12
johnfromstaffs ◊ 2010-10-25 16:46	If you had ever driven a Marina, especially the 1.8 with the terminal understeer, you would not be shedding any tears. It was basically an over powered Morris Minor, and that was an early 1940s design. The Anglia was not bad to drive, except a little light at the back.
Skid ◊ 2011-08-17 01:29	58pacer wrote There are more Edsels still in existence than people who want to own them. You're assuming everyone who wants to own them can afford them.
Commander 57 ◊ 2011-08-17 01:58	And there's always ever more people but there will never be any more Edsels than there are right now.
GodzillaFan54 ◊ 2020-09-07 15:10	From what I saw of the film, the car isn't destroyed. Yes it gets smashed up pretty good, but it was still driveable by the end of the movie.

Advertising

Last completed movie pages

1959 Edsel Ranger Four-Door Sedan [58D]

1959 Edsel Ranger [58D] in Blacktop, Movie, 2000

Comments about this vehicle

Add a comment

Advertising

Watch or buy this title - Powered by JustWatch

Advertising