CC has not featured any Imperial models from the early 1970s, and it is not hard to understand why: By this time, the Imperial brand was on its last gasp. With annual sales in the low five-figure range, these were not common even when new. And while I never cease to be amazed at the depth of old cars still plying the streets of the West Coast, good luck finding a ragged curbside example of one today. Car shows are realistically your only chance at seeing one of these Imperials in the metal.
So let’s take a closer look at this 1970 Imperial LeBaron I found at a car show last summer – who knows when we’ll get a chance to see another one.
Imperial has always been a niche product for Chrysler. Even in its best year (1957), they moved only 37,593 examples. By the late 1960s and early 1970s, Lincoln was routinely outselling Imperial 4:1, while Cadillac was moving roughly 12 cars for every one Imperial sold. In 1970, the year of our feature car, Imperial found just 11,816 buyers across its entire lineup.
Although the Imperial brand would go through many “lasts” over the years, 1970 would be the last year Chrysler marketed Imperial as a true standalone marque. Starting in 1971, the Imperial would be badged as the “Imperial by Chrysler” and would no longer have its own separate brochure, having to share pages with the Chrysler brochure.
While there are multiple reasons for this decline (which we will get into shortly), part of Imperial’s problem was the lack of an entry in the red-hot Personal Luxury Coupe segment. In 1970, Cadillac moved 23,842 Eldorados, which was by then a four-year-old model. Lincoln sold 21,432 examples of the Mark III in 1970, its third year on the market. Both these single-model sales numbers trounced the sales of the entire Imperial lineup that year. The market was shifting to the PLC, for which Chrysler would endure a long wait: Not until the 1975 Cordoba would Chrysler have a PLC, and Imperial wouldn’t morph into a PLC until 1981, right at the tail end of the PLC era.
1970 would be the last year the Imperial was offered in two series: Crown and LeBaron. Beginning in 1971 the Imperial Lebaron would be the sole model on offer. Both the Crown and LeBaron were available in a two- and four-door hardtop configuration. Other than the split bench seat and vinyl roof (both standard on the LeBaron, optional on the Crown), I can see little difference between the two models. Buyers apparently agreed, as only 1,597 Crowns were produced vs. 10,229 LeBaron models. Of those LeBarons, 8,426 were four-door hard tops, making the featured car by far the most popular Imperial variant sold in 1970.
Every 1970 Imperial came with a 440 cu. in. 4-bbl. V8 producing 350 gross HP. While the numbers sound impressive and were surely more than adequate, they trailed both the Lincoln (460/365HP) and Cadillac (472/375HP) that year. While the real-world differences were minuscule, in this class, bragging rights matter.
1968 Chevrolet Caprice. More than a passing resemblance.
The 1970 Imperial faced other headwinds. While the front end is certainly imposing in person, the front ends of most full-sized cars from this era overflow with presence and substance. To my eyes, the front end of the Imperial bears a bit too much resemblance to a 1968 Chevrolet Caprice, especially the grille. The “Woodlites” that the Imperial sprouted in 1972 are a much more distinctive (if polarizing) look, but at least they can’t be mistaken for anything else.
The situation doesn’t get much better as you move further back. The bloated fuselage styling introduced in 1969 does the Imperial no favors, especially compared to the crisp, creased lines that Cadillac and Lincoln were sporting in 1970. Major body panels, including the roof and glass, were by now shared with lesser Chrysler models.
The wide, flat dashboard was more 1960 than 1970, and it was also shared with lesser Chrysler models. By 1970 Lincoln and Cadillac were sporting driver-centric “pod” style dashboards suitable for the emerging “Me” generation. Even Plymouth and Dodge were sporting pod-style dashboards by 1970. And while wing windows weren’t entirely obsolete by 1970, they were definitely on their way out, and both Lincoln and Cadillac had dispensed with them by then.
The back seat tries its best to hold up its end of the luxury bargain, with robe rails on the front seatbacks, leather “oh shit” straps, and a weird padded thingie on the C-pillar. Was this some early form of side impact protection? Or perhaps a pillow for tired passengers to rest their weary heads upon? The brochure is silent on the matter, so as usual I’ll leave it for the commenters to speculate.
The rear is probably the least distinctive view of the Imperial. While the corner bumper extensions that hint at fender blades are visually interesting, the brake lights could just as easily have come from a contemporary Buick or Mercury. You know how when you recognize someone’s face, but you can’t quite place it? It’s like that. In 1969 the turn signals were at least sequential, but in 1970 even that bit of distinctiveness was gone. It’s not like Chrysler couldn’t do great rear ends: The rear treatment of the 1970 Chrysler 300, with its unbroken full-width taillight, is a much more cohesive design.
