>With 1.67 million vehicles moved for the 1957 model year, Ford out-paced Chevrolet (1.5 million vehicles) in production for the first time in 22 years in part because the '57 Fords were a new design instead of Chevrolet's three year old one and also longer and wider. The "tri five" Chevys however proved far more enduring; despite higher sales, the '57 Fords suffered from poor quality control and body integrity and surviving examples are relatively rare.
>>28676681my grandfather had one of these. he found out the hard way about the awful Q/C that year.
The Y-block was also kinda crap compared to SBC, it didn't take power well nor were factory performance parts available for it and parts in general are rather harder to find since it was discontinued by 1964.
the Chrysler lineup that year was much worse
>>28676690They sent Y-block tooling to Argentina in ‘64 where it spent the next 20 years of continued production
>>28676681>The "tri five" Chevys however proved far more enduringwhat went so right with them?Also, were the other GM brands similarly durable?
>>28677954>Ford and Chrysler had horrible build quality in '57 so they have a low survival rate while '57 Chevy was built pretty well as it was a 3 year old design>much more replacement parts for Chevy>SBC better suited to hot rodding than Ford Y-block>used Ford and Chrysler cars in 50s-60s had lower resale value than GM cars and were often owned by poor people who trashed them
