(first posted 7/10/2013) Automakers responded to the mid 1970s gas crisis in a variety of different ways. Captive imports, dropping the availability of big block engines, revising axle ratios, etc. Plymouth may have been ahead of the time with offering the Feather Duster; a whole trim level dedicated to increased fuel economy. 
The Feather Duster has to rank up there as one of the more oddly names cars which is perhaps why it is more remembered today than its similar in concept sibling; the Dodge Dart Lite. For 1976 only Plymouth offered the $50.56 Feather Duster Fuel Economy Package which turned your normal Duster into a Feather Duster. Included in the package was a very tall 2.94:1 axle ratio, special exhaust, re-calibrated single barrel carburetor and distributor. In the quest to reduce weight aluminum parts were substituted for the hood, inner trunk structure, bumper mounts, intake manifold and transmission housing on the manual gearbox. This diet took 187lbs off the weight of a normal Duster which is quite significant on a car that started out under 3,000lbs. 
Transmission offerings were either a four speed manual or three speed automatic. The result was advertised fuel economy of 24 mpg city and 36 mph highway but acceleration suffered slightly. It may not sound like much to modern ears but it was quite impressive for a car of its size and era. On paper the fuel economy was quite close to the much smaller compacts. 
This particular Feather Duster likely won’t achieve anywhere close to those mileage estimates as its fugal slant six has been tossed in favor of a high performance 360cid small block V8. Somewhat ironically the Feather Duster’s weight advantage made it in demand with racers looking for an extra edge on the competition and many have been similarly modified. 
Even the hubcaps were drilled with speed holes! This same partial hub cap with the holes was quite popular with fleet and police vehicles right into the nineteen eighties. I’ve never been able to figure out why, generally, the police models had the holes but the civilian ones didn’t. Anyone know?
Plain and simple. The ultimate Mopar. If it didn’t have the scoop and tach, this would be the perfect sleeper.
This car would make a good sleeper. The scoops and hood mounted tach scream, “look what I got at Wal-Mart” . . . . New – I don’t believe these were offered in California . . .
It would make an even better sleeper with it’s slant-six back, given a Clifford 6=8 treatment. . .
Comrade, I was thinking of the same thing. Additionally usingredients fiberglass fenders and a gear vendorso over drive. I saw an article some where about modified Buick Sequential injection systems on the straight six.
Agreed, my 76 ran a 3” hedman header to a 21/2 single exhaust with 😎Cherry bomb. It held its own with most 340’s and p’d off the bowtie & oval boys too.
I always thought the holes in the hubcaps on HD fleet vehicles was air circulation for some wheel bearing heat issues with disk brakes in hard use.
To get heat out of the hub area.
Ah yes, the Feather Duster. I didn’t see many around back in the day. By 1976, the Duster was relegated to cheap also-ran status while all of the attention was paid to the new Volare, as both were in showrooms for all of 1976. If only Chrysler could have kept the old A body around through 1980 instead.
These mods sort of irritate me. If you are racing the car, great. But if you are showing it off at a car show, you have removed pretty much the whole reason for it being a Feather Duster. Sorry, there were no 360-powered Feather Dusters. Oh well, at least its not a SBC/THM.
You could buy a Duster and a Volare at the same time? Highly illogical Captain!
Chrysler seemed to like to do that back then. I think they saw it as a way to cover the cheap end of the segment with the old car that was pure profit, and to concentrate on the higher end models of the newer one to try to make the new model more profitable. IIRC, they did the same thing with the old L body Omni/Horizon while the newer Sundance/Shadow made its intro. GM seems to have followed this plan in more recent years, squeezing another year out of an old model to fill the fleet channel while trying to sell the new one at retail.
Kinda like they do today with the dart and the avenger. I read somwhere that one can get a loaded up avenger for around the same price as a base dart, that gets an avenger with a 283 hp v6 and 29 mpg. Suposedly
2018 and 2019 Ram 1500 pickups are both still in production as of today (I assume the 2018 design is dated 2019 at this point). Same rationale, the old design sells a lot cheaper.
Sorry, I know this comment is really late to the game, but I think the Aspen and Volare were somewhat delayed in introduction, a bit late in the model year. So that might have been why they kept the Dart and Valiant in production for part of the 1976 model year.
