[ Login ]

Advertising

Last completed movie pages

Brewster McCloud; Easy; Texas Cotton; To so gadi; Beneath Clouds; Gongjang-ui ju-indeul; Leif & Billy; Coldblooded; Vla×nost; Die H÷lle; Katie Fforde: Zimmer mit Meerblick; Der Vater und sein Sohn; Zvizdan; The Marine 6: Close Quarters; La vie de JÚsus; (more...)

1959 Cadillac Ambulance Miller-Meteor Futura 'Ecto-1A'

1959 Cadillac Ambulance in Ghostbusters II, Movie, 1989 IMDB

Class: Cars, Ambulance — Model origin: US

1959 Cadillac Ambulance Miller-Meteor Futura 'Ecto-1A'

Position 00:02:40 [*][*][*][*][*] The vehicle is part of the movie

Comments about this vehicle

AuthorMessage

wrenchhead US

2006-03-06 20:45

Quote

[Image: cadnite342sa.2474.jpg]

Rocker B. J.

2006-03-06 21:42

Quote

Same 1959 Cadillac Futura.

Carfan US

2006-03-06 22:51

Quote

Rocker B. J. wrote Same 1959 Cadillac Futura.

Yeah same one, but with more lights and new rims

mrcadillac SX

2006-03-07 04:37

Quote

Commercial car enthusiasts [and they are many] visiting this site will disagree with the identification "Cadillac Futura" for this car. Once again, we are up against the problem of naming "custom built" cars.

This Cadillac was delivered in commercial chassis form [the correct designation is "Type "6890"] to the Ohio coach-builder Miller-Meteor. The resulting vehicle is a Cadillac 6890 but only upto and including the instrument panel, but not the windshield. From the windshield back it is a Miller-Meteor creation with the model name "Futura". Miller-Meteor also made the "Sentinel" and the "Landau Traditional".

Cadillac never made a "Futura" model, but Oldsmobile did. We can't call this car a "Cadillac Futura". The name just DOES NOT fit.

So what do we call it ?

Hecubus CA

2006-03-07 07:17

Quote

I was wondering about the Futura name, it didn't seem right (I've always associated it with the Lincoln concept car, just because it became the Batmobile).

Anyways, I'd guess a reasonable designation would be the Cadillac Type 6890 Miller-Meteor Futura. Seems to properly incorporate everything.

antp BE

2006-03-07 11:36

Quote

We could just label it as "Cadillac Ambulance", like we did for lots of other models.

Junkman UK

2006-03-07 11:53

Quote

We should introduce a seperate section for 'professional cars' like ambulances, hearses and wreckers/tow trucks. As a professional car enthusiast and collector, identifying the coachbuilder is one of my biggest hobbies. We should also change the politically incorrect term 'hearse' to the generally accepted and correct 'funeral car' or 'funeral coach'.

mrcadillac SX

2006-03-07 12:50

Quote

"Hecubus": you are right ...but I believe the IMCDb does not have enough "columns" in which to paste all these different (and correct) model identification criteria, e.g. make, type or series name and/or number, model name and/or number, body style, coach-builder (if NOT the manufacturer) and coach builder's model name and/or number.

"antp": that would be the simplest way around the problem ...but it would be wrong, since Cadillac never built any ambulances or funeral vehicles; more correctly, it would need to be "Custom Ambulance on Cadillac chassis".

"Junkman": excellent suggestion; I would recommend also SEPARATE sections for 2-wheelers, 3-wheelers, more-than-4-wheelers, tractors & trailers, crawler vehicles (Caterpillar, etc.), "custom-built" vehicles where coach work is NOT made by the engine/chassis manufacturer and lastly cartoon and animation vehicles. IMHO, the latter have no place in a "serious" information resource like the IMCDb.

Just my 2 cents worth. But in any case CONGRATULATIONS to whomever put this Web site together; it is no mean feat and I can appreciate the difficulties involved in attempting to modify the parameters at this late stage in its development.

antp BE

2006-03-07 14:38

Quote

For such cases we should have a body make/model and a chassis make/model. We have the same problem for busses.
For the moment I think it is better to use the chassis reference, even if the vehicle was not sold by the maker as it is seen in the movie.
About "hearse" term, I'll rename the existing vehicles.

About the different vehicles types, we could split them, yes, but I have to think how we will manage that. In some cases it is nice to list them together, on the movies pages for example.
On the other hand, in the general vehicle listing it would be better to split them.

For the cartoons, we could list them separately. But having too many separate listings will maybe become quite difficult to manage...

-- Last edit: 2006-03-07 14:40:53

wrenchhead US

2006-03-08 00:15

Quote

To be consistent, car in Ghostbusters /vehicle_1936-Cadillac-Ambulance-1959.html should also be renamed as I believe it is the same or very similar car.

FamousCars.de DE

2007-03-08 18:45

Quote

The car shown above is the car from the first movie.
In the second movie you can see it only at the beginning.

