(first posted 8/4/2015) Unless you’re reading this after January the 18th, 2048 (in which case, hello there from 2015! Hopefully all the nutjobs running around predicting the end of civilization were wrong and we’re all doing just fine) there’s one of these buried, or covered with dirt at least, in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Hopefully when it’s time to take it out, all the planning done by the organizers way back in 1998 will have ensured it is in a better state than the 1957 Belvedere that was taken out of the earth before it. In any case, it has already outlived the Plymouth brand.
Now the reason that a 1957 Plymouth Belvedere was chosen all those years ago was, at least according to Wikipedia, “for its Virgil Exner styling as a way of showing the people of 2007 the good taste and forward thinking of the people of 1957.” I wouldn’t have picked any other car really. I’m guessing if it had been 1959 the vehicle chosen would’ve been a Cadillac and if it had been 1961 a Lincoln Continental would’ve taken its spot if styling is the only criteria. Unfortunately it seems 1950s concrete sarcophagus design was rather less than impressive and when Miss Belvedere was taken out it looked less like a 1950s example of beautiful design and more like a rust bucket.
It would be a shame if the Prowler disintegrated, as it really is a breathtaking design. As beautiful an example of retro design when it was released in 1997 as it was four years earlier when it was shown as a concept in the 1993 New York Auto Show. Really, would anyone have predicted the Chrysler would actually take it into production? It’s not like the Chrysler Corporation didn’t already have a stylish, mental roadster in the Viper, and the chances of investing more money on such a low-return sector of the market would be very small indeed.
However, the 1997 model was essentially identical to the concept. Oh sure this time they weren’t working in concept car-land so they had to make it comply with safety regulations and ensure that the powertrain could cash the checks the body was making. Speaking of which, I suppose we do have to talk about the powertrain don’t we?
When I first saw the Prowler, on a copy of Popular Mechanics that I begged my father to buy me, I was just stunned. I thought, “Here was a car that looked like all those hot rods that they showed in car shows and music videos. But this time people won’t have to destroy a lovely old car to make it, they can just buy it from the factory. I bet the engine is also amazing and unique!” In fact, the drivetrain was the same 3.5-liter engine V6 engine you got on the Chrysler LH cars and it was mated to a four speed automatic. Not the most exciting combination, is it?
The funny thing is, the drivetrain was actually quite good. If they had tried to stick…say the 5.2 or the 5.9-liter Magnum V8’s they would’ve had to do substantial alterations to the design just to get the engines in, essentially taking away the purpose of the Prowler to begin with. After an update in 1999, the engine got a power bump to 254 horsepower, more than either the 5.2 (230) or the 5.9 (230) while weighting less than those engines to boot. Okay a four-speed automatic is not as easy to defend and was already out of place on a ‘90s sports car, at least in concept, but this one benefited from having the option of manual control (AutoStick).
To top it off, it was a very light car thanks to the liberal amounts of aluminum parts used, including the engine block, hood and doors. This, combined with the engine, meant a 0-60 of 5.9 seconds. Nothing to scoff at. Top speed was 126 mph, not that you’d want to drive it at that speed for very long.
Of course, a product on such a small niche and with love-it-or-hate-it styling was never going to top the sales charts. Common criticisms included the interior ambiance (though that’s to be expected of anything built by an American manufacturer around that time) exterior visibility and a chorus of “it must have a V8”. Chrysler didn’t produce more than 5,000 units a year and on its best year (1999) only 3921 models left production lines. In any case, what I like the most about the Prowler is the simple fact that it exists.
Few cars make a transition from outlandish concept car to production without losing some pizazz along the way; another example from that era would be the first-gen Audi TT. The Prowler was something that sold on its design and absolutely nothing else. It was a brief return to an era where you made cars that were stylish first. I wonder how it’ll look alongside what we’ll all be driving in 2048?
Of all the pointless niche vehicles of Bob Lutz’s illustrious work in the subgenre, this has to be the most pointless.
You take a vehicle segment that’s popular for 1) Their hand-crafted custom-build nature and 2) Their classic Hot Rod V8/Four-on-the-Floor power and you make a factory version around a minivan V6/Automatic.
Brilliant.
And then he repeated the theme in an only slightly less stupid variation during his GM reign, the Chevy SSR.
I don’t believe the minivans used the 3.5, I think they were 2.4s for regular caravans and 3.3 or 3.8s with the 4.0 v6 available later on for grands. My friend has an avenger r/t awd with a 3.5 and that thing scoots.