I’d say other than obviously swapping out the slant 6 and adding the scoops/spoilers, it appears pretty original. It wouldn’t take too much effort to restore it back to 100% stock status. If someone’s preserving a feather duster to this degree, I’m fine with a few personal touches along the way.
The hood tach is ugly though. That’s a part that should never grace the hood of anything other than a GTO
…or a Rebel Machine.
Or a GSX….
Good point, Ford and Mercury menaged to sell both the Maverick/Comet and the Granada/Monarch during the 1975-76-77 model years.
We could wonder what if the Feather Duster had arrived one or 2 years early?
Don’t forget the Ford LTD-II/Mercury Marquis (Fox) alongside the Taurus and Sable for 1986/87 . .
No, the Fox Marquis/LTD only made it part way into the 1986 model year. I owned an 86 Marquis wagon, and learned that production stopped in maybe January of 86 or something, making 1986 a super-low production year for those cars. I don’t think the Taurus/Sable were quite ready in summer 1985 when they would have started building the 86 cars, so they kept cranking out the Foxes for just a bit until the replacements were ready.
Technically there were no 1986 Fox LTD/Marquis built, although they were available until January of 1986. Ford parts cataloging, shop manuals, and electrical/vacuum/technical manuals were only printed for the years ’83-’86 for those cars. The only ones that may have been titled as ’86s would be ones sold in states that had model year laws (just as some states titled the earliest Edsels as ’57s).
I have to disagree with you, because I owned one. The only change for 1986 was inclusion of the mandatory rear high mounted stoplight (which my car had), and as I said, they were only produced for the early part of the model year. Mine had a 1986 VIN and a 1986 owners manual. According to Wiki, a Georgia plant built the Fox body LTD/Marquis into December of 85 and the Chicago plant built them into January of 86. I remember looking into production figures, and seem to remember that there were only about 3K of the Marquis wagons built as 86 models.
By that time the federal law prohibited titling the car in the year sold, they had to be titled as the official model year who’s standards it was built to meet. The entire rules are convoluted as to what defines a model year but the basics are if it is produced on or after Jan 2nd of a given calender year that is the model year of that run. Ford could have continued producing 1985 model year LTDs until Dec 31st 1985. However since they did want to hedge their bets, in case the Taurus wasn’t well recieved and the LTD generated a bunch of people or fleets who wanted to get in on the last RWDs, they started production of a 1986 model year LTD in Sep 1985 just in case they needed to continue production until after Jan 2nd 1986, if needed, which they did. So yes there are 1986 model year LTDs.
Yes, there were 1986 Foxes, the Chicago plant was still making them until mid way through model year. Said so on the MSRP stickers too. kept as stop gap and for frightened older buyers. [Just kidding, they warmed to the new cars after all.]
Co-worker at time ordered a new Sable and had to wait nearly 4 months. Dealer offered a new [Fox] Marquis, when wait got pushed further out. But once it came in, wow!
I bought my 86 Marquis when it was 5 years old. By then, these things had resale value in the range of dogshit. I picked up a nice loaded car that looked good (for what it was) and was comfy for absolute peanuts. I liked the way it drove better than the 85 Crown Vic that I replaced it with. Problem was that Mom wanted to sell me the 85, and it had half the miles on it that the Marquis did. Almost immediately, I wished I had not made that deal.
The Maverick/Comet was not supposed to overlap with the Granada/Monarch but since it had a big sales surge due to the gas crisis Ford figured they would keep making it and move the Granada/Monarch to a slightly higher level of Broughamyness along with a higher price making them a “premium” compact while the Maverick and Comet soldiered on as economy cars.
For that matter, they should’ve just thoroughly reskinned and refined the A-body to take them through the end of the RWD compact era. The end result wouldn’t have looked much different from the Aspen/Volare but would’ve been much cheaper to develop and not suffered two or more full model year’s worth of first-year teething troubles.
Very rough estimates here–please be kind:
If this improved all-round mileage by, say, 5 mpg (perhaps 23 to 28), for someone driving 12K a year at .75/gal, the price of the package would pay off in well less than a year. (saving 93 gal/yr, or $69.74)
If I’m way off, though, please let me know.
