(first posted 7/30/2013) One of the reasons I love 1970s luxury cars is because not many have survived to the present day–and Mopars in particular. Why, you ask? Simple. From the late ’70s through today, many Imperials, New Yorkers, Fury IIIs and Monacos have had their big-block 440 CID mills unceremoniously yanked, and the rest crushed, just so some bozo can shoehorn one into his Slant Six-equipped Dart, Belvedere or Duster. Never once does it occur to these dim-witted individuals that perhaps that Polara Custom or Sport Fury might be enjoyable transportation in itself. But this survivor has beaten the odds. It was a joy to see!
Chrysler Corporation–to say the least–had its share of ups and downs throughout the 1960s and 1970s. The shrunken and bizarrely-styled 1962 full-sizers was the Airflow all over again, and only the clean, attractive new biggies of 1965, courtesy of Elwood Engel, saved Chrysler’s bacon. The 1965-68 Chryslers were well-made cars that brought back a fair share of luster to Chrysler’s once-proud engineering credibility.
In 1969, all full-size Dodges, Chryslers, Plymouths and Imperials were redesigned. Their “fuselage” C-bodies were meant to recall aircraft design–a road-going 747, if you will– and their big styling feature was a profile that was one consistent curve from the rocker panels to the roof. It was a big change, not only for Chrysler but for the industry, as the roofs of most contemporary domestic rolling stock appeared to be separate from the body, with a ridge between the tops of the fenders and the A, B and C-pillars.
In your author’s opinion, the curved sides were rather attractive but sadly, 95% of these cars had a vinyl roof, which effectively masked the fuselage look. Still, they were very cleanly styled in all their Mopar variants, although the Plymouths had a bit of an anonymous look from the front, at least in the plain-grille, non-Sport Fury versions. But let’s focus on Mopar’s namesake nameplate: the Chrysler Newport, Newport Custom, and that Electra 225 competitor, the lovely New Yorker. Today’s CC looks quite sharp in silver-blue paint, whitewalls, black top and a blue interior, but its attractive lines did not translate into big sales.
Unfortunately, the fuselage C-bodies were introduced at the beginning of yet another crisis in Highland Park. Today, we can look back at cool cars like the E-body Challenger and Barracuda, Charger Daytona, Superbird, GTX, et. al. and think, “Chrysler was at the top of its game.” That wasn’t the case, however, as Chrysler started to experience slipping sales–again–going into 1970. The fuselage cars were not horrible sellers, but still were not meeting expectations: 260,771 full-size 1969 Chryslers were built–less than 1968 production of 264,863. Not good, when you consider that the ’68 was a three-year-old design.
Things got much worse in 1970, as model year production dropped by 30 percent. Indeed, Chrysler was moving from the “fat” years of 1964-68 to yet another “lean” period. It didn’t help that Chrysler quality remained hit-or-miss despite the company’s efforts to shed the rusty tin can reputation that started with the rushed-into-production 1957 models. If you got a good one, you got a really good one–and if you got a bad one, you got a really, REALLY bad one. That wasn’t the case with the B- and C-body Oldsmobiles and Buicks, at least prior to the ’71 model year.
But enough of Chrysler’s corporate ups and downs; let’s focus on the car itself. There’s something about a Chrysler New Yorker that always catches my interest. Personally, I think “Chrysler New Yorker,” along with “Lincoln Continental” and “Buick Electra,” is among my top ten best-ever car names. They always were a cut above, unless you plumped for the pricey Imperial–actually just a fancier version of this car–at least after 1966.
Nineteen seventy-one was the last year for the original fuselage styling. Oh sure, the taillights, grilles and other trim minutiae changed year-to-year, but starting in ’72 they would get new sheet metal and a blockier roofline. Compared with the less-prestigious Newport and Newport Custom, the New Yorker received a fancier, prow-like grille; wide, chrome side moldings; plush Cairo cloth-and-vinyl upholstery; an electric clock; fender skirts, and more. The cheapest variant was the $5,555 four-door sedan, and the four-door hardtop, at $5,686, was dearest. In the middle was the two-door hardtop–the best of the bunch, style-wise. The 4,250-lb. coupe cost you a not-inconsiderable $4,250.
The coupe was also the least popular New Yorker, with only 4,485 built. No, even when new these cars didn’t exactly grow on trees! Indeed, any 1971 New Yorker is a find these days, since only 34,968 were made. Every one of them had standard power brakes, power steering, and a 440 CID, 335-hp V8.
That standard mill is the reason so few are seen today. The cars never were worth much (and really aren’t even today), so many people building fake Challenger R/Ts or ‘cudas would buy one for peanuts, rip out the heart of these once-proud luxury cars and then pop it into their former secretary-special Duster or Barracuda. A shame, as these cars are big, plush and comfy.
Yes, big! The ’71 New Yorker coupe was 224.6″ long, with an impressive 124″ wheelbase. Interior room was ample, as this large, comfy high-back bench seat shows. Our featured CC is an original car. Despite being the top non-Imperial Chrysler, plenty of options were available to those who wanted more, including factory air ($426; $501 with Automatic Temperature Control), AM/FM with cassette ($407) and a tilt/telescopic steering wheel ($91).
I was on my way to the library after work when I saw the nose of this car while at an intersection. I initially thought it was merely a four-door (there are a few sedans around here), but became much more interested when I saw it was a two-door. Immediate detour!
As I was taking my many, many pictures, the owner came over, wondering what I was up to. He was happy to open up the car for better interior pictures, and he even popped the hood and started it up for me! It sounded very healthy and very happy. He has had the car a few years, and other than a possible repaint in the original color (it looks good in the pictures, but is a bit more worn in person), he is keeping it just the way it is. I was happy to meet another C-body fan. I was beginning to think myself, JPCavanaugh and 73ImpCapn were the only ones!
“I was beginning to think myself, JPCavanaugh and 73ImpCapn were the only ones!”
(Loud throat-clearing sound….)
Fellow Chrysler C body fan checking in. (What I wouldn’t give to have a 1970 300 Hurst)
Oops, sorry about that 🙂
I’m also a C-body fan. Just thought I’d let you know, seven months later.
Another C Body fan here 🙂 .
Voluptuous, I think that is the first word that came to mind.
I’d compare it to Joan Holloway…pretty damn sexy for a bigger girl. Time for a 7&7.
Count me in! I’m a Chrysler C-body fan too!