Beauty is in each persons own eye. I have owned two of them. 1st: 2001 Mulholland w/ 9400 mi. in great condition. And then along came the “gotta have this one” – # 2. 2001 Custom, Show Car Quality Cat in a quality paint of Silver. Turn signal redirect kits (ugly front fenders removed), custom grille, chrome inlays spelling Plymouth & Prowler on rear bumpers, chromed & custom transmission cooler, dualed & chromed exhausts (2) per side and after marker spoiler with light kit. There’s more but the biggie is this: The Frame has been Tripled Chromed
so have the Wheels and all of the exposed front suspension, its fluid lines, fluid reservoirs and the rest of the components. Brand new $1200+ tires. There’s more and I absolutely Love It. Also, it literally lights-up faces everywhere it goes, making people of all ages genuinely happy. There are 11,200 mi. on it.
Also, I owned a 2004 Chevy SSR and found it fun, too. I must be a little opposite than you ’cause I find the unusual attractive especially in a time when most cars are shapeed like an egg. * You should have seen my 2 Cadillac XLR’s, also. More head-turners.
And don’t forget the Lutz ill-fated Envoy XUV.
Another winner!
Appreciated what they were trying to do…but looked way too much like the gutless PT Cruiser for my tastes.
I’d actually prefer the PT between the two, being that it was a wagon you could get with a stick. Less Lutzian self-indulgent niche product, more honest attempt to build interestingness into a workhorse daily-driver car. Isn’t that what we all complain about the lack of?
The PT Cruiser was very quick…you could get the 180 hp Turbo,the 215 hp Turbo then jumped to 230 hp Turbo with 245 torque..you then could get the Mopar Performance parts and stage 1,2 or 3 and a 12 second car…the got low 14’s out of the box with the 230 hp engine..even in the 13’s if you could control the tire spin..
The Prowler was impractical and unattractive, it was the answer to a question no one asked, and it sold in such a low volume that I’d be surprised if it ever made money. Yet they built it anyway.
Nothing…not even the Viper…epitomizes the chutzpah of the post-Iacocca, pre-Daimler Chrysler Corporation better than this. And, that “chutzpah” probably has something to do with the reason they’re not an independent company any more…
When Chrysler did the Prowler, it was the most profitable car company on earth. But then GM-lifer Bob Eaton took over and immediately panicked. “Oh no, how can a company this small survive?” Then the “merger of equals” with Daimler, in which Chrysler’s profits for the first 2 or 3 years propped up the money-losing German side. By then much of the Chrysler talent had fled the company under Daimler leadership, and each new product became more underwhelming than the last (with a couple of exceptions). An oversimplification, but this is closer to why they are no longer an independent company.
Agree.
It’s my understanding that Eaton also subjected the upcoming, first-generation Neon to some last-minute cost-cutting, which really hurt the car. He was bringing his GM mentality with him…which, ironically enough, was supposedly a big reason why Iacocca wanted him in the first place.
I have concluded that, at least in modern times, experience moving up the ladder at GM qualified a person to be an exec at . . . GM. I don’t claim expert status here, but is there any record of a modern GM exec moving out and successfully running a smaller company? None come to mind.
None come to my mind, either.
The whole Lutz-Eaton drama shows how time had passed by Iacocca.
He was still obsessed with GM (he admitted to being a diehard GM watcher in his first book), even though it was painfully apparent by the early 1990s that GM no longer set the pace for the domestic industry.
Look what those geniuses did to GM, they flushed the most successful automotive giant down the toilet I wouldnt let them run a 10 ticket lottery honestly.
JPC: The reason Chrysler was so profitable is because they cut so many corners. All of the passenger cars that came out during this era (LH, Cloud, Neon) ended up having mediocre to terrible reputations for reliability and quality. That’s hardly a sustainable model.
I tend to think Eaton knew the jig was up to some extent at Chrysler, and that what they were doing was essentially “hyping” profits at the expense of quality and long term stability. And I think he knew that the next (inevitable) downturn would make them very vulnerable.
The situation is not all that different today with FCA: Marchionne sees the writing on the wall, despite FCA making very big profits at the moment. I agree mostly with his assessment of the industry and the need to consolidate.
The problem always is how to consolidate. The theoretical advantages are very obvious, but pulling it off requires tremendous leadership. The only real success story in modern times is Renault-Nissan. The one previous merger/acquisition that really worked well was Chrysler buying AMC. Iacccoca gets the credit for that, as he insisted that within 90 days, the total non-manufacturing expense be no greater than it was before.
In fact, that acquisition of AMC really was critical to Chrysler’s boom years, as it was AMC’s Castaing who showed Chrysler how to develop cars much cheaper by using a “platform team” instead of the usual archaic structure/layers.
The magnetic draw of mergers is huge, but making them work is always much harder than the egos involved can pull off.
