It goes without saying that 1965 was a good year for Chrysler, because it was a good year for almost everybody; however, Chrysler’s volume exceeded 200,000 for the first time, and it wasn’t based on a boom year alone. The Newport, 300, 300L, and New Yorker were aided by handsome new styling, but what else was new at the sign of the Pentastar?
Fortunately, we’re able to find out thanks to the efforts of MyMopar.com, who has digitized many original dealer filmstrips, including this one promoting the new-for-1965 Chrysler. If you’ve watched enough old dealer filmstrips, you know that you can expect some squirrely things when a woman enters the frame, but in this case, the tone is mostly benign. Mostly. She’s walked into her Chrysler dealer to examine the new cars, and the example on the showroom floor is a handsome New Yorker two-door hardtop in (most likely) Formal Black. The salesman is not telling a fish tale or (ahem) anything untoward, but he is talking about how big the new Chrysler is. This is truly a picture that begs to be taken out of context, perfect for the internet age of memes.
Back to Chryslers. The New Yorker was the expensive line-topper, but the bulk of Chrysler’s sales came from the entry-level Newport, which certainly crowded the top of Plymouth’s line, including the fancier Fury models. For the sake of comparison with the other Chrysler models, the base list price of the Newport two-door hardtop was $3,028, and 23,665 were sold. The best-seller was unsurprisingly the four-door sedan at 61,054 units. (Also for comparison’s sake, a Sport Fury Hardtop started out at $2,920, $108 less than a comparable Newport, and 38,348 were sold.)
The sportier 300 two-door hardtop was a much more expensive $3,500, and 11,621 were sold.
The 300 “Letter Series” car returned for a final time for 1965, and with a base price of $4,090 (just under a comparable New Yorker), only 2,405 two-door hardtops found homes.
Finally, the expensive New Yorker two-door hardtop, which cost $4,098, sold fairly well: 9,357 units. That was almost as many as the much cheaper base 300.
The lovely maiden in this scene is hanging dreamily on every word our intrepid salesman says, but nobody said these filmstrips were completely based in reality. I hope he’s not “mansplaining” or otherwise being condescending.
Before getting to the “good part,” which is the interior in this case, the filmstrip inspects the varied front end treatments of Chrysler’s three-and-a-half models, which is an area of 1965 Chrysler study by which I’m fascinated. The New Yorker’s nose, seen here, is by far my favorite, and it certainly speaks to the car’s status in the line.
It’s mostly these stylized clear glass headlight covers; Imperials also wore them, but I like the New Yorker’s treatment better personally. Look at the little “crown” between the headlights; you simply don’t see detailing like that in industrial design anymore, and it’s a subtle tie-in to the Imperial, too, akin to how Mercury advertised their line as having the “Continental” look.
The 300 shares the New Yorker’s headlight covers, but its blacked-out grille and red-tinged “crosshairs” give it a more sporting image.
The Newport is obviously plain by comparison, and it doesn’t get the fancy headlight covers, but it’s still attractive. I once looked at a ’65 Newport two-door hardtop for sale with a New Yorker grille, and it was a nice combination, but alas, in 1965 you had to spend the extra money.
In the paint wars of the 1960s, Acrylic Enamel (used by Chrysler and Ford) battled it out with GM’s “Magic Mirror” Acrylic Lacquer. Chrysler (of course) talks up the durability of their enamel finishes, and the narrator explains that the Chrysler is available in 21 colors, six being extra-cost options that are buffed at the factory. Those colors are Mist Blue Metallic, Sage Green Metallic, Frost Turquoise Metallic, Silver Mist Metallic, and Pink Silver Metallic (I’m unable to find the sixth, but are you sensing a pattern?).
Another styling feature that Chrysler brags about in the film is curved side glass, which (no judgment) I find to be a detail that is discussed in automotive styling analysis more than it deserves. The 1965 Continental had flat side glass, as did the 1965 Corvette and 1965 Riviera, and nobody’s calling them ugly. Just saying. I do want to take a minute to address something our salesman protagonist does not bring up, and that is the New Yorker’s unique vinyl-covered C-pillar. It might not make a lot of sense, but I like it.