As know I’ve said before, I’m also a big Fuselage fan, particularly of the 1969-1971 years. The few of these I’ve seen in person were truly a sight to behold. I love the color combination of this one, and really love those optional high-back seats!
It’s really a shame that the Chrysler name has been dragged so low over the past few decades. I don’t think it can ever again carry the prestige that this car does. Even the new 300 sedan isn’t all that luxurious compared to competitors, as well as the posher-than-ever Grand Cherokee.
Equally as rare (for us anyway,) is that Happy Joe’s Pizza in the background. Ours closed in the early 80’s.
Really? Where do you live? The QC is Happy Joe Central as their corporate office is in Bettendorf.
However, I work in accounting for their arch-rival, Harris Pizza 🙂
I’m in NW FL…We had a Happy Joe’s here from about ’79 to ’82. Had a couple of birthdays there when I was a kid. I think it was too similar to Shakey’s which was more prevalent.
Love it, love it, love IT. For some reason, Chrysler never sold that many 2 doors, especially New Yorkers. I cannot tell you the last time I saw one. I agree with you on the “Chrysler New Yorker” name. It just sounded like an important car.
I have never owned a fuselage C body, but have come close a couple of times. I think that BOC can confirm that the fuseys did not have a lot of the built-in quality and damn-the-expense engineering touches of the 1965-68 cars. I think that this was apparent when the cars were new, and was one of the reason that sales fell off. Also, all that extra money for the New Yorker and the car still carried an awful lot of the subjective feel of a Fury III. But then, there was always a lot less difference between the top and bottom lines at Chrysler as at other companies.
This car brought back many memories of my childhood in the 1970s. While there didn’t seem to be a huge difference between a Fury III and a Newport, among the fuselage Mopars, the full-size Chryslers seemed to be as popular among retail buyers as the contemporary Plymouths and Dodges.
It seemed as though as many people owned a full-size Chrysler as owned full-size Dodges and Plymouths during those years, at least in my memory.
> I have never owned a fuselage C body, but have come close a couple of times.
You had a ’77 New Yorker right? I guess that the “fuselage” era was considered to be over with the 1974 redesign.
You can see that the designers spent a lot of time trying to make the 65-68 Chryslers distinctive amongst other cars and amongst themselves too. For example, there were 2-door hardtop models of the Newport, New Yorker and 300 which mostly shared the same body, but each one had it’s own distinctive roof in 1965-66. The Newport had a crease near the back which resembled a convertible top bow. The New Yorker had a more upright roof with an almost trapezoidal C-pillar, like a shortened version of the 4-door hardtop roof. The 300 coupe got a distinct roof from the Newport for 1966, similar but without the fake convertible bow crease, and had a smaller rear window to evoke a sense of privacy. (The ’66 300 roof would later appear on the ’67 Plymouth Fury.)
Where I’m going with this is that. by 1971, Chrysler Newport, New Yorker and 300 coupes all shared the same roofline. I think the Imperial did too, just with a smaller back window. To the untrained eye, they were all just “Chryslers”. This New Yorker needs something, beyond the wide chrome strip on the lower body, to make it look more formal. That was probably much easier do in 65-68, when the C-pillar was separated from the body by a chrome molding. The fuselage styling doesn’t lend itself well to a formal roofline either.
Your right on this.
They did it with Plymouth from 69-70. They had the 2door sedan (Fury I and II, and Gran Coupe), 2 door formal hardtop (Fury III and Sport Fury) and the similar roof line as the other C coupes (Sport Fury, Fury III and GT) . Why would they make such a variety on the Plymouth and not the Chrysler? Maybe they thought they would have the volume in Plymouth to cover the cost.
Maybe the belt-line of the Fury lent itself to this variety, the Chrysler did not have the same belt-line as the Fury.
I think you’re right about the belt line. On the Chrysler and Imperial, there was a scallop around the window opening on the two doors, but the C-pillar really was flush with the quarter panels. But on the Plymouth and Dodge there is a slight indentation of the C-Pillar from the “hippier” quarter panels.
I never understood what they felt they were getting with the formal hardtop, either, and if it wasn’t for the persistence of the 2-door sedan, whose roof it shared, I can’t imagine it seeing the light of day. Chevy had started the trend wiith different hardtop roofs in the mid 60s, IIRC, and Chrysler was just playing along.
Wasn’t there a 1970 model called just “Chrysler” ? Think I saw an ad for it in National Geographic.
I’ve never read or heard that, and I can’t find the ad you’re referring to in the archived online scans of National Geographic.
According to oldcarbrochures.com, were five models in the Chrysler lineup for 1970:
New Yorker
300/Three Hundred
Newport Custom
Newport
Town and Country (wagon)
I remember our neighborhood Den Mother had a New Yorker like this, most likely four door. It sat next to a 30′ (or more) Airstream in the driveway (which it towed on occasion).
My main impression as an 11 year old was that it was really bigger than our Country Squire wagon, and that was saying something!
One of my parts cars was a 1973 New Yorker Brougham that was used for trailer towing. I assume they did a lot of towing because it was fitted with an aftermarket transmission temp gauge. It met its demise when a brake line blew out (not while towing) and hit something, causing some minor damage to a front fender. It was sold for parts to someone else who pulled the 440/727 and sold the roller to me.
Mr. Brady drove a 1970 Gran Fury III in the same color!
I didn’t remember this – I thought he always had Caprice Classic convertibles. I think Carol always had a Chrysler (co) wagon though.
The Bradys were exclusively Mopar through 1971, when Mike had a Barracuda convertible. After Chrysler dropped all convertibles, he switched to Chevrolet, an Impala in ’72, then a Caprice in ’73 and ’74. Bobby put an umbrella through the top of the Impala, and Greg and Marsha (Marsha, Marsha!) had a driving competition maneuvering the ’74 Caprice around an obstacle course (Greg blew it and broke the egg).
Didn’t Bobby put the umbrella through the top of a Plymouth Barracuda convertible?
It was the Barracuda convertible that Bobby poked a hole in the top with an umbrella.
Oddly, that is the only episode of the Brady Bunch that I actually remember.
Yes, he did:
http://www.tv.com/shows/the-brady-bunch/the-big-bet-4928/
I must have confused the Impala and Barracuda since both were blue.
Well, there were no Caprice ragtop before 1973, so no.