The base price for the Imperial LeBaron 4-door hardtop in 1970 was $6,328 (about $51,000 in 2023), making it the most expensive model in the Imperial lineup. This lines up pretty close to the base price of a 1970 Continental ($6,211) and Sedan DeVille ($6,118). Throw in a few essential options like A/C ($475), power door locks ($73), power seat ($120), AM radio ($165), and whitewall tires ($46) like this example has and you are looking at over $7,000 ($57,000 adjusted).
However, the Imperial’s real competition wasn’t across the street, but across the showroom. When compared to the mechanically identical Chrysler New Yorker, which started out at $4,762 ($38,600 adj.) in 4-door hardtop guise, it is easy to see why so few Imperials found buyers.
Related Reading
My Curbside Classic: 1973 Imperial LeBaron By Chrysler
Fender Blade On A Fuselage: The Design Of The 1973 Imperial by Chrysler
Vintage Review: 1972 Imperial LeBaron – Road Test Reviews The Facelifted Fancy Fuselage
I fully understand all of the reasons it was not a successful product but dang I want one. This car is bloody beautiful. Perhaps the new Ram Tungsten is the new Imperial LeBaron. How many will pony up 100K for a Ram? Sure is nice though. GM, Ford, and Stellantis are all making 4 door luxo barge sedans again. They just happen to be quad cab pickups with 5 foot boxes.
Great minds think alike, Tom: I wrote up a dealer filmstrip comparing the 1970 Imperial to the 1970 Cadillac for Wednesday. Even the factory seemed to know that it didn’t have a chance against the Cadillac, let alone the New Yorker.
The price difference tells the story. You could buy a New Yorker plus a Toyota for the same price as one Imperial.
The exact same engine, transmission, and suspension, but at least $2000 more because of the badge? This may explain why these were such poor sellers.
Even a lowly AM radio and whitewalls extra at this price point?
That and the anonymity. Caddys were similarly priced but when you bought one in 1970 everyone knew You Had A Cadillac.
I believe you meant to compare the Imperial to the ’69 Caprice with loop bumper and hidden headlights, not the ’68.
I’ve never seen a fuselage or later Imperial without a vinyl roof. Now I know why–less than 2,000 Crowns made.
The pre-fuselage Chryslers had low beltlines and fenders with tall greenhouses that made the cars look smaller than others, so they went to the other extreme for these, and the proportions are just bad–plus they look too much alike.
This is a good looking car. Have always liked the 1965-1970 Impala and Caprice models, both two and four door. Though I prefer the ’69-’70 models without fender skirts, which were an option those years on these cars.
I agree, I was surprised to see it compared to the Imperial. I didn’t see a resemblance at all. The ’69, yes.
Those fender skirts do not ((and did not)) look good on the “68 Caprice”.
The door mirror looks rather out of place as well.
Yes, that is what I was looking for (although the Imperial’s corner lights are more 1968 Caprice than 1969 or 1970). Again, a look that you feel like you’ve seen before, but can’t quite place.
The C pillar cushions were indeed pillows for tired passengers to rest their heads on since there were no rear seat headrests. These were better integrated on the subsequent ’74-78 generation, and the brochures for those did describe them as pillows.
The fuselage Mopars all look too much alike to me; from the side view I have trouble telling them apart, and the Imperial interior is only slightly nicer than in other big Chryslers. It’s no wonder few people ponied up for an Imperial. The 1968 model was the last one that was truly distinctive (if less so than the ’57-66). By 1970 they weren’t even trying.
And a very clever solution at that.
I guess because I’m old I knew *instantly* that those C pillar bolsters were for resting your head on after a hard day doing whatever it is rich folks do .
I think they’re a great idea having had to sleep uncomfortably many times in the back seat, usually with my jacket / shirt wadded up for a pillow .
-Nate
My first impression also was “that looks like a Chevy” .
When new I thought all these Mopars looked fst but looking at it now it’s a very beautiful automobile if still too darn big for me to want it .
-Nate
Say what you will, but to me, this is a darn nice looking Imperial. Good looking on the outside and love the beautiful leather interior!
Starting in 1971, the Imperial would be badged as the “Imperial by Chrysler” and would no longer have its own separate brochure, having to share pages with the Chrysler brochure.
I found a 1973 separate Imperial brochure too.