Here’s a very good read on this subject: http://www.autonews.com/section/industry_on_trial
I love the Prowler, and you gotta give credit to Chrysler for selling it as a Plymouth in attempt to have a halo car, previewing what was originally intended to come. The Prowler insipred several concepts such as the Pronto, Pronto Cruizer (which would become the PT Cruiser), and Pronto Spyder. Had the Daimler takeover not occurred, the PT Cruiser would’ve likely been a Plymouth and have given Plymouth a much needed unique car that would have higher practical appeal and sales than the Prowler.
Regardless of the Prowler’s impracticality, it was a cool car and it was cool for me growing up when the Prowler and Viper were being sold at the same time. The Prowler even made our Christmas card in 1999.
+1
I agree. It took some guts to put this into production in any guise. I like the look.
Ugly silly car. And giving it an automatic? Just one more example of why nobody misses Plymouth.
They really should have done some integrated metal bumpers. Those must be the most poorly integrated kit car grade bumpers I’ve ever seen! They mar the entire vehicle. If you can visualize it with no bumpers at all it looks a lot better.
It is altogether a silly baby boomer vanity vehicle. No thanks.
Just a half assed attempt to slap em on there to meet the regulations. Many Prowlers have had them removed and I think that was the idea all along. The car looks infinity billion times better when bumper-less.
Wow, such hate. To me, some of the criticism voiced here could be leveled at the Mazda Miata, yeah…there’s another pointless niche vehicle (please note the sarcasm).
I agree the Prowler and the PT Cruiser could have been an interesting “rebirth” for the Plymouth brand, though it’s not easy to see where the brand could go after that.
I have to wonder how many folks would have been so critical if the Prowler had had an available manual transmission?
The Miata actually has a manual and sells well.
I don’t dislike the Prowler because it’s a “niche” car, I dislike it because it is silly looking. Anything that silly looking should at least be fast….yet it has the drivetrain of a minivan.
If it had a manual and actually lived up to it’s “bold” looks I’m sure more people would have bought it. Instead it’s all show, zero go. It’s a minivan without the storage capacity.
The 3.5 was not available in the minivan.
The Miata actually has a manual and sells well.
Exactly. When Mazda set out to update the classic British roadster they picked one of the best – the Lotus Elan – and faithfully replicated its best points while eliminating its more egregious faults.
The Prowler wasn’t anything close to this formula, it was an executive’s vanity project.
The 3.5 was not available in the minivan.
Same basic SOHC V6 only with a longer stroke and other minor changes. Built in the same Trenton Engine plant, very likely on the same line.
I suppose the more accurate way of putting it would be to call it a ‘FWD Fleet/Rental Car engine that was adapted to Minivan use’.
Yes, and the Corvette engine has spent time under the hoods of cop cars and Buick Roadmasters.
Many other engines that have graced sporty or sports cars have spent time under the hoods of trucks and mundane higher end sedans in a manufacturer’s line.
I don’t see the relevancy of derivative engines having also spent time in minivans.
Many other engines that have graced sporty or sports cars have spent time under the hoods of trucks and mundane higher end sedans in a manufacturer’s line.
Big difference is that the classic large V8/manual trans truck power train has many virtues that lend it to performance applications – the engines produce tons of torque and usually have well-built bottom ends that lend themselves to tuning for higher power, while the transmissions are designed for heavy-duty torque applications with shift linkage locations that are perfectly located. There’s a reason why many Rod builders (And even the OEMs with their musclecars) went this route back in the day, it has a lot to recommend it.
This on the other hand seems the answer to a question no one ever really asked. The EG Family SOHC V6 has never had a great reputation for performance and the Ultradrive Transmission is notorious for its problems, regardless of where you mount it. Indeed, considering, between the LHs and Minivans, how many of these power trains there are, it’s pretty striking that pretty much no one selects them for performance applications.
But I don’t really think any of that ever occurred to Bob Lutz, he just wanted to see his picture in the Car Rags standing next to his shiny new toy.
My thinking was mostly on two points. The comments that tie the Prowler to the minivan are pretty far off the mark, it was LH derived as I’ve noted in other comments.
I’m happy to concede that a V-8 may have made a real difference for this car, but it was a different era when Chrysler had been all but a 4 banger company for almost 15 years. The 3.5 was a high output engine in relative terms when it was introduced. Chrysler took a shot that it might be accepted, and they were wrong. I still applaud their taking a chance. And, the 3.5 was a relative kick when I bought one new in a 1995 Concorde. The car and its original drivetrain lasted me 10 years and 100,000 miles, and was running fine when I traded it in. It was the first of three consecutive Mopar products I was happy to buy and own.
My other point was that an engine’s other applications really aren’t relevant to consider when it is such a common practice that a sporty / sports car engine came from a truck or sedan. The original Datsun 240Z took its inline six from the Datsun 510 sedan, and Nissan introduced the car to a V-8 crazy America in 1970. The car became a bit of a legend. Variants of this engine also spent time in the Datsun 521 and 620 pick-ups. This sort of thing has been going on since the beginning of the automobile.