In fact, I like almost everything about the New Yorker. If the expensive-looking nose didn’t sell a prospect, the clear taillights must have driven them clean out of their minds.
What a beauty! The “crown” motif is continued across the concave tail panel, and the bumpers wrap upward to protect the corners of the quarter panels. It’s so elegant that I almost can’t stand not owning one.
The idea of Chrysler as a luxury car was sadly watered down over time, most likely due to the Newport’s “price leader” status affecting what people thought of when they thought of a Chrysler, but you can’t possibly look at the New Yorker’s interior and have that opinion. The film points out that the “individual” seats are standard on 300s of all stripes and New Yorker wagons, and optional on New Yorker hardtops. The reclining passenger seat is standard on all models except the Newport.
What else can be said about the dashboard that hasn’t been said? Chrysler dashboards of the 1960s were always gorgeous, and the salesman is quick to point out the new shift mechanism—no more push buttons.
The sales brochure calls this a “drawerful of surprises.” It has a coin sorter, storage space, dual ashtrays, and a lighter (only one, those darn bean counters).
It’s doubtful that the salesman put the New Yorker on the lift to show the young lady the finer points of Chrysler engineering, but the filmstrip condescendingly points out that there are a few technical points that aren’t too complicated for her to understand, including a separate crossmember for the rear shock absorbers and torsion bars to isolate road shocks from the floorpan.
The next step in selling any prospect on a Chrysler is, of course, a test drive. The potential buyer doesn’t actually get to drive the car, but she does get to smile behind the wheel while an animator is busy simulating a road. It’s cheesy, but I love this stuff.
An interesting sales point that would never come up today is the Torqueflite’s new torque converter; with a higher stall speed than before, the car is less likely to creep at stop lights. Of dubious accuracy: the film points out that the prospect doesn’t have to hold her foot on the brake at stop signs as a result of this modification. Buyer beware.
Chrysler engines are the familiar B- and RB-series of big blocks. The Newport has a standard 270-horsepower 383 two-barrel.
Optional in the Newport and standard in the basic 300 is the 315-horsepower 383 four-barrel.
The New Yorker has a 340-horsepower 413, while the 300L has the “high-performance” 413 with 360 horsepower (this engine is also optional on the New Yorker and the 300). The high-performance engine benefits from a hotter camshaft, an “unsilenced air cleaner, and a dual exhaust system.”
No Chrysler sales filmstrip would be legitimate without pointing out the advantages of unibody construction, including “fully-enclosed wheel housings.” Notice that this New Yorker has the standard single exhaust system, so it clearly has the base 340-horsepower 413.
Almost as captivating as the enamel vs. lacquer debate is the matter of windshield wiper design. Chrysler in 1965 fell on the side of this traditional sweep, saying that it eliminates the blind spot in the center of the windshield left by some other cars.
So, have we forgotten anything in selling the new Chrysler to this prospect?
Yep, the misogyny. Who wouldn’t expect a kiss from someone walking through the door shopping for cars? You have to keep the salesmen awake on filmstrip day, I guess, and maybe a little daydreaming will do it.
Has the salesman done enough to sell you on a ’65 Chrysler? It’s sure making me long to go back in time and pick up the one I turned down years ago. See my link below if you’re interested in that old story.
Related CC Reading
Car Show Classics: 1965 Chrysler New Yorker (by me)
Curbside Classic: 1965 Chrysler New Yorker – The Last Great Chrysler? (by Paul N)
CC Outtake: 1965 Chrysler Newporker (by Paul N)
Now I want a 65 New Yorker more than I ever have. I have always been crazy over those clear/white taillight lenses. My grandfather’s 62 Cadillac used those too.
I would argue that in 1965 “traditional” wiper design would have been the opposing action rather than the parallel. But I love how the new design doesn’t leave a blind spot “like some other cars” – such as the New Yorker we tried to sell you last year.