Then they "turned" it into Ecto-1a (it was almost a completly new car):

[Image: ecto1asd_small.jpg]

For further details and pictures look at: www.famouscars.de/images/ghostbusters/ghostbusters.htm

antp BE

2007-03-08 21:06

Quote

The picture shown above as main picture is how the car appears at the beginning of the movie, in a bad state compared to the one of the first movie.
As you said, later they change it when they get client again: when ghosts are back due to some special event around the museum.

stronghold EN

2007-08-17 08:54

Quote

[Image: ghostbusters223lo5.3952.jpg] [Image: ghostbusters226ua0.181.jpg] [Image: ghostbusters267lj9.731.jpg] [Image: ghostbusters271gd3.9560.jpg] [Image: ghostbusters2117bx9.8751.jpg]

-- Last edit: 2014-08-08 19:45:14 (antp)

Skid US

2007-08-17 11:37

Quote

Supposedly the "beat-up" car used in the beginning was the car from the first film, but somewhat dilapidated after 5 years or so on a back lot. They built a separate car for the "restored" version.

BTW, what exactly is wrong with the term "hearse?" Is it really incorrect somehow, or is it one of those pointless politically correct euphemistic issues, wherein people try to change the terminology every time one of the old words takes on a percieved negative conotation?

Cycolac Fan EN

2008-02-17 02:55

Quote

I heard that it broke down during the scene where the cross the bridge and had to be towed off set, hence being dumped on a studio back lot. Rumour is that Ecto1 (the car from the first film) belonged to Dan Akroyrd, he'd owned it for several years before writing it into the Ghostbusters script.

Bricklin1990 US

2008-10-03 04:14

Quote

What's so politically incorrest about using the term hearse? That's what I've always called them.

movie freak US

2009-07-16 04:03

Quote

[Image: iftheressomthingstrange.872.jpg][Image: inthenaborhood.8505.jpg][Image: whoyagonnacall.4776.jpg][Image: ghostbusterst.103.jpg][Image: iftheresomethingweirdan.7075.jpg][Image: whoyagonnacallc.1565.jpg]

CRAFT372 US

2009-10-12 21:13

Quote

Why onely 4 stars ?

Lantzs09

2010-12-21 03:43

Quote

I rember this car it was the Ecto 1.

stonecoldfan100 US

2011-02-18 14:50

Quote

[*][*][*][*][*]

CRAFT372 US

2011-05-21 19:04

Quote

Come One guys it's the Ghostbusters Ecto One ambulance give it 5 stars

-- Last edit: 2014-03-28 22:53:42

ominusdude CA

2011-08-03 18:08

Quote

I think the 4 stars fit. need i remind you guys that this is the original ecto 1 that was used only in the beginning scene of THIS movie, it got pimped out for the rest of the movie. and NO, it is not the same car. it was one caddy for the ecto 1 and another caddy for the ecto 1a.

Batdoc US

2012-04-30 05:21

Quote

I found out the answer to this when I went to register my Ecto with the State Theft Bureau. The car isn't technically a Cadillac. It ceased to be a Cadillac when it was shipped to Miller-Meteor. Miller-Meteor, and other coach companies, is issued its own VINs assigned by the Federal government. Miller-Meteor has to have everything approved by the Feds as far as safety and other automotive standards, and Miller-Meteor is held to the standards since they are the designers and builders of the finished vehicle. So the car is only Cadillac by signage, not by production (even though Cadillac produced the fame and some other parts, Miller-Meteor is technically the producer of the car). That's why you won't find the typical Cadillac VINs. You will find a specific Miller-Meteor VIN, usually in the sequence Letter#-######. And that is why the car isn't a Cadillac, but a Miller-Meteor Limo Ambulance. ("Lim Amb" is what is stamped on the ID plate of the actual movie car.) Mine is a Duplex and in the model area is stamped Duplex. So it is a Miller-Meteor Limo-Ambulance. Not a Futura. And not a Duplex.

This is a pic of the plate from the actual Ecto-1 used in the film.

Link to "www.gbfans.com"

somename US

2013-10-16 19:14

Quote

Ghostbusters fans launch campaign to save Ecto 1a from the crusher

funzi159 IT

2014-01-26 23:20

Quote

It's the same old story, why do you give just 4 stars???? This car has been made specifically for the movie so it deserves 5 stars!!! It's not just a cameo appearance, a standard vehicle used in a car chase or a "Vehicle used a lot by a main character or for a long time", it's THE GHOSTBUSTERS' CAR!!!!!!! IT'S FIVE STARS!!!!!

CRAFT372 US

2014-02-01 21:39

Quote

Good new to all of you LEGO and Ghostbusters fans out there Link to "www.mirror.co.uk" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3u9DSMcZZ84

-- Last edit: 2014-02-18 01:01:25

mike962 DE

2016-07-21 17:24

Quote

I don't think it deserves 5 star, more like 4

Add a comment

You must login to post comments...

Advertising