In the pilot, (Bradys get married), Mr. Brady drives a ’68 Polara 500 convertible; same color as mine (blue). it’s got power windows and the dog rolls the windows down, gets out, and mayhem ensues! Alas, mine has crank windows.
On that note, my kids get in the car and can’t figure out how to open the windows. Seems the term, “roll down the windows” doesn’t click in their button-pushing brains.
My girlfriend’s kids (7 and 10) were similarly flummoxed by the window cranks and door handles the first time they road in my ’64 Impala. Cracked me up.
My stogie-chompin’ Uncle William had one of these. The windshield washer nozzles were misaimed and would send streams of washer fluid over his car onto the car behind him. He loved to do that to my dad when we’d follow him somewhere.
Add me to the list of Sea-Body fans. When I was a kid in the 70s, it seemed only older, well-to-do gentlemen and cops drove big Mopars. I thought they were the most manliest of cars. And just like their musclecar brethren, they all had that distinctive Mopar sound.
Im a Sea-Body owner as well, but I like mine in uniform.
’72 Fury! Is that your car? Hot. Forgive me for not knowing what state it’s from…
+1. Oh that car is sweet. As fast as my father’s 72 Fury III was with its 360-2 engine, this car ought to fly.. Hmm. Lt. Dan + squad car — this is starting to come together. 🙂
thanks guys! It is an actual Virginia State Police car (not a clone) and it has no problem keeping with a new Charger cruiser. Don’t make any turns though.
These always have fired my imagination. The fuselage styling always seemed to me like Chrysler was shoving the unibody nature of these cars in your face, kinda like: “No this car doesn’t have a separate frame, you know what else doesn’t have a separate frame? An airplane, that’s what.”
The thing that also always captured me was the same thing that lead to the demise of so many of these cars, the standard 440. Chryslers big sedans, Cadillac, Lincoln, their standard big blocks always made me want one from this late 60s into mid 70s time period.
My car during college was a 71 Fury Gran Coupe 2 door hardtop. Same color scheme as this one, Blue and Blue with Black Vinyl Top and no paisley. Called it the Starcruiser. It had the 360 which seemed a lot faster, handled much better and got about 5 more MPGs than my Dad’s 73 Impala with a 350. The car served me well for the 3 years of college making the trip between home in Mobile, AL and school in Sequin, TX. (653 miles on I 10) It did die on me once in Baton Rouge, Points burned up. Loved the high back seat with Center Armrest which my Dad’s Impala lacked. So much more comfy. Got the car through a family friend who I helped drive back used cars from an Auction he attended in St. Elmo, AL. Got it for around 850.00 with around 60,000 miles on it in 1976. Eventually sold it to my younger brother who kept it for a year before he traded it in on a used Mustang 2 during the Gas crisis of 79-80. He raced it once against a friend of his who had just hopped up a Malibu and won, but broke a motor mount in the process. By that time the car had well over 100,000 miles on it but used no oil, the AC still worked, (never serviced) and was for the most part needed very little work over the years. Thanks for reminding me of another time.
Chrysler New Yorker along with Cadillac Coupe DeVille have to be the most melodic car names ever introduced. And they are names, not letters and numbers!
Like many kids in about 1971,we had our own 1/4 mile drag strip. Six banger Pontiacs vs V8 Fords,and tired old Dodges.
One kid would show up in Daddys 70-71? 440 Chrysler. Man, could that big Chrysler do an impressive smoke show!
These were the days of “polyester belted” tires. I often wondered what the kids dad thought of his premature tire wear?
What town is this? Looks really small, like my town was in the ’70’s…I am jealous…
Rock Island, IL, population 39K-something. I live only about ten minutes from where these photos were taken.
The Brady Bunch did feature mostly Mopar cars. Mike Brady’s last convertible was, however, a Chevy.
If you can find a rare without without the damned vinyl roof, they’re incredibly attractive cars, and probably about the only ones in that oversized land yacht category. Unfortunately, Chrysler went original rather than slavishly following GM – and the market stuck with GM’s idea of attractive. Which meant Chrysler lost again. Attempting to back off this radicalism with the next generation only turned out cars that were a lot less attractive and I don’t seem to remember they got back any sales for their trouble, either.
This was a very noticable fumble on Chrysler’s part at the time. I remember reading articles in various car mags at the beginning of the 70’s model year specifically dwelling on how Chrysler’s new look hadn’t gone over all that well.
My first thought of Chryslers in that era: Made of papier mache’.
This model/body style in particular? Someone who’s head is ‘way too small for their body, or someone who is seriously bottom-heavy, or lived on a steady diet of Big Macs.
These cars, while reasonably attractive, just didn’t work for me due to the fact that the proportions were all wrong.
GM & Ford got away with it because the greenhouses better matched the mass of the over-sized bodies with their monstrous overhangs.
Either way, I was into smaller machines back then, so no sale for me for Chrysler (or anyone else in the large-car department, for that matter). In fact, years before while in the air force, hitching rides in various Chrysler products reinforced my impression of their dubious physical integrity.
Of course, how do I explain my turning to Chrysler in the 1980’s? Simple: The X cars. Ford? I just couldn’t bring myself to buying one, even if the Fairmont was a good car and would have been the best vehicle to own at the time.
Getting mad at GM and Chevy in particular for what they did to “my” automobiles did funny things to my head, which lasted until 2004.
Someone who’s head is ‘way too small for their body, or someone who is seriously bottom-heavy, or lived on a steady diet of Big Macs.
Well said; my sentiments exactly. But that’s never stopped me from loving these in a slightly perverse way.
While I love all the fuselage Chryslers, too, this is a good explanation as to why my favorite is the 1970 convertible (Newport, New Yorker or 300). Simply put, sans top, the fuselage cars look better.
The 4 doors weren’t as bad. Neither were the Plymouth & Dodges in all body types. But the Chrysler and Imperial coupes really did feel like the top and lower body came from two different-sized cars – an Elwood Engel failing you’ve noted before, IIRC.
I loved our ’70 Fury III 4 door hardtop, sans vinyl roof in a deep turquoise, black interior. My dad’s company car. It’s replacement, a ’73 Fury, also sans vinyl, in a turgid gold over gold color scheme, was flabby where the ’70 was taut.
IM(less than)HO the 4 door hardtops are quite good looking.
I would love to have the combination that Mr. Stembridge described above. I can picture pulling into the campground and everyone woundering what it was.