1974 Imperial brochure
As I alluded to in the piece, Chrysler’s handling of the Imperial brand was very inconsistent in the 1970s. Was it marketed as a standalone make or a Chrysler model? Depends on what year you are talking about.
1970 might have been the first “last” year of the Imperial brand, but it wasn’t the last.
That’s one nice looking car.
Interesting thought, what if there was a larger version of the Cordoba planned as an Imperial PLC to compete with Eldorado and Mark IV/ V? Surprised this never happened back in the late 1960’s/ early 1970’s.
The biggest flaw imo was the generic instrument panel, overly similar between all Chrysler and Imperial models. As to styling the Imperials is cleaner and more sophisticated than either Cad or Lincoln, albeit not as formal and pretentious, and that’s exactly why I like it better.
As to driving one, they were every bit as powerful and handled better than the competition but were not quite as quiet and refined, still, the Imp seemed much more refined and luxurious overall than a NY’er, based on the ’69 LeBaron and ’72 NYer that we had. A ’70 LeBaron in Dark Charcoal with black vinyl roof and black brocade interior that an acquaintance bought new is about the most elegant luxury car I’ve ever seen, period.
My favorite noise in the world is when the headlight doors close on these,, sounds like a garbage truck hitting a power pole !! lol
I recall the noise when the openers are grinding , trying to open the covers that are “not opening”.
The “bang” sound when you open the hood and manually release the covers comes to mind too.
After ’71”, the ones on my aunt/uncles, “68 LTD” stopped working.
We left them permanently open.
One big obstacle Imperial faced was depreciation. During this era, Cadillac could still boast about low depreciation rates, as there were plenty of people lining up to buy clean 2-3 year-old Cadillacs. The used car market apparently viewed the Imperial as a fancy Chrysler, as it had one of the highest depreciation rates of that era, if I recall correctly.
These cars weren’t too common when new. One of the bankers in our town was a Chrysler loyalist, and he regularly drove an Imperial. But his cars were the only Imperials I can remember in our town when I was young.
Cadillacs sold in the 70’s because they were Cadillacs. Lincolns sold in the 70’s because they were cars that felt luxurious and because they were solid alternatives to Cadillacs. Imperials of the 70’s were high-trim New Yorkers, and everyone knew it. They were a luxury car for someone who was a diehard Chrysler guy.
As Geeber notes, their resale value was awful. Also, they felt far less refined than the other two, especially in the fuselage generation, when all big Mopars felt less quiet and refined than the competition.
All that said, I would love to own this car!
Well put J.P. ~
MoPar owners are a different breed, either you ‘get’ it or you don’t .
I’ve had more than a few MoPars and never had a bad one in spite of a couple being serious beaters .
I still look wistfully at every early Barracuda with Slant Six ……
-Nate
Imperials were more than just high trim NYers, there actually were some chassis differences between Imps and NYers, and there was quite a discussion on this topic at Allpar a few years ago. Some wanted to continue to call the ’69 to ’73 models “D-body”, as was the previous generation, because the differences were significant, ie: parts that did not interchange, chassis tuning, &c, though officially that nomenclature was not used. Having owned both a fuselage LeBaron and a NYer, there were significant differences in feel, ride and quietness, even though the 440/727 powertrains were the same. It was not just a gussied-up NYer, though dumb moves like sharing the IP surely made it seem so to some.
In hindsight, since GM seemed dead set on degrading Cadillac interiors, there would seem to have been a clearer place for Imperial. A vacuum, in fact. Just maintain (improve?) the quality and Imperial could have been positioned as an uber-Cadillac brand. But I guess there was that problem of image – for years Imperial had been seen as the ‘poor relation’ of the luxury three, and often a darned strange-looking one at that.
Maybe if Dodge had been repositioned where it should have been and not a Plymouth-wannabe, then Chrysler could have been jacked upmarket, and sent Cadillac-hunting with Imperial as a superior luxury brand with no American equal, something akin to an American Rolls-Royce or Mercedes Grosser?
About as likely as rain falling up, I know, but it’s fun to imaginify. Cheap fun, too.
I like this car. I like the front end. The tail lights look ok to me. The goofy pillows on the C pillars make me laugh as I imagine the car keeled into a turn and its well-appointed passengers sliding across the enormous back seat and slamming into those things.
But to your point, even as a 10 year old, I had no idea what made an Imperial any different from a New Yorker. As a person with a life-long interest in sorting and categorizing objects, the Imperial was just a head-scratcher to me.
$2000 is a lot of money today, and really a lot of money in 1970.