That said, I don’t remember this package whatsoever–cool idea! Indeed, highway cruising at 36 mpg (if obtainable in the real world) would be an accomplishment for a car of that size then…
Aunty Entity : But how the world turns. One day, cock of the walk. Next, a feather duster.
I’ve actually only heard of the Feather Duster – not the Dart Lite. The Feather Duster had a memorable, punny name.
Here’s the thing – much of what you see may be period mods. From what my dad’s told me (I wasn’t born until 1981) both of the people he knew with Feather Dusters bought them specifically for racing. Granted, they were both purchased as couple-year-old used cars, but people knew about the lightweight bits. One swapped in a 340 – he can’t recall what the other guy did – but they were doing this back in the late-70s. Lots of Mopar guys knew these were just a few parts bin mods from being pretty quick machines.
Should have been called the Nerf Dart 🙂
When it quit running, it became a Lawn Dart.
(I’ll be here all week!)
This car is junk in my eyes now that it has been “customized”. What a way to ruin a rare car. A TBI unit hidden under the factory /6 air cleaner…now that would be cool to me.
I agree. Wasn’t the point of the Feather Duster Package for it to be lighter so the owner could achieve better gas mileage? Tossing out the original engine for a larger, heavier engine negates the whole point of the deal, does it not? And so it goes; probably aren’t any original Feather Dusters left. Or could there be one or two un-customized FD’s extant? Hmm . . .
Is that the original steering wheel? I’m curious.
If you ever drove one of these turds you would instantly know why the engine swap was a great idea. I thought the regular six Duster was intolerably slow until I drove a Feather Duster which belonged to a customer of ours who was loaded, but obsessed with getting high gas mileage for some reason. After seeing some of the goofy stuff he did to his “big car”, a Satellite Sebring in that awful frosty green, like magnets on the fuel line, a carb spacer with screen to break up the gas particles, etc, I asked him one day, “Why don’t you stop doing all this stuff to your cars, wasting money for nothing, and just put gas in and drive them?” No answer. Last I heard, he was driving a Smart 4 2. He’s got to be in his 80’s now.
Having driven a Feather Duster (friend has one), it’s fine to drive. If anything, the FD is better than most, because it has deeper axle gears (many had 2.76s) due to the OD 4-speed.
The Feather Duster/Dart Lite rear axle ratio was 2.94 with the 4-speed (versus 3.23 with that transmission in the non-FeatherLite A-bodies). 2.76 was, is, and would have been intolerably tall with the stick shift—dangerously slow from a stop, and very tough on the clutch—and so was not offered. Printed material says the automatic FeatherLite cars got the same 2.76 axle as regular A-bodies, but I have in mind a medium-dim recall that some might have come through with 2.45s.
Many automatic A-bodies did have 2.76…never seen 2.45 in an A-body, but I won’t say none were built.
With the A-body’s short tires, the 3.09 low gear, and the slant’s heavy flywheel and low-end pull, 2.76 would probably be fine.
No, 2.76 + manual trans (even with 3.09 first gear) = bad. That’s the uniform, consistent, nigh-on unanimous report of those who’ve actually tried it.
I’ve driven one. It’s perfectly fine. Wouldn’t want to try it with a light flywheel, but with a stock drive train and short tires (I think 205/70R14) it’s actually nice. My only real gripe is the large 1-2 split.
Alrighty, then: because we’re in pretend-land about this, we can just disregard the contradiction between your specification of “stock drivetrain”—manual trans + 2.76 rear axle is not a stock drivetrain—so you’ve got the role of Exception to Prove the Rule in this play! 😀
(Terms and conditions apply: vehicle to be driven at or below sea level, on flat or downhill roads only, with not more than one passenger or equivalent weight in cargo. See in-traffic for details.)
Dodge Aspen, 225/A833OD, 2.76-no issues. 4 people in the car (my aunt’s car-I drove, since I was the DD), no issues at all. Underpowered…a little. (That 1-2 ratio split is huge.) But perfectly acceptable.
I know I’m a little late here but just happen to have an all original 1976 feather duster. In pretty good condition mind you. And it is for sale.