I recall a family camping trip in the late 70s. Everyone in the campground had either a motorhome, a pickup camper, or towed one with a van or a big Ford wagon. One guy towed his trailer with a beautiful white 67 Dodge Polara fastback. Everyone else was fiddling with fires, napping or drinking beer. That guy was waxing his car.
My dad always wanted a Chrysler New Yorker because that was what his favorite uncle, my namesake, drove. After wearing out the 1967 Galaxie 500, he discovered he could get a 1970 Chrysler New Yorker four door hardtop with a white vinyl roof, white interior and the same color light metallic blue as the two door coupe above.
It was a very attractive car and it was extremely large inside and out. The 440 was very powerful and thirsty – I think he got about 10 miles per gallon, maybe 7 around town.
The back seat was large enough for three growing boys and a grandmother to travel thousands of miles across the Great Plains, towing a salmon-pink Bethany pop-up travel trailer.
The trunk is enormous. However when the spare was needed, it took a mighty reach across the length of the trunk to reach the edge of the spare riding over the rear axle. During long trips, my dad would need to unload the trunk of nearly everything in order to yank the big spare tire out of it’s housing and to place the flattened tired back.
The 1970 Chrysler New Yorker was not ornate. It wasn’t broughamified. It had a more minimal modern 1960s luxury design to it. Other parents had more ornate Oldsmobiles or GM products, popular in our Chicagoland neighborhood, and after riding in a 98 or an Electra, I thought the New Yorker wasn’t as luxuriously upholstered or appointed as the GM vehicles. The Chrysler New Yorker of this generation was not bordelloed – Chrysler remedied this with their shockingly broughamified 1974 line and especially the Imperial. The instrument panel was conservative. It was a giant unbroken horizontal plane with a slanted concave panel where the driving instruments resided. Nothing flashy at all. But, in 1970, the fuselage New Yorker was big, dignified, masculine and modern. A conservative and tasteful giant vehicle.
The front fenders rusted through by 1975. The attractive bright accent strip along the lower body of the car necessitated holes in the sheet metal that began weeping rust color tracks. The rear fenders began to blister and pock behind the wheel wells. The rear panel below the loop bumper looked weathered and worn.
The big 440 began burning oil and leaking. The four-barrel carberator became finicky and sticky. The big Chrysler New Yorker became a giant hungry barge at a time when gas prices were too high, along with inflation.
The fuselage Chrysler products were designed with 1965 in mind, not 1975. No one could have predicted the tremendous impact upon the automobile industry the 1970s would wrought. Had times not changed, the fuselage Chryslers would have been warmly embraced and loved as much as my dad love his.
I wouldn’t want one. Too many glitches in the workmanship. Too big. Too heavy. A beautiful tank, but a tank nontheless.
Your description in paragraph #5 is spot on IMO.
Good find! But wait, this isn’t the Clue with the white vinyl roof?
A few points:
– Brother BOC has forgotten more about C-bodies than I’ll ever know. 🙂
– I agree with those who prefer the four-doors to coupes. That goes for most other full-size cars of the ’60s-’70s.
– If I was a product planner back then, I would have made the New Yorker and Newport four-door only, with 300 and Imperial as two-door entries into the burgeoning personal-luxury market. Instead, every car became pretty much identical to the casual viewer. The famous ’80s Lincoln ad about how similar big GMs had gotten could have been about Mopar 15 years earlier.
Thanks for the hat-tip, 73ImpCapn. 🙂 I agree that the fuselage C’s were all starting to look too much alike across the board. I like your idea of just offiering 2-doors on the 300 and Imperial. They probably figured that continuing to offer 2-door Newports and New Yorkers would help amortize the tooling costs. Also, kids were still just thrown into the back seat back then, and they wouldn’t want to turn away someone that wanted to buy a Newport but wanted a 2-door to keep the kids corralled in the back. The New Yorker coupe makes less sense though.
I always preferred the 1965-68 Chrysler products to these. My father drove Dodge Polaras in this era, and his ’69 model was neither as comfortable nor as well made as the ’65 and ’68 he had.
Yeah even here I can see the problem a local 79 Plymouth Fury thats for sale comes with an optional 440inch motor should you require the extra gas bill. I guess another one bit the dust for that.
In late ’71, my dad bought his first new car since the ’55 Ford he purchased from the showroom floor. It was a ’72 New Yorker Brougham, 4 dr hardtop, fully loaded w/leather, etc. Our neighbor across the street, a GM fan had always been a bit of a show off w/ each new Chevy he purchased. On the SAME day he arrived in a 72 Caprice, which DID NOT come w/ a leather interior and was not quite as fancy as the Chrysler. Talk about neighborly one upping and pricking a balloon!! I have a fond spot for the big C!! I saw an ad a couple of years back from a motorhead who had converted a two door hardtop into a four speed car, utilizing factory components! The only thing he couldn’t duplicate was carpeting, as no C body came w/ a transmission hump for a 4 speed!! I would have LOVED to own that car!! 🙂
The all-new 1969 C-bodies were a major disappointment for Chrysler. I remember reading an interview with Lynn Townsend, and he said his goal was to get the Plymouth Fury closer in total sales to the full-size Ford and Chevrolet. The 1969 models were supposed to provide a big boost toward that goal.
The 1969 Fury didn’t come close to reaching that goal (sales were basically flat compared to 1968, if I recall correctly), and sales of the other versions of the C-body were disappointing. The only one that really scored a notable increase in sales was the Imperial.
When GM’s all-new full-size cars debuted for 1971, many reviewers noted that GM was following Chrysler with the adoption of “fuselage-type” styling in a critical market segment. They wondered whether GM’s adoption of this look would make it more acceptable to the public in general. A key difference, however, was that the GM cars had a lower beltline, which gave the cars a “lighter” look. The GM cars also featured more sculpturing on the hood and decklid, which added interest and avoided the “plain” look of the Mopars.
Chrysler also experienced its first brush with death in 1970. The old Penn Central railroad had declared bankruptcy in June 1970, and apparently Chrysler was burdened with a large amount of similar debt (short-term debt, if I recall correctly). A run on that type of debt could have been fatal to Chrysler. Supposedly a few large banks had to step in to prevent such a run in the panic that followed the bankruptcy of Penn Central.
Chrysler could have become bankrupt in late 1954. In fact, it was some insurance company [Prudential?] that loaned Chrysler a HUGE amount of money back then to keep Mopar afloat.