To the extent that it shared parts and architecture, the Prowler was derivative of the LH car platform, not the minivan.
The Mopar minis have always been transverse mounted engines with FWD drivetrains that offered AWD for a few years.
The LH was a longitudinal mounted engine with a chassis designed to be Front, Rear, and AWD, even if only the FWD made it to production.
The Prowler was a longitudinal mounted engine with the transmission to the rear, and made a RWD vehicle. Performance was quite respectable for the times, and the Mopar Auto Stick was kind of fun if you’ve ever driven one. Handling had its potential as the weight balance with the rear transmission was nearly perfect. As product planning went, it looked pretty good on paper.
Failure is sort of an opinion here. The car generated a lot of mostly positive attention for Chrysler – and as a two seater car, the market was always going to be very limited. It’s price was likely its most limiting factor – ranging from about $38,000 to $45,000. A bold halo price when first introduced as a Plymouth, a brand that hadn’t seen much excitement since the early 1970s.
If no chances are taken, no one will ever know what the next break-out hit will be. The PT Cruiser that followed is a perfect example: an out-of-the-park hit. Chrysler’s final years as an independent were a nice example of going out on a high note.
The PT Cruiser is a high note? Come on!
A lot of Mopar revisionism going on here.
The $$$ spent making the Prowler would have been better spent making transmissions that didn’t catastrophically fail in less than 100k miles (many times far less).
But the Lutz-meister was never very interested in such prosaic matters, not when there was a press conference to be scheduled, unveiling the Next Big Thing!
In fact, both the Dodge Copperhead roadster and TJ Dakar would have been more successful concept-to-halo car projects than the Prowler.
The Copperhead could have kept the same power train configuration as the Prowler but in a more attractive package, while a four door Wrangler was a no-brainer.
I wrote that Chrysler’s final years as an independent were a high note, I did not write that the PT Cruiser was a high note. I wrote that the PT Cruiser was an out-of-the-park hit.
Anyway, despite its faults, Chrysler with its many peaks and valleys in history, was at a relative peak when taken over by Daimler. This in terms of sales, styling, profitability, and desirable products. A peak that it is only now relatively close to about 18 years later.
The Datsun Z six was derived from the four cylinder in the 510. The four was based upon a Mercedes design scaled back to a four, and restored to a six in the Z. Later the six was used in a sedan.
I don’t care what the initial use an engine was designed for, as long as it provides adequate power. Truck engines such as the Chevy 348 (409) and the Ford 390 never were very good performance engines, they were just big for the times. The small block Chevy and the 5.0 Ford V8’s weren’t very large, and weren’t strictly designed for performance, but developed into great motors, in numerous applications.
I agree that the Prowler should probably be given the benefit of the doubt and some credit for being an ambitious and courageous execution of an neat idea–if not fully baked. However, the Miata comparison is totally off-base–the Miata has been an unmitigated sales success (unlike the Prowler) and is very much a ‘real’ car in terms of performing it’s sports car mission–its nowhere near ‘pointless’ in the way that an SSR or a Prowler are.
“I have to wonder how many folks would have been so critical if the Prowler had had an available manual transmission?”
They’d just find something else to whine about.
“Its only a five speed? Waaah!”
“They’d just find something else to whine about.”
+1
The great gearhead paradox very much applies.
Well said.
I could whine similarly that the new Bronco’s a pointless niche vehicle. Just leaving it at “it’s aimed at someone else…” Nobody forced anybody to buy one.
Would have been interesting to see how these armchair product planners would’ve done during the development phase. “Fitting a V8 means completely redoing the front if we want any hope of proportion; we don’t have a V8 / manual combination that’s not in a truck, so there’s potentially an emissions / fuel economy issue; and now we’ve driven the price up to Viper levels so what was a not-outlandish toy at $45K is now a $70K investment we’ll be lucky to sell a few dozen of.”
Well as a 10 YO when it came out I did find it pretty cool, I can’t argue that it was a good idea to put into production, but in the rare instance I’ve actually seen one on the street it always turns my head, and that’s what most custom Hot Rods do best. I think ugly is a really strong word when it comes to cars, I find the Audi TT ugly, I’d much rather have a Prowler over that wart shaped piece of transverse engined crap.
Well said…Especially your nealy poetic description of the TT! CC effect: Just seen a Plymouth Prowler yesterday! It’s perhaps the only car from the ’90s that’ll actually get me to stop and gawk!
Most hot rods go like a Fabergé egg, they’re parked in a museum or a garage and are there to gawk at, and due to their fabricated and one off underpinnings rarely can be driven anywhere with any kind of comfort, at least the Prowler actually does go. Aesthetically it’s no uglier than a Boydster IMO.