Chrysler didn’t have a small car at a time when everyone else did. After playing around with captive imports like the Mitsubishi Colt and the Plymouth Cricket, and failing to launch a domestic product to compete against the Beetle, Gremlin, Vega and Pinto, selling silly packages on an old car was all Chrysler had. Everyone who wanted a Duster, a Valiant or a Dart by this time, had one.
The Feather Duster was a pitiful ‘hail mary’ pass for dealers tired of telling potential customers strolling through their showrooms that they didn’t have a domestic subcompact to sell them, but that they had an antique car that got gas mileage as good as those subcompacts did.
I recall Chrysler ads for the Duster comparing it to the VW Beetle. There was no way that someone interested in a Beetle would have compared it to a Duster, but there you go when you have nothing to sell a shopper interested in a subcompact.
So, when I see this car I see a more modern version of a Studebaker Scotsman, Chrysler hoping against hope that they can find folks willing to consider buying a dull old car no one wanted anymore, but was cheap to buy and cheap to own.
Yuk.
And this one. So sad. Not even a real Feather Duster.
I like your comparison between the Feather Duster and the Studebaker Champion Scotsman quite a bit. The 76 Duster/Dart Sport was an ancient car (7 seasons was an eternity back then). The difference was that Studebaker was configuring for low price and Chrysler was configuring for maximum mileage. The Mopar vehicle was certainly more expensive to engineer and equip than the Scotsman (which was done completely on the cheap) but the Feather Duster was certainly cheaper to do in the short run. After all, the L body Horizon was due as a 1978 model. I have forgotten if there was a Volare equivalent for 77, although by 77 everyone had (temporarily) forgotten about fuel mileage again.
Several times I have told of my 1976 Dart Lite.
It had the 225 4 speed. The shifter was a Hurst, but that car could barely get out of its own way, but my city commute at the time didn’t matter, and I was happy for any extra fuel economy I could get.
I bought the car when Wifey went back to work after four years of having and caring for our kids, as we only had the Reliant plus mom’s 1979 AMC Concord, but she still drove a lot at that time.
The photo shows the car was in very good shape when I bought it in May, 1983. I kept it for three years, selling it after we bought our 1984 Chrysler E-Class.
BTW, the Dart had under-dash factory air, which sort of worked, power steering, brakes and my aging am/fm cassette deck. Our son called it the “race car”! Our daughter just called it a “bomb”, adopting that kindly term from me and thinking it was very funny, but she was only two at the time!
I had some rust spots fixed and really enjoyed cruising around in it. Although no comparison to my old avatar, it was mine, it was unique and I took considerable pride in it.
Oddly enough, every time our son rode with me in the back seat, the first thing he always did, regardless of the weather, hot or cold, he just HAD to pop open the rear windows! Chip off the old block, eh?
I post the photo again.
In 1976, I was spending the summer with my Grandfolks in Northeast Missouri. That year, they decided to attend one of the “Family Motor Coach Association” drive-in conventions, to which I rode along. Memorable because I met some nice girls up there (Centerville, Michigan), and two – because I was two digits off winning the raffle prize . . a brand-new 1976 Dodge Dart Lite. No options except for the whitewall tires. I had visions while at this fair about winning this car and getting the OK from my Dad to drive it back (myself at 16 1/2 years old!) to Northern California!! I believe this and the Feather Duster were n/a in California (emission/drivetrain reasons).
Some minor powertrain changes and I’d take that, Swap in some Aussie Hemi 6 with suitable mods and that would be a nice car, some Val Charger pieces in the front to make it turn, yep done properly that could’ve been quite a car had anyone thought to replace our 2 door sedan with something this would’ve been perfect.
Was this car show grouped by manufacturer, or is it just a coincidence that the Duster is surrounded by other Mopars?
Yes they were (mostly) grouped by make. I prefer a more random arrangement myself. Nothing is more boring than a row of the same car.
Otoh, I find it just fine that the tri-five Chevys tend to group together so there isn’t one between every pair of other makes.
Chrysler was ga-ga for gas savings back in 1976. I once owned a ’76 Charger base model equipped with the 225ci slant six which was the fuel economy option for that model. The only other options on the car were automatic transmission and rear window defroster. Otherwise the car was completely decontented.