It was the ’74 and ’75 Imperials that really, really confused me. My uncle had a ’76 New Yorker Brougham – I was 11 years old when it was new – so I knew what a New Yorker looked like and saw several of those around. But every now and then I’d spot what looked exactly like a New Yorker except that it had Imperial and LeBaron badges, and an unusually shaped rear side marker lamp. I had no idea why this was until years later. There was also a ’67 Imperial sedan a block away from where I lived that was clearly a relative of our ’66 Dodge Polara, and a fuselage Imperial coupe that looked like any other ’69-73 big Mopar to me except it was a few inches longer – really huge even by ’70s standards. I only learned a few years ago that Imperial was a separate brand from Chrysler in that era.
I remember around ’78 or ’79, people were buying Toyotas, driving them for a year or two, and selling them for more than they bought them for (of course if they replaced it with the same model Toyota, they likely had to pay more for it as well). I wasn’t around in the 50’s when I think Cadillac was much the same, used ones really held much of their original value. I don’t know when this stopped, but I would guess sometime in the late 60’s or early 70’s when the cars were a bit more cost reduced and higher volume so not as exclusive.
Imperial seemed to do this in a way too (except for volume which was low) but cost reduction was done first by a non-unique platform starting in ’69, then the changing of Imperial from a brand to a model in ’71, and in ’76 the Imperial name disappeared for a number of years but what had been the Imperial was now sold as the New Yorker Brougham, albeit with a bit less equipment to sell at a lower price. Other than the less equipment, the Imperial seemed still seemed to be built with expensive material like the die cut metal grill vanes, whereas by this time Cadillac seemed to show more signs of cost cutting (maybe to get the higher volume built?)….but because Cadillac had the reputation for high resale in the past, it still maintained that at least for awhile, whereas the Imperial seemed always to suffer from high depreciation, even while maintaining some of these expensive touches (but let the name of the make and the model degrade over time). I think in 1976 Chrysler must have been saying something like, “We can’t compete at the high end luxury anymore, but we still have to get some of our money out of the 1974 redesign of the Imperial, so we’ll just sell it as the deluxe New Yorker which actually seemed to work (I think the New Yorker Broughams sold in significantly higher volumes than the Imperial, likely due to the lower selling price of the Brougham).
Chrysler seemed really to be backstepping quickly from ’75 to ’78 when it discontinued all the old full sized models by ’79. What was selling other than the Cordoba during that time? And before ’75 their mantra was “no junior editions”…it seemed the gas shortages impacted Chrysler first, though of course Cadillac also felt it, but delayed a few years…the debasing of Imperial continued on to Chrysler which by that time really seemed to be like a “deluxe Dodge” but otherwise not being very unique (kind of like Mercury became at their end).
It wasn’t just Imperial that had strange naming…I think you could say that of most of Chrysler Corp in the later 70’s;
I have to say I don’t dislike it. I’m actually so unfamiliar with it that if you had told me nothing about it and deleted the badges I might have wondered if Fuzzyman had cranked up his AI generator again.
The headrest side pillows are a great touch, IMO, it is exactly what is called for in that spot, just like on an airplane when you get the windowseat and just want to rest your head on something soft (and fixed in place!) instead of a hard surface. Although after the other day’s news I’ll be skipping window seats forevermore, methinks.
But surely the price, I know you indicated it seemed sort of high…today that $50k equivalent gets you a fairly low end crew cab full size pickup that may or may not have more interior and “trunk” space…
In the end, everyone who wants a Lincoln has a Lincoln, everyone else has a Cadillac (or two), why not be an individual and rock a 1970 Imperial? The name alone (or only?) conveys superiority. As you said you won’t see a beater one everywhere you look. And never mind the poors that only sprung for the New Yorker when new that thought they were so smart, if you didn’t spend the extra 30% just to show that it doesn’t matter to you, then it means you had to ask what the price was and we all know that means that you couldn’t really afford it. That’s more than half of what this class of car is all about anyway. There should have been an Imperial F.U.Money edition.
Glad you did this needed write-up, Tom.
The ’70 is my favorite fuselage, Imperial or otherwise. Love the car! The grill and taillights work perfectly and the 3-inch longer axle-dash vs Chrysler gives it added presence. The Crown had always been my favorite because it could be had without the vinyl roof, which I don’t think works on the fuselage. But these days the vinyl roof on a LeBaron can be removed to make a really slick car with a smaller backlight and the top-of-line interior. The ’70 was remiss in one detail: it didn’t get skirts for that one year only. Today you could buy a ’71 LeBaron 4-door hardtop that has no front vent windows, and swap the headlight covers to make it look like a ’70.