I don’t disagree that it was a mistake to put into production and a V6 is a lame choice, but it’s not THAT bad for the vitriol it gets. It is something a kid would think would look cool, which in an era of minivans and cookie cutter sedans is not a bad thing. As a kid when these came out(I really was 10 in 1998) the Prowler was a unique beacon of light in a sea of boring plastic 4/5 door jellybeans. No 10 year old kid gives two shits about their image, space efficiency or corporate profits, or even has a realistic concept speed, they just embrace something that excites them, whatever it is.
“No 10 year old kid gives two shits about their image, space efficiency or corporate profits, or even has a realistic concept speed, they just embrace something that excites them, whatever it is.”
Nicely put. I think we all need to step back for a second and view the Prowler (as well as many other cars) in this light. For once, can’t a car just be cool to look and emotionally exciting FIRST, and then space efficiency, powertrain, etc. be addressed?
I am conflicted about these. On one hand, Chrysler was turning out some of the most appealing product anywhere when these came out, and was not afraid to take on some interesting low-volume stuff. The Chrysler of the late 90s was a lean and nimble operation with some genuine enthusiasm for cars.
But, I was one of the folks who scratched my head about the 3.5/auto combo. This was not a practical car at all, but “let’s build a flashy hotrod with a 6” said nobody ever. Yeah, the 3.5 put up better numbers than the V8, but that argument is aimed at the side of the brain that had nothing to do with whether to buy one of these. This car needed a Magnum V8 rumble to go with those looks, and probably would have sold triple the volume, even with the automatic.
There were a couple of these running around in my area. Have not seen either one for awhile, though.
Interestingly enough, I see two Prowlers semi-regularly. Two business owners in my town one Prowlers which they drive on occasion. One is a black Plymouth, the other a Mulholland Edition Chrysler. I’d pick one up it I had the space and money, neither of which I currently have :).
“Yeah, the 3.5 put up better numbers than the V8, but that argument is aimed at the side of the brain that had nothing to do with whether to buy one of these. This car needed a Magnum V8 rumble to go with those looks”
+1- Because of this issue, I don’t see the Prowler ever gaining “Got to have it” status in the collector car market. It compares well to the Delorean- While some love the looks and audacity of the gull wing doors, most enthusiasts consider the Delorean’s V-6 powertrain a bad joke.
“Put up better numbers than the V8”?
In what way? I looked up the 0-60 for the early Prowlers and it was over 7 seconds.
The later ones did better, getting it down around 6 but any Camaro or Mustang with a V 8 from that era would smoke a Prowler, at less than half the price with 4 seats and a trunk.
Building a “hot rod” with a (non turbo) V6 and an automatic is like building an econo car with a big block V8, it makes zero sense.
Really, what was the logic behind doing that?
Building a “hot rod” with a (non turbo) V6 and an automatic is like building an econo car with a big block V8, it makes zero sense.
At least the SSR had an LS and 6 Speed Manual. It wasn’t anymore impractical than a Corvette and offered roughly the equivalent in performance.
Chevy and Ford both had better V8s at the time, I really don’t see a 5.2 accelerating this car any better, and it’s extra weight would likely only make it worse
If 0-60 in 7 seconds is the best they could do……they probably shouldn’t have built it. That’s a 0-60 time that would have been acceptable in the early 80s……maybe. But by the late 90s? No way.
I agree. These cars needed a V-8 and a five-speed manual. With that drivetrain, the Prowler’s overall character would have matched the styling.
Why not a six speed? My 94 Z28 had a six speed and cost less than half of what one of these cost.
It just needed a manual transmission, whether with five speeds, or six.
Yeah, but for the price there was no reason it shouldn’t have had a six speed.
I thought the Prowler was cool looking when it came out, and I still do, but I would prefer to build my own hot rod than buy one turn-key. I also thought it needed a V8 and available stick-shift. I’ve also sat in a Prowler and found it quite snug too. The Prowler is a toy for “car guys” who aren’t into wrenching on their own cars and appreciate having a factory warranty and dealer service. Ask me about the Prowler again in 20 years. 🙂
It’s a shame about the fate of the ’57 Belvedere. I suspect that it was known well before the time capsule was opened that there would be water problems inside. If only someone had thought to dig down beside it years before and install a sump pump, the car may have been at least restorable when unearthed. They won’t have the same problem with the Prowler though. The concrete vault it’s stored in is actually above-ground.
Chequebook hotrodders are everywhere now the bought not built guys, we have plenty over here they baby their 57 Chevy along at below the speed limit and never spin a tyre in anger, these are who the Prowler was aimed at not real car guys it was a posemobile for wannabes.