My aunt and uncle drove a 69 Newport Custom coupe in Smithtown, Long Island, NY for many years. It was a great car and I loved to ride in it. It made 100,000 miles plus before my cousin wrecked it. (rollover!) Fuselage Chryslers are great cars!
There are some some great Chrysler commercials from the early fuselage era on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bVeZrUetwU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43R7Qs3C7qo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMTTrq8zXZI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnT9hYTMBjs
Love the “Your Next Car” jingle. “Your next car should have this much class. And this much quiet authority.”
I’ve always liked the styling of the early fuselage Chryslers, the Plymouth and Dodge versions not so much. That’s probably because of my grandmother’s ’71 Plymouth Fury II, which was already a falling-apart POS by 1974.
Huge fan of the C Bodies here. I can go on and on, but my 71 T&C wagon was a great car. Drove it all through college, lots of fun. They would track down the highway with minimal fuss, and had no problems keeping up with 80mph plus traffic all day. It felt the best with the cruise at 75 and AC blowing.
Throwing up a pic of my 71 300 with the sunroof.
BTW 71 was the first year for the sunroof on the C Bodies(2 door only) and the first year for the factory cassette player and ABS brakes.
Your 300 is a very pretty car. That would be my choice of this era/bodystyle of Mopar.
The 4door hardtop without the top was a sharp looker. I liked the lines on the 4 door hardtop better than the 2door. I always thought the side windows on the coupe should have been bigger. My old 70, just sold it lost my storage.
Pic of my old 70 without the roof.
My yellow 71 was the same blue as this NYer, with wood sides too. The paint was peeling off, so I figured yellow and bondo was the best choice. The subframe gave out at 240k.
Great rides, thanks!
You can count me among those who love these cars (perhaps the Sport Fury most of all), but who would not want to drive one, unless I had ample room to drive and park it and a climate conducive to minimal rust. So, someplace like Palm Desert. A beautiful shape, I think, but I can see how it would be polarizing. (Modern cars have gone so far to avoid being polarizing that they no longer are distinctive at all.)
The fleet circa 1995. The T&C, Dart, Newport and Cordoba were daily drivers when the pic was taken.
BIg C-body fans here.
Great write up!
You are one lucky guy!
I spent a lot of time and racked up a whole lotta miles riding in the back seat of a 1972 Newport like the one you have parked in the back. Same color. My namesake uncle drove it like it was a Crosley with a blown cylinder. Everyone in northern Colorado has probably seen the rear bumper of it, but not me – because I used to cringe down too embarrassed by his pokey driving.
He traded it in for a 1981 Olds Omega, stripped of all options and suffered through all that glorious GM X car catastrophes.
Great find!! My Great Aunt on my father’s side had many Chrysler New Yorkers through the years, getting them like clock work every 2 years. Her husband had been a die-hard Chrysler driver, and she continued the tradition even after he passed away. Yes, she had a ’71 hardtop sedan (gold, black top, gold brocade inside) and I spent hours and hours checking it out. It was my primary exposure to Chrysler products of the era. I was both attracted to, and repelled by, her huge Chryslers. Some of the details were great, and I really liked the instrument panels and the wide, long lines with loop bumpers. But I always thought they looked fat in the rear quarters and I generally preferred the GM products that were more prevalent in my family at the time. She was a lucky New Yorker customer, as I think they all were of reasonable quality and never let her down (though she didn’t have them that long or drive them that much. And Memphis TN is not the harshest climate). Her last New Yorker was a 1979 Fifth Avenue. She didn’t get another because the bankruptcy issues scared her off. A 1981 Buick Electra took over when it was time for the ’79 New Yorker to go.
Count me among the fans of these cars; my family had two fuselage Mopars while I was growing up, a 1970 Plymouth Sport Suburban and a 1973 Dodge Polara four-door hardtop. The wagon was my favorite.
On this car, I like how the slightly protruding center section of the tail light strip echoes the center section of the grille.
I’m another C-body fan, but like some others I prefer the 1965 – 1968 cars to the fuselage ones.
When I was growing up, we had a ’66 Newport (base model with an AM/FM radio, so was probably a special order) that was one of my father’s favorite cars. My Godmother drove a ’69 Newport and it was always my opinion that our ’66 was a better car both from an engineering standpoint, build quality standpoint, and comfort standpoint. Through the years, I had the opportunity to ride in Plymouths and Dodges of the fuselage era and my thoughts still stand.
Years ago, I was looking for an old car to buy and I found a very nice ’66 New Yorker with every factory option except power vent windows and disc brakes. I love that old New Yorker and the class and quality it exudes.
And, for the ’69 models only, what was Chrysler thinking sticking the ignition switch at the bottom left of the dash? A horrible place for it, in my opinion, even worse than my father’s ’68 Fury III which had it at the bottom of the dash but to the right of the driver.
Mr. Bill
I had a 69 300 for a while, I agree with the ignition on the left side of the dash.
I never got used to the left hand ignition switch. Its a PITA to swap keys from the right hand (unlocking the door) to the left hand (start the car) every time you want to go some place. Reverse sequence when you leave, the front doors on the 69 and 70 can only be locked with the key, the button will not push down when the doors are open.
Fellow fuselage fan checking in! There’s a derelict ’72 New Yorker sitting in the back lot of a rundown escrow office near my place. It’s been there for several years.
The automotive equivalent of the Up-Yours-Middle-Finger….certainly here.
Such land yachts are cult vehicles, rolling statements. Let’s say that the owners here aren’t the typical pipe smoking red (or yellow) trousers wearing classic car enthusiasts.
Would love to own a late sixties full-size Mopar, but the A-body already occupies my garage. It compensates its lack of length with a big mouth.
My first car was my great-grandmother’s ’69 Polara 2-dr hardtop. 33k on the clock.
White and black like the advertisment at the time. Damn close to pristine, very low optioned. Was forced to sell it due to life circumstances when I got out of the Air Force in 2002. I am still mad about it and damn I miss that car.
When I was in college, I found a gold 70 Newport 2 door with a black vinyl roof and that bright gold vinyl interior. Beautiful car with 383 and a/c. The dealer wanted $800 but I was broke and in college. I asked Mom to float me some cash until I could sell my 71 Scamp, but she had gotten tired of my “fall-in-love-with-another-car-every-6-months” lifestyle. That Newport is one that got away that I really wish hadn’t.