RE: Duster models:- Feather Duster, Gold Duster, Silver Duster, Space Duster, Duster Twister, 340 Duster and 360 Duster (per that wiki pedia place)
Was that the one where the left side fender-mounted turn signal would glow if the vacuum dropped too low because you were on the gas too hard?
That was the fuel pacer system. I think it was available from 75-78.
My 1986 Mitsubishi had that or a similar system, it would light up the low fuel light if you were heavy on the throttle, and get brighter the harder you pressed. I can’t remember if there was any effect when the light was already on!
My condolences. I thought a Duster or Dart with the slant six was a Mopar “penalty car’, but your charger sounds even worse due to the extra weight.
The Feather Duster and Dart Lite were developed during the depths of Fuel Crisis I, 1974. They were needed right then, but by time the Bicentennial year ‘Lite’ A bodies came out, gas supply was up and prices stabilized. Also, Cordoba was in its glory era for C-P dealers, so away with the A bodies.
Mid/late 70’s Ford had the Pinto Pony MPG and Mustang MPG models, I do recall.
The Pony MPG versions were also introduced for the 1976 model year.
The first time I ran my 1978 VW, the Uber Rabbit, at the drag strip, I ran up against either a Duster or its equal in Dodgedom. This was time trials so there was no effort to match up cars. I don’t know whether the guy was running a 340 or 360, but damn!, that thing was fast. He turned a 13.4 and I, with a bad fuse panel (thank you Bosch), only ran a 17.3, going through the traps at 5300 rpm in third gear. Before I could figure out why I couldn’t rev any higher, I blew the tranny. End of drag racing career.
Well, at least the tranny enjoyed him or her self…….
Ha, ha, ha. You dirty old man.
Damn you! Now I have to clean Coke off my screen.
I recall the very similar Dodge Dart Lite. Saw a few in white with the identical striped interior. While I’ve heard of the Feather Duster, don’t recall ever seeing one in person.
For a Feather Duster, that upgraded, striped interior doesn’t look quite right. Those striped seats may originally have been out of a Dart Sport ‘Hang 10’. I just don’t remember the Feather Dusters being available with a lot of options. They had base interiors and steering wheels, with a four-speed to maximize fuel economy.
Coupled with the ‘Tuff’ steering wheel, I’m wondering if this guy changed a whole lot more to his Feather Duster than add the hood scoop, tachometer, and swap the engine. A real shame, too, as others have pointed out, that he didn’t keep it stock.
OTOH, as others have also pointed out, a lot of those used Feather Dusters were converted to drag-racing duty in the late seventies because of their light weight, so there probably aren’t a whole lot of stock ones left.
Yes, it does look like interior of Dart Hang-10 or Plymouth’s version of orange-y striped seats. No way would any make offer that today, every new car interior has to be ‘corporate neutral’.
Heres an original, untouched Feather Duster that was at Carlisle several years ago. It has the original hubcaps. The drilled ones that are in the feature car are from a later model police car and the holes are there for better brake and wheel bearing cooling.
I drove a pre-smog 1971 /6 Duster with a 3 speed and 3.23 gears for a couple of years and I feared for my life every time I went to pass another car or merged on the interstate; Id have no problem swapping in a 340, 360 or even a new Hemi into ANY slant six Mopar. A-Body Mopar+hot V8=tons of fast stupid tire frying fun!
Of course, I whose series of A-body cars were all V8’s agree….
Dad had 2 Dart Sport (or GT, can’t remember exactly), 318 V8 and also under dash air.
I love that steering wheel design. Any ideas about its name?
I think Chrysler called that one the “Tuff” steering wheel. A quick check of the 1974 Duster brochure proves me right.
Cheers mate
My grandfather had a Gold Duster, and make no mistake, that was a massive car. He lived in Pittsburgh where space is a premium and he couldn’t even pretend to park it in the garage. He had a hard enough time getting it down the hill without hitting the house. I still have no idea how my uncle did it in his Pacer.
That the Feather Duster got the mileage it did is nothing short of miraculous. Driving it must have been white-knuckle, though. I’ll bet it went from 0-60 in September.