Wow, nearly 20 years later and this car is still creating all manner of comments. In that sense, I view it as being highly successful as it has definitely left an impression on people.
The Prowler had good bones but it was like selling formula at a Le Leche League meeting, where folks just weren’t going to partake. However, for a product coming from the pinnacle of Chrysler, kudos to them for making it.
Yugos left an impression on people too. I don’t know how that equates to “success” though.
I agree. Not to my taste at all, but it stood out when launched and made me notice.
I applaud any car company brave enough to do something like this. Much preferable to the vanilla we’re being served these days.
I always liked the concept and the looks of the Prowler. In its time I thought it was an excellent, if flawed halo car for Chrylser. It showed that the sad 70’s and anemic 80’s were over and that Chrysler was a revitalized forward looking company. They were turning out interesting cars which actually looked like their show cars and they were getting them to market quickly.
The Prowler, however, failed for me. A V-6 from the home of the Hemi? Hah! Some things simply are not done . Period, end of discussion
Fortunately, conversions have been made – here’s a good looking one:
http://www.carbuzz.com/news/2012/9/4/Prowler-Gets-a-Hemi-Conversion-7710575/
I find this a much more appealing car.
The Prowler’s mission was much the same as the Pontiac Aztek, then Solstice: inject some life into a dying brand. It’s worth noting that the similar (but much less expensive), very successful PT Cruiser was originally slated to be a Plymouth.
In that regard, if the release timing of the Prowler and PT Cruiser had been reversed, maybe Plymouth would have lasted a bit longer. In a tragic irony, the failure of the Prowler in the marketplace may have been the final nail in the coffin for Plymouth when the PT Cruiser was moved to be a Chrysler, instead.
FWIW, one of the most egregious examples of dealer greed I’ve ever seen involved the final production Prowler. It was the limited-edition ‘Woodward’ Prowler, which was, literally, nothing more than a factory, black-over-red, two-tone paint job. A Chrysler dealer north of Cincinnati (King’s Auto Mall) had one on the showroom for at least a year after initial release when I was killing time one day and was taken aback when I saw a cool $100k added onto the MSRP. I really thought it was a mistake or joke, but a salesman assured me that was, indeed, the price. Needless to say, the car sat there for a long time, and the dealership went belly-up not long after, as well.
I have such mixed feelings on these cars. Taken for what they are, they sure as hell LOOK cool, but an automatic V6 is just SO wrong and on so many levels for a ‘hotrod’. But then again, there’s just no such thing as a ‘factory hotrod’ since they can only be built, or commissioned to be built…never bought off the showroom floor. Sure, a few have been legitimized by way of a Hemi swap…but such a limited run car wont be fodder for many such conversions.
When I sold cars, we had one of these, in orange. I got to test drive it, and its probably the most exotic thing Ive ever driven. Certainly one of the rarest. It was a lot quicker than youd think but the muffled whir of a V6 just isnt what you want to hear when driving a cycle fendered roadster. The 4.7 V8 was around in these days, and there was even a concept using it. That engine was never used since the transaxle just wouldnt hold the torque…the contemporary 4spd slapstic was marginal even with a V6, and nothing else available at the time wouldve really worked.
Still, Ma Mopar is the only company with a history of building such outrageous rides. Sure, Bob Lutz did for a bit at GM…but that was a flash in the pan.
The Prowler certainly focussed attention on the Chrysler brand from where I saw it anyway, I was in a market that hadnt had a live Chrysler in it for nearly 20 years, we had the Jeep Cherokee which was a cut price/rate Landcruiser with a dodgy warranty one Viper had been imported and raced unsuccesfully due to its poor brakes the Prowler foretold of interesting Chryslers to come, ok so they never showed up we got the gas guzzling biodegradable Neon and the styled like a 30s FORD PT Cruiser and the 300 which compared with local RWD V8 sedans failed abysmally but did feature a turbo diesel so as far as I can see the Prowler succeeded in its mission it was never going to sell huge numbers due to its impracticality or whatever percieved faults it had but as an attention getter it worked.
MISS Belvedere was buried without even disconnecting the battery. There was extensive road and building construction near where it was buried. Oklahoma also has a high water table basements flood. It was a doomed idea from the start. The prowler is in an above ground crypt filled with inert gas. It should be pristine when opened.
It’s not a matter of space efficiency uber alles, but the recognition that the most successful niche cars are ones that manage to be at least usable. This is something Ford figured out with the consumer clinics for the 1965 Mustang: The key is to make the car at least practical enough that people can rationalize it to themselves. That’s clearly part of the appeal of even the Miata — yes, it’s a two-seater, but if you’re single/childless, you can get away with using it as a daily driver.
