One of Ford’s ads for the 1956 Thunderbird, then in its second year of existence, called it “Even dreamier – even newer.” Ford managed to convince only 15,631 individuals to buy into this particular “dream-car-come-true.” And fewer still of those buyers opted for the high output, 260 horsepower, 312 cubic inch engine that Ford offered that year.
I have very early memories of the first series ’55-’57 T-birds. We just did not get to see many of them, to most of us, they were really exotic cars that yes, and they sure made a big impression on my young self. I thought they were flat out beautiful cars that stood out from the sea of “regular” American cars. And like many of my fellow Baby Boomers, I’ve dreamed of owning one ever since I was a kid.
So it looks like Ford was right after all – Thunderbirds are indeed great cars for dreamers.
The seller of this good looking example for sale here on craigslist in Fall River, Massachusetts seems to be a dreamer too. He says (somewhat sadly, it seems to me): “I had purchased the car with plans on fully restoring back to its former glory again but after owning it for years I don’t think I’ll ever get the time to do so.”
This T-Bird has been in storage since 1974. It does not run, nor does it have working brakes, but the seller says that the engine will turn over. It does have that optional 312 engine, and happily also has a three speed transmission, instead of the optional Ford-o-matic, so it will be a fun driver. As you can readily see from the photos, it also has the factory stock continental rear wheel and tire, as well as the hard top without portholes. The seller does not mention the body, but does say it is a “good looking car” as it sits, and I certainly agree. There is just no way to determine whether there is rust in the floors or trunk, or how much body work it’s had in the past without an inspection. That could be more significant than the mechanical and electrical work it will require after more than 40 years in storage.
But for all you dreamers out there, the asking price on this beautiful car is only $10,000, which is definitely under market value for a complete car with an apparently decent body, even if it does need a ton of mechanical work – which it certainly does. The chrome does look solid, as does the interior. The engine appears to be complete and hopefully is original to the car. And it even has pretty nice paint in “buy-me red.” I am sure the paint is not original, but who cares?
So what am I missing? Maybe there is more here than meets the eye, but this “dreamier” Thunderbird looks like a great deal from here. Fall River is only 120 miles up the road from me; maybe it’s time for a road trip.
Having owned a ’56 for over 40 years myself I might have to question the 312 engine coupled with the 3-speed. As mine was also a 3-speed I believe the only engine available with the 3-speed trans was the 292ci. The 312 was only available with the automatic. I believe a conversation I had with Amos Mintor several years ago at the Barrett-Jackson event in Scottsdale confirmed what I had always been told.
Zack, I believe your understanding regarding the engines is correct. Also, I believe all 56 hardtops had the port holes. The non port hole tops were what the 55s and a handful of 57s had. Also I notice that the front bumper guards are missing on this car.
The port holes in the 56 and 57 were added due to buyer pressure, after the 55 was released Ford got loads of complaints from owners because they couldn’t see out to the side when turning due to the massive rear pillar being in the way. The use of many parts from previous models such as headlamps, speedo, switches, etc. are from the early stuff due to Ford rushing to release the car before Chevrolet got a foothold in the market with the all new Corvette. Many of the parts were sitting on shelves from previous Ford models built in the early 50’s.
Thanks Bob. As I get older I don’t always remember things as correctly as I once did. I’d forgotten too that the porthole top I had was one with the little windows….that were not on the ’55’s. I’d almost like to have this one just to toy with one again…. I’m caught thinking what other toys I could do without right now….. that’s a tough one.
You guys, in fact almost anyone, will know more about these cars than I do. I think you are right that this hardtop must be from a ’55. I misinterpreted my sources on portholes. They were standard in ’56.
I have not been able to find any sources that definitively show that you could not get the 312 engine with a three speed though. If it was possible to order, and the 312 engine is original to this car, it would be very rare indeed.
But even if this car is not correct, it sure is pretty!
David, I too have never found conclusive proof that the 312 engine wasn’t available on the manual transmissions in 1956 but I would think it’s very rare if it exists.
The car is not running.If it was it would be in the 30,000 range.
The slight bow in the trunk, the rear bumper that is canted downward at the body sides, and the ill fitting top, make me wonder if the car was hit from behind at some point. Both doors also look like they either are out of shape or were not hung well. I wouldn’t be surprised if some chassis straightening was in order.
K.C., I also noticed that the receivers to attach the top to are missing on the rear deck. A detailed look at the underside of this car is a must.
Zack, I have a 55 in my garage that has both a soft top and the hardtop. The hardtop for 55 also has an insignia on it which is missing on the hardtop shown here.
All the information I can find indicates a 3 speed was standard equipment on ALL baby birds. However, upwards of 90% were ordered with automatic.
This car has been hit, hard.
10K? Y so cheap?
Hagerty values a base 56 with a 292 at 32900. Even IF it needs frame work seems like a great deal.
Its only worth what someone is willing to pay. 32K if its cherry.
The comments always amaze me, there is allot of knowledge and great attention to detail, from all the readers. I would love to put any car I want to buy on Barn Finds, and see the real story, with all the comments. I would say this car is too good to be true, just from the comments
Joe – so much knowledge among readers here. If I was buying a car, I’d ask for help from this group for sure. Based on some of the comments about this car, for example, I am now wondering about its history. If the seller were to be forthcoming, maybe he would reveal what he knows about its condition and whether it’s been, as suspected, hit and has had major work to put it back together. The low asking price and the fact it’s still for sale makes you at least suspect there is some thing serious about this car to worry about. But it’s still a great looking car from a distance, isn’t it?
A quick peek at the vin number would tell you which engine it should have. If the first letter is “M” it was a 292 or “P” would be a 312. There is no call out for a 312 with a Standard shift in my decoder book.
life is short folks
It’s strange to see the advertising brochure for 1956 showing a car without portholes, as I understand it all T-Birds after 55 had them as standard from the factory.
still cheap…..
Non porthole tops were available for 56 T-Birds according to reference book i have… 312 V8 only available with automatic though
In 1956 and 1957 portholes were a no cost option. Non port tops were available both years . 1955 and 1957 non port tops had an emblem – different in each year. 1956 non port tops had no emblem. I believe the 312 was available with a 3 sp overdrive or auto. The 3 sp was only used with the 292.
Nothing on the back half is fitting right, Right side rocker looks wavy, Both doors fit poorly, Yet the front of the car looks like the fit is good. I’d have to agree with some of you guys that this car has been hit, or it’s a total rust can that was poorly patched back together. I’d pass on this one.
Thanks Gord. Learn something new every day. I was wondering why the sales brochure showed a non porthole top but then sales brochures were notorious for not being factual in the fifties.
I believe the horsepower rating for the 312 engine in 56 was 215 for the standard transmission, and 225 for the automatic.
IDK, looks pretty to me just as it is. However, it has been posted for 10 days and still available? Must be something wrong. I’d love to have it if I could get it going and drive it as is. Wonder what the original color was? So many neater choices in the 50s that, to me, would be better than red. If I were closer, I would definitely be taking a look.