Note David is from Canada so those MPG figures are based on the larger Imperial gallon. So those numbers in US gallons would be 20/30 do the modern conversion and those numbers would be somewhere around 16-17/24-26, so no where near as impressive sounding.
To translate into metric that rating would be 11.8L/100km city and 7.8L/100km highway, or 13.8-14.7 city and 9.0-9.8 highway estimate using the revised/updated system.
I bet Plymouth didn’t put the sort of disclaimer on their ads that I’ve seen for some Japanese cars in the 1980’s to the effect that “the EPA highway figure is pure fantasy”!
tks, knew those MPGs were HIGH
What wasn’t said in this artical. Was that the special version of the A-833 4spd transmission was an over drive unit. 3rd was 1:1 and forth was 1:0.68 overdrive. So these cars easily got the 36mpg highway. (US gallons)
They also used this transmission configuration in work truck. They would have 4.11 rear gears for hauling and towing, but have the overdrive also.
My Dad downsized to a Gold Duster to replace his Fury. He looked at a Feather Duster first, but the broughamtastic Gold Duster won him over! It was a good car for the most part but the front-end suspension parts were sub-standard and wore out really fast.
It’s not a “massive” car, it’s a compact. Performance, while not impressive (not much was in 1976, and no economy car was), was adequate…the manual transmission helps a lot, so does the low-RPM torque (peak about 2800RPM, IIRC) of the slant six. Also note: a Feather Duster with no A/C is only about 2900lbs.
2.94 axle? A friend had a 74 Dart Swinger and it had a 2.73 axle ratio, but his was an automatic Slant six, no idea what mileage he got, and I don’t think he cared, but it was easier on the gas than my car.
The torque multiplication of the automatic’s torque converter allows a steeper axle ratio to be used than on manual trans vehicles despite the fact that the AT often has a steeper 1st gear than a manual trans.
Also, on the Feather Duster, the manual transmission had overdrive.
Indeed, which is why my ’77 Chevelle has the absolutely anemic 2.56 rear axle and the 3 speed manual gets a 2.73 or 3.08 as standard ratio. The Torque converter can do almost a 2:1 multiplier if I remember my maths from years ago the last time I really studied it.
Having driven a few of these cars with the clunky shifting manual, I’ll take a Torqueflight or a Turbo-Hydramatic over the 3 and 4 speed manuals these cars came with from the factory.
Swap in a slick shifting 5-6 speed and we’ll talk manual transmissions.
My ’79 Trans Am came with a 2.41 posi rear end. Insane. Almost the first thing I did when I bought it in ’81 was toss those gears and put in 3.21’s with a new carrier (you had to change it when going from a 2.XX to a 3.XX ratio.), it was like it was a totally different car, and mileage barely changed at all. Even with cam, heads, intake, and a bunch of other stuff I did to the 403 Olds, gas mileage wasn’t all that affected, unless I got heavy on the throttle. When I drove it to LA and back several times, it always got into the low 20 MPG range. I bet if it wouldn’t have been in the mountains, it would have come close to 24 or so. Not bad for a car that could run 13.40 ETs.
These factory strippo/economy models have to be some of the rarest survivors, I have always had a thing for them, they are kind of as far as you can get from the Broughamyness of the mainstream domestics, but still buying from the Big 3. They are neat in an opposite end of the spectrum kind of way, like a Chevette Scooter parked next to a Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham Talisman.
Oldsmobile also started pushing the baser strippo Cutlass with a 5 speed manual as an economy champ during this era.
After my Fiat 128 got wrecked I bought a new VW Rabbit in 1978. Compared to the Fiat (the V Dub had much more low-end torque due to added cubes and FI) it felt as though it had a mini V8 in it. Aside from the added power, it was kinda a step down from the Fiat in terms of quality. Fiat used no sheet metal screws. Anything penetrating the sheet metal was a weld stud. All fasteners that were part of periodic maintenance were nylock, somewhat surprising for such an inexpensive car. It’s been so long in the US that we have been able to buy Italian cars that we forget what a joy the controls (steering, brakes, shifting) were, especially in comparison to the VW which was clunky and quite Germanic.
My ’78 Rab had two options-vinyl interior ($50) and a sunroof. I was out the door at $5300. I later installed a Panasonic AM-FM Cassette and four speakers (I lived the Disco lifestyle-not).