I think to be emotionally compelling, a car needs to do more than just look outlandish, at least if you’re old enough to drive. God knows it doesn’t have to be flawless or sensible, but it needs to promise an experience, otherwise it might as well be a non-running concept car.
I agree with Jim that the reason the Prowler needed a V-8 had nothing to do with performance and everything to do with getting the proper rumbling exhaust note. It could even have had an automatic — just give it a tough-looking pistol-grip or T-handle shifter, or perhaps one of those multi-lever jobs — because it’s not about 0-60 and ET so much as setting a mood. Even if I liked the Prowler’s looks (I’m with Jason that it looks silly), it doesn’t go far enough with the fantasy before the unfortunate prosaic realities set it, which I think was its fundamental problem.
Great write-up and photos. Interesting comments too. As touched on in the comments, the whole concept of a factory hot rod is problematic. That would be true regardless of powertrain. Not everyone would be happy.
So yes, one of best things about the Prowler is that it even exists. Sort of amazing really: basically a styling exercise- a tribute car to the classic American hot rod, in a sense- that made it into production with few modifications. Everything doesn’t have to be practical, or fast, or the same. Just being different and fun is enough for some people.
The 3.5 automatic combo may be an issue for some. But, it’s actually a very good engine, advanced for its time and decently powerful in later versions. And, despite what people say about manuals (I actually prefer them), they buy automatics (consider that the Viper is the other way with a manual and no automatic, and some say that’s a problem… can’t win this one). If I recall correctly, the transmission is actually located in the back, by the way, really a transaxle. Interesting car in a lot of ways.
Great that Chrysler had the audacity to build this, no doubt knowing it’s not for everyone. What a difference from the sameness we see so much of today.
I think you nail it. Hot Rods are vehicles where the key appeal is the unique to the builder’s customization – the bodywork shouldn’t look like another, the powertrain shouldn’t be like another, ect. The Prowler is a production car styled largely like popular hot rods of the time, the Boyd Coddington smooth high tech look in particular, and that was in essence a fad and merely a subgenre within the Hot Rodding community to begin with. The more recent retro Ponycars work much better as homages to classic designs since they’re homages of classic mass production designs, ones that can still be easily personalized or not just as the originals were, the Prowler doesn’t lend itself well to that
On the other hand the other point you note is the interesting stuff inside the Prowler, it was actually built sort of like a hot rod in a parts bin sense by the designers and engineers behind it. This was a RWD car afterall, whether or not it’s a “minivan” powertrain is just as irrelevant as one would accuse a hot rod Model A of having a truck engine swapped into it. It was reconfigured, if it were a truly bad effort it would have been converted to FWD for production.
My gut feeling on these, is that Bob Lutz looked around his neighborhood and said, there’s a market for a car like this.
There are a whole group of aging boomers in Michigan who want a “hot rod” to take to the Tuesday cruise night at Denny’s and something to drive on Woodward Ave in August.
They don’t have the time or inclination to build or maintain a tempermental old car, and they aren’t planning to drag race, or autocross the thing. It just has to look fun, drive easily, and have enough creature comforts that their wives will ride in it.
Most of the actual street rods I see at shows these days have automatics, tilt wheel, & air conditioning.
The 10 year old me loved it back in 1997. I remember that shade of purple seemed to be pretty wild. A Plymouth dealer near me had a few in their showroom, and they stayed there for quite a while.
The Prowler a pointless vehicle?
It’s only pointless if you have a heart’s desire to be a proud Corolla owner and put that car on a pedestal of brilliant, cool design! Wait ’til your (illegal) drugs wear off before making such a ridiculous statement!
Prowler
SSR
HHR
G8/SS
Cube
(add a car I missed here)
The automotive world would be much poorer if these car were NOT built and sold. Sometimes it’s good to dare to be different, and I applaud that. I find each and every one of them truly exciting, and I loved the Prowler – AND the matching trailer!
In the 90’s I lived in L.A. A good friend worked for a major vehicle manufacturer and his job was to road-test the competition’s models. Every month or so he would stop by with something new and have me drive while he monitored the operating systems and such. I got to drive a number of great vehicles before they hit the market!
The Saturday afternoon he dropped by with a Prowler I was giddy with anticipation. Truth-be-told, it had the absolute WORST ride of any vehicle I’ve EVER been in. Shakes, rattles, shimmy, hard-suspension crashes and the most raucous exhaust note making conversation impossible.
The only highpoint of that drive was the folks who probably wrenched their necks looking at the car as we passed…then again my eyes were vibrating so violently from the ride it was hard to focus on them.
I thought the same about my one drive in an SSR. That was at a GM event, so it should have been in good shape.
Dang, they actually entombed another Plymouth in Tulsa!