I’ve always been slightly puzzled by the existence of the Newport. You have the Plymouth Fury, which was the “cheap” C-body, the Dodge Polara, which apparently was the cheapest Dodge model, and finally the Newport, which was essentially a de-contented New Yorker. The Fury “VIP”, Dodge Monaco, and Imperial were their plusher and pricier siblings.
Why would Mopar’s flagship division ( Chrysler ) bother to build and sell a low-price model ( the Newport ), when the Fury and Polara already had that market segment covered?
Am I the only one confused and wondering where Chrysler was going with this?
Three words – Stand alone dealerships.
Four words – The Death of DeSoto
Three more words – Chasing the Competition.
(Damn near a haiku isn’t it?) 😛
Stand alone dealerships need to have “everything” to sell to “everybody.” Low priced cars, high priced cars, in between cars. Like GM deciding that Buick needs a broader model range now that Pontiac is dead. (FYI GM dealerships in the US were almost all Buick/Pontiac/GMC and then Chevy/Cadillac now Buick/GMC and Chevy/Cadillac).
Death of DeSoto – When Chrysler killed DeSoto the danger was loosing those customers to Mercury or Buick or Oldsmobile so to try to “plug the gap” some Chrysler company products had to move down market some had to move upmarket.
Chasing the Competition. Why a Plymouth VIP? Because of the Ford LTD and Chevy Caprice of course!
When you put it that way, it makes sense.
In that case, I suppose the Newport would have been on par with the Mercury Monterey and Cadillac Calais.
The Newport debuted in 1961, the same year that Buick and Oldsmobile rolled out their “senior” compacts – the Special/Skylark and F-85/Cutlass, respectively. Chrysler ads from 1961 on pointedly noted that the division did NOT sell a compact (or “junior edition” as the ads referred to such cars).
In addition to replacing the DeSoto, the Newport allowed the corporation to extend the Chrysler brand into a lower price bracket without placing the Chrysler badge on a reworked Valiant/Lancer.
By allowing Chrysler to offer a lower price model without introducing its version of a senior compact, the Newport protected the division’s prestige to some extent. (Remember that Chrysler was still offering the New Yorker and letter-series 300, both of which were expensive and prestigious. They helped uphold the division’s upscale reputation.)
When the Newport came out in 1962, I think it was designed to fill the (small) void left by DeSoto. It was on a bigger body than the Plymouth and Dodge were. By 1965 Plymouth Dodge and Chrysler were all on the same basic body (with different wheelbases) and the VIP and Monaco had come out, but Newport was by far Chrysler’s volume leader. It also shared showrooms with Plymouth and probably killed the VIP, because a Chrysler was far more prestigious than a Plymouth. I suspect that the Newport was probably solidly in the Olds 88-Buick LeSabre price range.
The ’62 Newport was a “plucked chicken” version of the ’61 Chrysler, so it was quick to develop and get into showrooms.
Unfortunately, the video has been taken off YouTube, but I did get to see Bud Lindemann’s review of a ’71 New Yorker very much like the subject car.
http://jalopnik.com/5734075/1971-chrysler-new-yorker-combines-poshiness-and-muscle
One other big reason large C bodies are hard to find today, Demo Derbies! I remember seeing 1969-71 fuselage cars as early as ’79 in local smash ups.
Seeing 70’s cars now getting smashed is too painful! Should wreck Escalades.
“Should wreck Escalades.”
All in good time, sir…all in good time.
Seeing ’70s land yachts getting wrecked nauseates me, too. Ugh! Land yachts were meant to be driven, but not driven into other cars or walls! There’s not enough of them left as it is.
I can’t call myself a fuselage enthusiast; but I’ve always thought the style was modern and clean. And it was helped by the surround bumper offered in those years. Somewhere the Chrysler boys got the idea the style was responsible for their less-than stellar sales; and that may be so; but going to Ford-style pushplate bumpers didn’t much help sales, either. Nor did the sharp creases of the St. Regis set sales records.
A friend’s father had one of these when I was a kid – it was his, the father’s, announcement that he had arrived. A very blue-collar guy who bought his own business and worked it for ten years, it was paying off…and the ten-year-old Oldsmobile got traded in for this. At that age, I wasn’t interested in understated status-oriented luxury cars; but today…it’s a shame we can’t have them like this.
But we just can’t.
While attending the National Chrysler meet last weekend in the Twin Cities , I was surprised when my wife who usually only notices the color of a car looked a 72 fuselage Imperial over rather closely and proclaimed ” I like it!, the front of the car is shaped like the back”. Something I had never heard said about the fuselage cars, but some truth in that statement I believe .
Funny, I showed my car last weekend and got similar comments about front and back – I don’t see it either!
Another fuselage fan here. The Chrysler/Dodge/Plymouth dealer was the closest new car dealer to my house in my hometown when I was growing up. I was 12 when these cars debuted in late ’68. I remember riding my bike to the dealership and checking out the new models when they first came in. One day there were several that had just been unloaded that had the keys in them. I would start them up, drive forward and backwards a few feet, and go on to the next one. Great fun for a 12 year old car nut, and very educational.
Later in the mid seventies I owned an unusual ’69 Newport 2 door. It had only one option; power steering. Manual brakes, 3 speed on the column, no radio. It had the standard 383 with a 2 barrel. It was a cruiser. I made a 1800 mile road trip in it where I drove between 70 and 80 most of the time. It consistently got 17 – 18 mpg. Not too bad for a big car of that era. Unlike some of the earlier commentators, I liked the quirky left side ignition switch. With the manual transmission you could shift gears while you were starting the car. They advertised it as a safety feature because a front seat passenger could not reach it and turn off the engine while the car was underway. Of course, it turned out to be a one year wonder because of the federally mandated locking steering wheel for the ’70 model year.
I miss the days when you could buy a plain full sized car if you so desired.
I always thought that left-side key in the 69s was a cost thing. Everyone knew that the column-mounted ignition was coming in 1970 so the new dash in the 69 got a key stuck in the cheapest and easiest place to redesign for the following year.
I love it for it’s sheer size, it’s probably buttery smooth and very comfortable to drive. My only issue is the side windows are so small. I never would’ve noticed this but whenever I get into an older car than my Caprice and ’83 98 it tends to annoy me. If it dropped down to at least door handle height it’d be great, otherwise it’d be a cave of vinyl. Still, if I saw one for sale at the right price, I’d probably end up buying it..