As I drove my new Rab home from the dealer, HB Lantzch in Fairfax, VA, I discovered that the clutch was way out of adjustment. Being a Saturday the salesman said that all of his mechanics were out for the weekend so I was SOL. Last time I was ever at the dealer, or any VW dealer for that matter. Fortunately I had learned how to adjust the clutch on my Fiat so that was the first thing that I did when I got home.
Early life with the Rab was largely positive but there were problems. The clutch cable failed early on. The plugs (Bosch) would only last about three weeks before requiring attention. Fix? Denso or equivalent Japanese copper plugs. The Bosch ignition system required constant attention. One respondent said that neither he or the dealer could fix the higher range missing problem. After replacing every ignition component under hood, my friend at Olympus Auto Parts in Gaithersburg, MD, posed a hypothetical question-“you’ve replaced every part except one, and you know which one that is”. I did-the fuse panel. Changed it and the bitch would rev to 7000 rpm. Another of the Commentariat mentioned oil burning, a common problem with these V Dubs. Bad valve seals, subject to a class action suit. I got $330 from VOA for that.
Otherwise, my wife and I enjoyed long vacation trips in the car. We would rip the rear seat out, load up our camping gear, and hit the road. The first song we would punch up was Woody Nelson’s “On The Road Again”.
Had the car for 16 years at which point the rear suspension decided it no longer wanted to be associated with the heavily rusted monocoque. Removed a few parts, including my Momo Jackie Stewart steering wheel, and gave the car to a mechanic that was willing to tow the car away at no expense to me.
I haven’t owned a VW product since.
What wasn’t said in this artical. Was that the A-833 4spd transmission was an over drive unit. 3rd was 1:1 and forth was 1:0.68 overdrive. So these cars easily got the 36mpg highway.
They also used this transmission configuration in work truck. They would have 4.11 rear gears for hauling and towing, but have the overdrive also.
Spot on. However…technically, THIRD gear was overdrive. Not having the money to build a new 4-speed, Chrysler engineers got creative: they took the A-833, replaced the third gear with the OD ratio…and flipped the 3-4 shift lever on the transmission. Presto: overdrive on the cheap.
I ordered a cherry red-3 on the floor auto-white bucket seats-factory chromes-it was gorges. I wish I still owned it….
Wow . . . all the negative comments, when you don’t even KNOW the history of the car !!! This car was originally sold in Wyoming . . . I bought it from a friend that got it out of the wrecking yard in Wyoming !!! Sure it is a pretty LOADED/RARE Feather Duster – factory Vinyl top, A/C (?!?!? What were they thinking on /6??), the Hang 10 interior – this is a “3” fender tag car !!! So, the /6 through a rod through the side of the block and there it sat, languishing in the wrecking yard. My buddy brought it home, built a 360 for it, kept the 4spd/OD tranny in it, and built a killer 8 3/4 rear end for it,
In the end, you build YOUR CAR for YOU !!! It was a really FUN car to drive – uhhh, I sold it because I was pretty sure I would lose my license – just way too much fun banging those gears with some RPM !!! The 360 ran great !! Great sound, had headers on it . . . . I miss that car !!!
Transmissions were auto or 4 speed manual? WRONG!! My 1976 Feather Duster was all original when I bought it in 1980. Slant 6 with aluminum case 3 speed w/ overdrive manual. Floor shifted too. Was a very cool car for a 17 year old. Hell, it was all my dad would let me buy. “No V8’s, you’d kill yourself.”
Borrowed $1000 from his credit union and she was a 340, 4 speed, 8 3/4 car in less than 6 months. He never noticed. But then again I always hauled ass until I was about 200 yards from home and shut it off. Coasting to a nice quiet stop.
Just like everyone, I wish I had that car back. I had no idea how rare they were back then. Who cared? Times were much different. But that light weight sure helped me beat a lot of big block cars. In fact, I rarely lost a race. Oh well, have a 70 Super Bee now, and trying to get it done and on the road soon.
And as far as the negative comments? F*%& THEM!! It is/was your car.
Great article on my first car!
“Transmissions were auto or 4 speed manual? WRONG!! My 1976 Feather Duster was all original when I bought it in 1980. Slant 6 with aluminum case 3 speed w/ overdrive manual.”