I had that “drawer of surprises” in my 68 Newport. I don’t know how useful it was, but it was really cool to show off. I remember reading a road test of one of these Chryslers, and the testers complained that the a/c vents were perfectly positioned to blow the ashes off your cigarette as you were going for the ashtray. Of course, the proper answer was to flick your ashes out the vent window.
OTOH Chrysler, or what’s left of it, would find that if they brought back the idea it would be a good position for cupholders since the a/c would keep your water or soda cold in the summer an hour and the heat would keep your coffee warm in the winter.
Regarding Chrysler’s nice bump in sales for 1965, while some of it is certainly due to a more comprehensive line-up and attractive, better-built cars (which is a rather low bar for Chrysler), it’s been mentioned before that Studebaker’s demise helped. Those buyers had to go somewhere and it fits that they’d move to Chrysler products (although some surely went to AMC). I doubt GM or Ford saw many of them.
With that said, 1965 was the year that Chrysler styling had fully transitioned from Exner to Engel, finally shedding the last vestiges of the 1962 downsizing debacle. The former Ford stylist and Lynn Townsend did a fine job of going the safe, conservative route of taking GM’s last model cycle cars (and Mercury, too) throughout the mid-to-late sixties and giving them their own unique touches that did improve their appearance. Times were good.
Sadly, the belt-tightening seventies were just around the corner (beginning with the 1969 fuselage cars) and it would be another Chrysler roller coaster ride with quality taking the typical downturn, this time bringing them to the brink of bankruptcy with stuff like the A-body’s replacement, the 1976 F-body Volare/Aspen.
it’s been mentioned before that Studebaker’s demise helped.
Studebaker lost 25k sales from 1964 to 1965. Plymouth alone gained 175k sales in 1965.And I rather suspect that other brands picked up some of those 25k lost Studebaker sales.
Although the last vestiges of the 1962 downsizing debacle was rechristened and remodeled as a mid-size/intermediate for 1965 with the 1964 Polara becoming the 1965 Coronet in hope then Dodge could bring back some customers after they dropped that nameplate at the end of the 1959 model year while the Belvedere monicker was recycled for the intermediate line-up when the Fury became full-size again before a bigger reskin and redesign for the 1966 model year and they showed a taste of things to come for the mid-size car/intermediate car with the 1965 Charger II show car.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=af7TxjisIDY
Still, the last Exner design was the 1961 Dodge light pick-up truck who survived to 1971 but that would be for an other story. 😉
Grandpa bought a ’65 Plymouth Belvedere. He was proud of the fact that it was as big as last year’s Fury at a lower price.
I recall the clear headlamp covers – or was it the clear taillights? – didn’t make it all the way through the ’65 model year.
Old filmstrips are always a hoot. I watched a bunch of them in elementary school in the ’70s, and they all seemed to be 25 years old and voiced with that ubiquitous ’50s inflection.
I always wondered if the same guy voiced every film made in the 1950s, but now I assume that the voiceover industry must have had their own form of non-regional diction.
Radio annouoncers were trained that way. Always use schoolmarm “grammar” and always pronounce every syllable whether it’s normally there or not.
The end of those requirements was definitely noticeable. Compare the grammatical enunciation in this ’64 AMC film:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVaqjdXlHig
with the real people talking normally in this ’73 AMC film.
The thing I always find distracting about radio announcer grammar in old radio shows is that they insist on pronouncing “Los Angeles” with a hard “g,” which is NOT how you say it if you live here. (The English and Spanish pronunciations are difference, but neither is “An-gehh-less.”)
The last of the “old school” news readers recently retired from our local AM news station. Every “W” had about seven syllables, but you could always understand him!
Growing up on the SW side of Chicago, we lived a block away from Beverly Chrysler Plymouth and Southwest Chevrolet. My brother and I used to scrounge their trash dumpsters for interesting stuff. We found some of these filmstrips for the 1966 models. They came with those thin audio records that would prompt you to advance to the next slide. We held the filmstrips up to a lamp while the record played. The dealers used to hide the next years car models by the back of the lot by the alley before they officially went on sale.