Goofing around today thinking about ’71 Chryslers and remembering the one my Great Aunt had. Went to oldcarbrochures.com and there is actually the color trim selector for 1971. This picture car looks to be finished in GB2 Glacial Blue Metallic, with the cloth and vinyl split back bench seat in H3B7 Blue. Vinyl top in Black V1X. My Great Aunt’s 4-door hardtop was GY9 Tawny Gold, also with the Black V1X top and H9Y5 Gold cloth and vinyl bench seat. Kinda fun to geek out over…
Cool! I have the 1976 Pontiac color and trim selector, and there are clear plastic outlines of each car line (Bonneville, Firebird, etc.) that you can lay over the paint chips and vinyl top swatches, so you can “see” your preferred model in your preferred colors. Really cool; I might have to do a “Brochure Classic” on it for CC.
Was 11 years old when friends of the family bought a new ’69 Chrysler Newport Custom 4door. The back seat had room for 6+ kids. Had the wrap around front and rear bumpers. It was identical to the 69 Newport shown on fuselage.de webpage. Have seen old fuselage Imperials and New Yorkers, but rare is the Newport. I so miss that car!!!
From 1964 to 1975 my father had New Yorkers , great cars , they were faster and handled better than all the big Buick and Oldsmobiles , I know as I raced my friends , me in the 440 New Yorker them in The Electras and 98 ‘S . Cars were reliable as well . 1969 was the fastest , 1975 had the nicest interior . On the highway nothing could touch them , great cars for long distance drives .
I’ve owned a bunch of the big Chryslers. 3 72 New Yorker Broughams, a 69 Imperial, a 71 Imperial, Monocos, Fury IIIs… All but 1 with the 440. My dad had a 72 NY from about ’75 to ’80 which I learned to drive in. My daily driver is a very raggedy 72 NY.
The crazy thing is, even tho the fenders are ready for the Vatican Museum of Holy Relics, it’s a rare drive in which nobody gives me the thumbs up as they pass the other way or someone in a parking lot doesn’t compliment the car.
To correct a little inaccuracy someone wrote above: The Imperials were not simply fancier versions of the C body. They were built much heavier and better quality. The frame and sheet metal were thicker, many parts were incompatible. Some things were much more complex but they didnt always work better. Altho the New Yorker Brougham was the top-of-the-line Chrysler, Imperial was a separate division.
didnt Marcus Welby drive one? a 4dr hardtop of this? those were the ole days gone by-
I rented a 2000 Durango and felt like that was what the modern version of the idea of what Chrysler had been; but feel today like Chrysler is an anacronysm, and what with Fiat cutting the Durango to limit the numbers of lines, consolidate, cut costs, bean counter stuff, put s.u.v. ideas into the Jeep line, Chrysler with 300 and T&C, 200 and smaller Dodges like it, just streamline to a point, and crew cab pickups with Dodge, seems like the ideas behind the type of cruiser this New Yorker used to be: a used-to-be idea; ah memories.
I did see a 70s car the other day, Malibu classic collonade wagon of like about ’75, but see stuff earlier and 60s almost never now; well did see a 442 hot rod restored super collector the other Sunday, out for a rare drive 😉 But a ’71 Yorker as a daily driver, today? No’f on yer Li’t. :O
In the early seasons, Welby drove a 300 4 door hardtop. I have a vague memory that it might have been replaced by an early 70s Newport or Newport Custom.
During my college years in Providence, my daily routine included stopping at Memorial Hall on Benefit Street to check on my mail or get “brunch”. I was on a dinner-only plan at RISD, so my one other meal often consisted of two Slim Jims and a Milky Way for dessert, bought at the bookstore inside. One chilly morning, perhaps in late Spring, a vehicle I will never forget appeared across the street, parked in front of Benson Hall. The image remains with me, not because the car was particularly exotic or beautiful, but because of its enormous presence. It was a newish Chrysler, maybe a Newport, and it was a plain as a Chrysler can get, with black wall tires and gun metal livery. But it was also immensely charismatic, masculine in an effortless way. Its body seemed too big for its wheels and the tiny glassed turret above, like a reinterpreted, expanded businessman’s coupe. Benson Hall housed the school’s photography department, run by the legendary Harry Callahan, and, never seeing anyone arrive or leave in the Chrysler, I was free to imagine Harry unloading all kinds of photo paraphernalia from that enormous trunk on the moors of Newport for a photo shoot at the Breakers. I began to look for the car on my daily mail stop, and was disappointed those times it didn’t show.
For those not in the know, the Breakers was the Newport, R.I. mansion, I mean, summer cottage, ahem, of Cornelius Vanderbilt. It is the most ornate of the Newport mansions.
I have a 1971 Chrysler Newport 2-dr hardtop that I’m trying to restore. Currently looking for interior door panels for both doors and the back seat panels. Dashpad too. All in green preferably. Other stuff too but those are my priority right now. If you’ve got em let me know! Thank you!
Looks almost exactly like the one I just sold. Mine was a 69 Newport 2door with a black interior. I had a hot rodded 440 motor.
Try legendaryautointeriors.com
Nice car, it seems to be in good shape. I see that this car has a “Bensonhurst Living Room Interior”. For those who don`t get the joke, it was called such because many residents of Bensonhurst in Brooklyn put clear plastic slip covers over their living room furniture to keep it looking like new. Many of the residents were Italian Americans, so this has become a joke among comedians of Italian American backgrounds. At one time Bensonhurst was a predominately Italian American working class-middle class enclave in Brooklyn, NY, but that has changed. Nothing offensive, just funny. All good humor has to have some basis in fact, right?
Very nice article, and nice find, thank you. Sales were drastically down in 1970 mainly as a result of an economic recession which hurt all auto manufacturers that year (GM additionally had to endure a UAW strike), but Chrysler Corp., being the smallest of the Big 3 could least afford it. They never recovered. To save money, the changes planned for the 1971 model year were put off until 1972. I’ve had a couple of these 1969-71 beautiful beasts, they are easy to work on, a dream to drive, quiet and elegant. Lower production numbers, would-be hotrodders – as your article eminently states – and demolition derbies (and rust) are the death of these unique machines. I seem to think, though, that the 4-door versions convey much more elegance and proper proportion; 2-door fuselage products look to me like Lulu Hogg in a pair of Daisy Duke-style shorts.