So a 3 speed + overdrive manual transmission does not have 4 speeds? This could be a point where some clarification might be helpful, but it is not wrong (let alone wrong in all caps with two exclamation points).
Your “3 speed with overdrive” is a 4-speed. It uses the exact same design as the 4-speed Chrysler used from the mid-60s, albeit with an aluminum housing. (Indeed: the cases and gearsets are 100% interchangeable.)
This seems like a pretty honest attempt to come up with an MPG special on the cheap. Aluminum parts were pretty rare on American cars at this time. The Mopar slant six was a much more efficient motor than the Ford 250 cid motor. Contemporary reports put the Ford real mileage at only around 15 mpg. Still full size V8 powered models were only getting around 10-12 mpg. so it was a real alternative. Things have changed for the better fuel economy wise, even though cars cost quite a bit more. I agree with the sentiment that the owner should build what pleases them. I’d bet that the original feather Duster wasn’t any fun to drive.
When I drove one, merging onto the freeway was the only exciting thing about driving it. Scary, and wow, it got me ready for all the birds I was flipped when I first got my ’77 Power Wagon with it’s full time 4WD and it’s mighty supposed 165hp 360. It was about as slow as the Feather Duster was. After 2 trips from Vegas to LA and back in it, I started modding it, and eventually got it to the point it was quicker than most cars were at that time. What I couldn’t get it to do was stay running without constant repairs. I had stuff go bad that never breaks, like the PS pump, the transfer case chain, and even the windshield washer tank split in half twice! It even caught on fire twice, and for some reason, I didn’t just let the POS burn either time.
My 250 in my ’68 el Camino only got 16 or 17 on the highway with a three speed manual. Such a disappointment knowing that a 307 or 327 would get 15 in a Camaro or Malibu.
One thing that seems a little odd is how Chrysler only made the smaller 198ci slant-six from 1970-74. You’d have thought they’d have kept producing it, at least through 1976 when they could have offered it in the Feather Duster/Dart Lite. You wouldn’t think it would be that much more of a slug than the 225 but give better fuel economy.
It was probably cheaper to drop it and not need the extra tooling and parts on the line.
The 198 cost very little to make, as it used the same block as the 225; only the crankshaft and connecting rods were different. At the time, primitive emission controls were making engines less powerful across the board while safety requirements and market demands were making cars heavier. The 198 was considered no longer adequate, so it was dropped after 1974.
A 198 with the Feather Duster/Dart Lite’s tall gearing would have been a very slow car.
3.23 gears and the OD 4-speed would probably give it perfectly adequate performance…though I’m not sure mileage would be any better than the 225.
You’re very likely right that the fuel economy wouldn’t differ significantly from the 225, and although the 198 only cost marginally more to make, it cost significantly more to offer; each engine/transmission/body combination had to be type-approved for emissions compliance.
The best thing about the 198 is its 7″ connecting rods, which can be combined with 2.2 turbo pistons to make a long-rod 225 (versus the 225’s 6.7″ rods). The long rod reduces piston side-loading and increases dwell time at TDC and BDC, all of which do favourable things to how the engine runs. But none of this has anything to do with factory-built engine configurations.
I had a feather duster in 76. The car ate clutches, trans gearing and 2.76 rear end made the car a slug off the line. It did get good fuel economy.
My mom bought a 1976 Dodge Dart in 1980. I leaned to drive on it, and even took my drivers test on it in ’81. It survived my teen years thru high school as well. I bought it from her in 1990. While its certainly no Hellcat, I’ve never had a problem with its performance around town or on the highway. I kept it tuned and regular upkeep quite often.
Now its June 2020 and, I still have it.
Its still original, except for tsome cop car wheels I added. (Still have the original Wheels and hubcaps). As far as mileage, it was still averaging 30 mpg at 100k miles. Ive gone thru 2 clutches, one at 98k miles, and again at 205k miles, couple of sets of brakes, and 3 alternators. Currently in the garage with new parts for the front end rebuild. And a new manual steering unit. 285k miles on it. It does need an overhaul, but it still runs, just gotta wait for funds to work on her.
Leaned? Learned.