Re: PLCs, given their limited budget it appears that Chrysler Corp. might have tried to make just that with their fuselage coupes. The roofs were very sporty and the interiors were available with bucket seats.
Imperial’s best opportunity in the early 70s might have been to use the new Dodge Coronet (name of which means small crown) to make a tweener between full-sized American luxury cars and Mercedes-Benz. Tech sophistication and quality would have been the focus, with pricing landing in between the two segments. A bigger and better Seville, Imperial needed to carve out a space in the luxury market that they could call their own. And that had a future.
It’s interesting to see these diminished Imperials carry a higher pricetag than competing Lincolns and Cadillacs. There was a time when the Imperial justified it – “America’s most carefully built car” – and they were noticeably nicer and grander than the competition. But what made them think this car deserved more money than a Cadillac?
My great aunt and uncle, Imperial buyers since their ’34 Airflow, had one of these in black, which replaced a stunning black ’65 LeBaron, and was in turn replaced by a yellow/creme ’73 with a white vinyl roof. Not surprisingly, I have the haziest memories of the ’70.
I’d forgotten how crude the interior back window frame was. These fuselage LeBarons had a full back window that was made smaller by filler panels. Less than elegant.
They also traded it in after only three years, which was unusual for them.
“Mr Drysdale” drove up to “Jed’s house in a “burgundy color, Imperial like this.
Episode was on “Friday eve”, 1-5-24.
One of the few episodes where “Milburn” is actually driving.
“The Beverly Hillbillies” for those who don’t know what I’m referring too.
I do realize that wing windows were losing their status then, and Chrysler and BMW were the last makes to hold onto them…but seriously, those gigantic coffee-cranks?! On what’s supposed to be a luxury car?! I found that insulting on Lincolns, but at least there was a power option (which was actually standard-issue from ’63 thru ’65). No wonder people considered Imperial a cocky upstart; heck, they were still being referred to as “Chrysler Imperial” by the common masses as far back as 1962 (see “It’s A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World” for the proof). Upstarts are always viewed in a denigrating light…or, at least, back then they were. I can’t figure how today’s upstarts have survived as long as they have…unless it’s just because the creature-comforts that used to be luxury items have since migrated to blue-collar vehicles, so the lines of car classes have so blurred that nobody can decipher the difference anymore.
I do have to admit, I really wish to see one of these Imperials up close and personal, at least to see if its trunk matches or exceeds my car’s trunk–which already puts all other sedan trunks I’ve seen to shame.
I absolutely love the fuselage Imperial, especially the ’70. I covet a crown coupe in black with a white interior and no vinyl roof.
The price of an Imperial was always heavily discounted by the dealer making them slightly better bargains compared to the competition. Either causing or anticipating their poor resale. I owned a 72 Imperial coupe in triple black. Great car!
In 1977 I had just graduated college and moved to NJ. I needed a car and had almost no money. I found a 1969 Imperial LeBaron that was used by a funeral home. I think it had 18k miles on it. With the help of a huge interest rate loan, I was able to buy it for 2,000 out the door.
My prior car that had died was a MGB. Holy cow. What a difference. I really liked the Imperial and so did my wife and Old English Sheepdog.
The car must have had every option available. The number of switches on the driver’s door were too numerous to remember. I did think the electric vent windows were amazing.
My parents were Cadillac owners and their Sedan Deville had nothing on the LeBaron.
I had it for four or five years before I replaced it with a Volvo.
Although not my typical kind of car, it was great and only let me down one time. I won’t comment on its fuel efficiency. It must have had a really large gas tank.
Iaccoca could have grown the Imperial “Brand” in the 1980’s. The large “R” bodies could have had a longer wheelbase Imperial sedan, coupe, formal sedan and limousine to compliment the Cordoba based Imperial personal coupe. Iaccoca did amazing things to get Lincoln on the map. Lincoln sure could use him today. Also, Iaccoca had the same passion as Edsel Ford did toward Lincoln. That’s the problem with Lincoln today. No excitement or passion with the vehicles. Really wish Imperial was back but not as that eye sore concept of a few years ago when Daimler owned Chrysler.
No matter what brand or make of car whether Corvette Lincoln Chrysler Cadillac Chevy hideaway headlights just never ticked my “floats my boat” box. The cars always seemed like they were sleepy without their headlights showing. And then when the covers were up it just seemed like an awful big square hole with headlights behind it. The Corvettes were the strangest to me either rotated like the mid-60s or flipped up like the ’70s, again odd.