Put some decent suspension on this, and a 318 under the hood, and you would have something that could perform. Maybe if they had made it a Dodge it could have been given some performance vibe. It was a handsomely designed car.
I saw one in a Chrysler showroom a while back, it belonged to the owner of the place. Good to see some have been kept as survivors. He keeps this one indoors at all times, only takes it out if the sky is clear.
A neighbour down the street had one when these were new, it was as eye catching as anything that has passed by here. As much as the other guy that had the 1959 Cadillac.
I wish I could say something more about these cars when they go by and I’m asked what they are.
Right now, I say – “Um – it’s an old Plymouth that is supposed to look like an even older Plymouth, but it really just another car like the PT Cruiser. Guys collect them for the same reason you see those new-old Ford Thunderbirds Grandma likes.”
That’s never been a problem for me: “Ah, that’s a Plymouth Prowler, with headlamps made by Lescoa—a company Chrysler bought an enormous mountain of tail lights, turn signals, and other signal lights from, but the Prowler’s was the only headlamp Lescoa ever made. Not long after that, Lescoa got iteratively swallowed up in the Autosystems-Decoma-Magna fish chain.”
Sorry – I wasn’t clear.
I meant something not coma-inducing.
Y’didn’t specify. 🤓
You guys crack me up.
From what I’ve read in various Hot Rod magazine articles, this concept was designed by Chip Foose. He later built a version of the car for himself. He was initially panned for cribbing Chrysler’s design, until he revealed that he was the actual designer of the Prowler.
I personally find the car silly and an embarrassment. I find the initial Viper ridiculous, but not silly. The Viper had the impressive performance to go with the looks. The first gen Vipers were just too Spartan, they didn’t even have a real roof! A total lack of creature comforts, (a/c) etc.
I remember when Harley Davidson started building “factory customs.” The bike rags stated that they wouldn’t be accepted by” the faithful.” The original boat tail Superglide wasn’t not too popular. But HD kept at it. When they rolled out the first Lowrider, the dam broke and demand took off. The Lowrider led to the belt drive Sturgis, the Wide Glide, the Soft tail, the Heritage Soft Tail, and the Springer Softail. Who can forget the Fat Boy?
Not only were these models popular with the faithful, they were respected and accepted by almost all Harley riders. While HD kept the base models in production these “specials” sold at a substantially higher price.
So I suppose that a car like the Prowler could have been more successful. Who’d have thunk that old HD would find the right formula? I will also admit that I like the reborn, two seat Thunderbird.
I personally find Chip Foose silly, which I’m using as code for less savoury adjectives.
These were and are still pretty awesome! A subset of us 1% of enthusiasts will never warm up to them nor have bought them and that’s okay, and not who Chrysler built it for. But it was great for publicity and the only mistake I think was not selling it as a Dodge or Chrysler – it may have endured far more in the collective memories of people than it has as part of a nonexistent brand. The 99% who turns their head could care less that it’s a V6 “from a minivan” even though THAT’s technically inaccurate too – they see a cool, now-almost legitimately-classic car that to boothas the fortune to not been made from compromised production methods and now falling apart from age like Avantis and cars lower down the ladder. And the interior is unique and inspired too, unlike the Retro-Bird and it’s Lincoln LS dashboard.
So i guess that means let’s mark down a “yes” from me.
Oops, that was supposed to be “…classic car that has the fortune of not being made from compromised production methods…”
I just love it, quite unbelievable. Never mind the V6 – it’s got pushrod front suspension ! On a road car ! How many other road cars from mainstream manufacturers are built this way !
If you like hot rods, what a wonderful starting point. Easy to upgrade the powertrain if you have a good chassis to start with.
The grill and headlights always makes me think of the Alien monster from the Alien movies.
Also I agree with many of you, first reaction was “WHAT, A V6” they should have had a HEMI as an option, carefully designed engine enclosure that could be easily removed to give it the Real Hotrod look with an exposed engine.
What hemi engine do you imagine Chrysler might’ve had in the house in 1997 to put in this car…?
This car is the total anti revolution .
If Daimler-Chrysler decided to give Plymouth a pityfull image ,
this “vehicle ” advanced the brand`s final farewell .
Neither ex Sovietic automobiles were so ridiculous and useless as a Prowler . Considering the rich history of Plymouth Cars, deciding to put in production this mobile-gag was an heresy .
So many arm-chair have been full of it. I’ve owned two Prowlers and they were and are fun and unique. There are so many negative opinions regarding this one-of-a-kind vehicle, and its’ component parts that make me ill. It did NOT need a V-8. You Will wreck it. Learn before you folks vent your ignorance. It is not productive to to judge corporate decisions that failed but be grateful that it was built to enjoy, collect and make those happy who see mine. Some of these opinions hare utter ignorance.h