What a coincidence I should be writing in this forum tonight. Just last night I drove my ’71 New Yorker 4-door hardtop 300 miles from our farm to the city. Sure, the rear brakes lock up easily, it guzzles a gallon every 12 miles, and the front tires squeal through tight bends, but it just glides at 75mph with the old 440 rumbling ominously courtesy of the 2.76 rear. The soft torsion bars and 7-leaf rear springs soak up the bumps without wallowing. You can take your hands off the wheel and it runs dead straight. The front seat is better than any new car I’ve driven, and there is so much legroom that old arthritic fellas like me can stretch out that achy right knee. My son fell asleep in the passenger seat, some four feet away; you know, the passenger seat that reclines to almost 80 degrees. Then, arriving in the big smoke, the beautifully weighted power steering makes corners a joy, and the aforementioned 440 simple lifts the whole show away effortlessly at the traffic lights despite the 4600lbs and tall gearing.
I’ll tell you, for my application – turnpike cruising through the cool nights – nothing could be better. And get this, I paid less than $5000 for this car a few years ago!
its great to read the stories in this forum about the as I call my 71 new Yorker the LAND YACHT I agree with GREG who posted above my many 3 plus hr trips to PA what a cruise
Yes I am lucky enough to own this lady..she is a 71 NY with the buckets and console shifter…nothing drives like these big chryslers..the color on this one is called light gunmetal poly..rare color and really rare console find I have been researching on line trying to find the # NY coupes with the console were built in 71..any educated guess would be appreciated
The 69-73 fuselage cars are my favorite C-Bodys and I think the Plymouths were the best looking. I’m also one of the few that thinks the 4 door cars, especially the hardtops, look better than the 2 door cars, those quarter panels looks enormous. Id hate to have to hang one.
Count me as a fan. I read a cool article about a 69 Newport that was rescued and put back on the road. It’s worth a quick read here …
http://driving.ca/chrysler/auto-news/news/how-i-revived-this-dusty-forgotten-classic-for-super-cheap
I remember on the he Brady bunch they had these Chrysler cars. Magical cars that could transform. They would leave in a convertible and often it would transform into a station wagon.
Having owned a 1970 Chrysler New Yorker 4 Dr Hardtop I must comment. This was one of the most beautiful cars I ever owned in my opinion and I purely enjoyed driving it from 1972 to 1975 when I let it go for a Volkswagen Dasher in the first gas crisis. (Wish I hadn’t) I was a librarian in an academic library in Pittsburgh, PA at the time, newly married and owned a 1968 Pontiac Catalina two door hardtop purchased new in November 1968 after arriving home from the Army. My boss’s husband Ronald was a law book salesman who loved cars and loved buying new ones. The boss went out of town to a library convention and Ronald came to me in the library and said “How would you like to buy ——-‘s New Yorker?” He went on to explain that he was buying her a new Thunderbird and was ready to part with the New Yorker. He was driving a 1970 Imperial at the time. This New Yorker was cream with black fabric top and matching cream leather interior with every possible option including thermostatically controlled climate control. Ronald knew I loved cars and he picked an excellent prospect though he usually sold his cars to his attorney book customers. I was totally excited as only a 28 year old car nut could be. He offered the Chrysler to me for $2700 and it had just 27,000 around the town miles on the odometer. Ronald pointed out it was originally a car that cost over $6000. I had to convince my wife but gave him a tentative yes and we had to complete the deal in two days as his wife (my boss) would be returning from her trip and he wanted to surprise her. Besides convincing my wife (relatively easy) and I needed to get rid of the Pontiac and arrange financing. I called an old college friend who lived in Pittsburgh and offered him my Pontiac for $800 and arranged a loan from my hometown credit union. Later in 1972 we had a baby daughter and I was proud to drive my family home from the hospital in the Chrysler New Yorker. The photo shown is looking out over the hood of the 70 New Yorker on a snowy day in northwest PA. I chose another shot of the car exterior which did not appear so I shall try to post as a comment. I have some great shots of the car somewhere but they haven not been digitized as yet.
For some unknown reason I cannot get the exterior shot of the 70 New Yorker to post on here.
OK it did post but it looked like it wasn’t going to. Eventually I did have new rear springs installed as well as a missing rubber “jounce bumper” so the rear got lifted a bit. It was a very comfortable car on road trips, the HVAC system was flawless.
The lead picture in this article illustrates a memory of mine. The Chrysler New Yorker is the first car that I remember that spells out the brand and model in one sentence. Not saying it was the first, just the first that I can remember.
Good call on the brand and model name together. And who could forget how they used to spell out “I M P E R I A L” in big, block letters on the quarter panels?
Week ago, our classic club had a annual meeting to pass classic vehicle inspection for another year and some fuselage mopars show up.
There were even Imperial with powered front vent windows!
While I love the ’69-’72 loop bumper fuselage Chryslers as much as anyone (my fave are the 300 convertibles), if I were buying new back in the day, I’d have to go with a better-built Buick Centurion.
The fuselage era, along with the expensive failure of the E-body, spelled the beginning of the end. With the exception of the Cordoba and the Omnirizon (and maybe the Club Cab pickup), the seventies were about as bad as it could get for the old Chrysler Corporation.
A great many of these cars died in demolition derbies too 🙁 .
I would like to comment on the lack of sales success for these Chryslers.
The 1969 Chevrolet had a very handsome loop bumper design that was replaced the next year, while the more expensive Chrysler hung onto this for three more years. While it looks fresh and innovative now – it didn’t in 1971.
The fusilage design was not what the market was looking for. Clean, unadored big cars were a 1960s look. Chrysler evolving into this design was natural, but by 1969, boring. GM and Ford were already broughamifying their big cars, and Chysler needed a formal sedan look, not the fusilage.
This is why the 1969 Chyslers didn’t succeed in the market, in my opinion. I have fond memories of our 1970 NYer, but I was always aware that it didn’t match our neighbor’s new formal sedans.
I’ve liked those fuselage bodies since back in the day, and I cannot lie. Have never yet owned one, but would sure like to some day. There’s just something very right about them. Big, solid and rather massive really.
Here’s mine. 440 TNT. Dad bought new in 71. 67,000 miles. Saddle brown interior. Dealer made him put down deposit due to odd color combo. Have a letter from Chrysler saying they made 16 in this color combo. Car will run 120mph all day.