Did you hang onto those filmstrips, Dave? They’re not exactly gold, but you could probably get a few bucks for them on eBay.
Hi Aaron. Unfortunately we never held on to them or the baseball/football card collections. Like the song goes “Regrets we’ve had a few”….
Our HS physics teacher showed us ’50s educational “Fisics Philms,” and we all cracked up at the dorky-looking kids in them. Not like us cool ’70s kids, right?
In hindsight, maybe those films and filmstrips were a way for teachers to take a break from more demanding modes of instruction.
I love the 65-66 New Yorker and would take a 66 first because of the 440 engine. Otherwise very similar except for the now red taillights. By the way my Ditzler Color Chip sheet show 24 colors for 1965. The special colors don’t stand out since Mopar uses the word poly and not metallic. If I had to guess the sixth might have been Patrician Gold Poly, below, which is a beautiful color in person.
As a child the back seat looks really comfy.
Beautiful cars, but don’t take my word regarding automotive aesthetics. I liked much of the last gasp of the Exner era and the fuselage Chryslers, too.
Great filmstrip resurrection. This brings a couple of things to mind.
First, filmstrips. Watching the YouTube version of this that you link is even better as it preserves the tone (“beep”) at the end of each frame’s narration. If the dealer had the fancy system, that would have signaled the projector to advance the frame. Otherwise, someone had to turn the knob to advance the strip. That was my job in elementary school.
Second, the script casually makes the connection between the female model and “the prospect”. I call BS on that as I really doubt that that many women in 1965 were coming into Chrysler-Plymouth dealers to shop for their own cars. Sure, some. But most ladies dressed like this one (in that scratchy wool suit! And btw she really looks and is dressed just like Babs in the final scene of Animal House.) would probably have had men do their shopping for them. I’m just saying. This lady is there solely for the interest of the guys who had to watch this thing on training night.
Third, yes, after watching this I too now want a ’65 New Yorker…and if I couldn’t swing that, one of the other 17 body styles available in the line. Seeing all of that splendid MoPar goodness, I can easily envision just how little attention these salesmen would have wanted to give to the Simca 1000s that Chrysler had plopped into many of their showrooms in 1965. I can only imagine the pitch that my dad probably got around about then when he went in for the Simca and refused to look at the cars they’d probably have rather sold him.
Fourth (finally) that crossing guard in the incredibly poorly created photo composition is even more creepy than anything that Art Fraham might have created. https://it.pinterest.com/pin/232779874469377984/ It’s kind of amazing that any of our parents ever let us out of the house to walk to school.
I kind of wondered what the crossing guard was doing with his right hand, but in your example…why is he smiling?
I’m sold, Newport hardtop please, oh and make it a 383 4 barrel with dual exhaust.
in Frost Turquoise Metallic.
Not Frost Turquoise, but this was on Hemmings Marketplace in July for $7,600, which seems like a great, great price.
https://www.hemmings.com/stories/hemmings-find-of-the-day-1965-chrysler-newport/
Thanks Aaron, that seems like a great price, given I live in Australia, if that was for sale here, they would be asking upwards of $50000, so approx 12000 AU$ plus shipping, other costs I’m not sure about, getting the car checked out etc.
Not quite ready yet though, I really envy the prices and choice you guys have over there.
One thing, those exhaust tips would have to go ! 🙂
WOW. Great price indeed. (It would seem anyway).
Beautiful cars. I think I’m wanting one now.
So I’ve watched this video several times. My dad never was a Chrysler man and I didn’t know why until I was 20. We were looking for a car for me and big Chryslers were cheap! I had my heart set on a 1978 New Yorker Brougham were looked at with something like 30,000 miles. And it was selling for $2000. But that when I learned that Chryslers could be great or horrible.
As for the wipers-whole I get the sweeping pattern, I never did understand who decided that having the driver’s side clear the water while the other threw more water on it!!
On occasion my wife will see a 5th Avenue for sale and ask about owning one.
Great article
Thanks Chip! I have never thought about how the “normal” pattern for windshield wipers is counterproductive until now. Looks like there’s no winning with windshield wipers. 🙂