1939 Chrysler unknown
1939 Chrysler unknown in По имени Барон... (By the Name of Baron...), TV Series, 2002
Ep. 4
Class: Cars, Sedan — Model origin:

Minor action vehicle or used in only a short scene
Comments about this vehicle
Author | Message |
---|---|
◊ 2023-11-12 21:28 |
'39 Chrysler of some kind. |
◊ 2023-11-12 21:31 |
Most probably the same: /vehicle_1626484-Chrysler-1939.html |
◊ 2023-11-13 14:22 |
![]() ![]() |
Kizzs_Guggya_01 ◊ 2023-11-15 17:03 |
1939 Chrysler Royal Sedan: Link to "upload.wikimedia.org" |
Kizzs_Guggya_01 ◊ 2023-11-16 18:40 |
https://www.youtube.com -- Last edit: 2023-11-16 19:01:46 (Baube) |
◊ 2023-11-16 18:53 |
Sending mean messages just because they don't edit corrections for you doesn't help anything at all ![]() |
◊ 2023-11-16 19:02 |
try https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kaOIxll4LCA instead, looks like you clearly need a worry-free day.. ![]() |
◊ 2023-11-16 19:04 |
Wait, how did this end up here? Was it something offensive he posted? |
◊ 2023-11-16 19:05 |
kind of.. and clearly not necessary.. |
◊ 2023-11-16 20:00 |
![]() |
Kizzs_Guggya_01 ◊ 2023-11-16 20:01 |
The fact that y'all can't accept that I commented the correct car model just makes this __ even more __ up xD -- Last edit: 2024-01-16 21:59:42 (night cub) |
◊ 2023-11-16 20:09 |
I think what we can't accept is your rude attitude towards the staff here. No need to be a jerk just because they haven´t changed the listing yet ![]() -- Last edit: 2023-11-16 20:34:32 |
◊ 2023-11-16 20:17 |
How about other 1939 C22/C23/C24 models of single-egg-twin design, just with different engines & wheelbases? |
◊ 2023-11-16 20:23 |
not as much as your comments.. |
◊ 2023-11-16 20:30 |
All right then. Please be so kind as to tell us why you make this to be a Royal over an Imperial, New Yorker, Saratoga or Custom Imperial, especially considering the fact this car has been through over 50 years of daily use in an area with no access to original parts, many of which set these models apart. -- Last edit: 2023-11-16 20:32:17 |
◊ 2023-11-16 20:37 |
not to mention that some other IDs you gave are... not that conclusive, to stay polite.. |
◊ 2023-11-16 20:38 |
As well as your profile.... |
◊ 2023-11-16 20:39 |
I didn't even read that. I thought he just felt personally attacked by Lateef's comment, but now it does make sense. |
◊ 2023-11-16 20:44 |
It makes a LOT of sense |
◊ 2023-11-16 21:45 |
If you can't brush up with your language, you know where it goes. |
◊ 2023-11-16 22:28 |
I think he’s a simpleton. Time he went. |
◊ 2023-11-19 14:46 |
I agree. Wholly unnecessary. Perhaps the majority of what has been written here can be erased, please? |
◊ 2023-11-19 16:47 |
I second that |
◊ 2023-11-20 01:59 |
Staff?! You mean I'm supposed to be getting paid?! |
◊ 2023-11-21 07:42 |
![]() |
◊ 2023-11-21 14:41 |
![]() |
◊ 2023-11-21 16:03 |
![]() |