Photo from the Cohort by Hyperpack.
Related reading:
Curbside Classic: 1971 Chrysler New Yorker – Living Large
Cohort Pic(k) Of The Day: 1972 Chrysler New Yorker – Awaiting Detail & Reconditioning?
– Posted on January 22, 2024
-
-
-
American Brands: GM 
American Brands: Ford 
American Brands: Chrysler 
American Brands: AMC, Jeep and All Others 
Automotive Histories and Misc. 
Asian Brands 
UK Brands 
Australian Brands 
European Brands 
Cars Of A Lifetime & Auto-Biography 
Buses 
Trucks, Pickups and Vans 
Design 
Trains, Planes & Ships 
Motorcycles, Trikes, Bicycles 
Engines, Transmissions and other Tech 
Tractors, Lawn Mowers, Off-Road Equipment 
RVs, Motorhomes, Trailers, Campers
The broad, bright lower bodyside trim seen on the fuselage New Yorkers after 1969, seemed out-of-place. Often misaligned, it cluttered the smooth continuous slab-sides that somewhat defined the fuselage styling appeal. Chrysler never improved upon the basic look of the fuselage bodywork.
Cleaner appearance.
Remember a lot of them looking like this one.. (various shades of “light colors”)/ dark top.
The Newport without the side trim is an arguably better-looking car for just this reason.
Still, the higher-profit New Yorker was a steady seller and some would consider it the the brightest spot in the Chrysler line-up for a long time.
Looks like a rust free car. I hope it gets detailed and reconditioned.
Hope the poor thing is savable and gets/ got some saving..
Would sure be an eye catcher when “rolling”.
((from gas pump to gas pump))
Lots of great photos by Hyperpack! Thanks for posting them, Rich. There’s a soft spot in my head for the fuselage Mopars because lots of my early driving took place in a ‘70 Fury III coupe, which had a similar profile to the featured New Yorker.
Being a Chrysler, the featured car has an attractive grille, but oh my! Lookit that rear overhang!
Is that grille (not) a rip off of the 1970 Buick LeSabre?
In any event, I do like that grille.
Such a menacing car. Very large trunk, presumably for illicit purposes.
It may have been used as such, but by design, more likely for sets of golf clubs perhaps?
I always found the styling of the fuselage cars, esp. as 2-doors without vinyl roofs, to be rather menacing, kinda like brutalist architecture. Good for cop cars, acceptable for plane-Jane fleet vehicles, but incongruous for the mild-mannered family man who was (at least previously) the target audience for a Chrysler Newport, and who would likely want to fit his golf clubs in there. There is just no lightness to it, especially in these colors. What are the emotions it imparts – ‘sportiness’? – not really. ‘Restrained Elegance’? (like one might find in a Buick) – not really. ‘Thriftiness/Practicality’? (like one might find in what in later years one might find in a Volvo) – not really. The only emotion I can come up with is ‘menace’. I cannot figure that would be a really atractive emotion for the target audience.
Cheers!
I know our “73 Fury” had a big, big truck. Did not do well in winter..
So it does seem pretty self-evident why when presented with a choice between learning to drive on one of these (a 1971 Town and Country…same length) versus a Fiat 128, I chose the Fiat.
This particular car points out yet again how no one beat Chrysler for coming up with colors that mixed green, brown, tan, and yellow.
“no one beat Chrysler for coming up with colors that mixed green, brown, tan, and yellow.” – Truth!
This particular one is the Tawny Gold Metallic that graced my 71 Plymouth Scamp. I spent a lot of time looking at that color, and never really got good at describing it. Is is brown? Gold? Green? All of the above. I didn’t really like it at the time, but have become a fan in more recent years. It just oozes early 1970’s.
The height of the front end is adjustable via the torsion bars. Either the frame broke or someone does not understand feature.
Those optional rims are worth more than the car in its current condition.
Or were the torsion bars cranked down on purpose?
OOof, I remember these very well. My father had one and so did my namesake uncle. Both had iffy quality problems.
It is a cool looking car – just wish they were made as good as they look.
To my eyes the 2 door models were not the best examples of Mopar’s “Fuselage” styling.
I thought the 4 door and station wagon models looked much better.
Just me?
Nope. You are not alone on that thought.
You’re absolutely correct. The 2 doors, especially without the vinyl roof, reminded me of a blimp or a huge, bloated sausage with its vast expanses of sheet metal. They were awful. On the other hand, I thought the 4 doors and wagons quite attractive.
I was not the biggest fan of the 1972-73 fuselage body coupes TBH, I didn’t think they looked right compared to the 1969-71 fuselage body coupes.
Thank you Rich for another Pic(k) from the cohort.
I am hyperpack on flicker.
This photo was snapped some 20 + years ago!
I will have to see if I can get over to the shop to get a modern day documentation of the car in 2024.
The Detail / reconditioning sign is long gone, but the building is still there and
the ’72 New Yorker still remains in the same spot as it was 20+ years ago like many other MoPar relics at my father’s shop, languishing in the Pennsylvania air, awaiting it’s fate… Either to go to the pick-apart yard or crusher, or if some loving MoPar fan can save it, and do the automotive equivalent of an organ donor…. Having it’s parts surgically preserved and passed along to other loving custodians of 1970’s Chrysler C body fuselage fans for preservation of better specimens.
This particular car arrived at the shop sometime when I was in college I suppose. It is still amazingly complete as Dad was reluctant to sell parts off this one, possibly waiting for the right buyer to come along and buy the car whole.
It surmise it was a “ran when parked” But I never remember seeing it drive.
It probably was a “Garage Find” with lower miles supposedly, and was pulled out of an estate where it sat complete, unwrecked and likely to run with a bit of elbow grease and futzing.
It has a 440 topped with from what I can tell is a Holley 4V Carb, and a “factory” Tow Package.. With a early bolt on Frame hitch If I remember correctly.
I can surely assume that although the car is complete, it would be more rusty now that in that old picture!
The Left Front wheel is rusted through – I had never seen that before, but it happened on this car.
The Angle of the parked car is skewed because it is sitting on a drainage culvert that is covered with metal plates I am sure the metal plates are bent which make the front look even lower – It’s also possible that there is a broke torsion bar under there too.
Enjoy Curbside Classic Fans!
These were incredible cars built like a tank and strong as an elephant.. They were very nimble and handled incredibly well. And the stylings were one of a kind no doubt. You always knew when a Chrysler was around
I bought a 1968 Plymouth Fury lll (2 door) right after high school (1975) & I loved that car! It was a Plymouth medium green with a dark green vinyl top & two-tone green interior. It had a 318 w dual exhaust (glass packs), automatic & am radio (no a/c)! That was a fun car to drive & I always got complements wherever I went. I had that car for almost 4 years & might still have it if it hadn’t been totaled in an accident. I still keep my eyes open for one that’s in good condition but the prices have gotten ridiculous. I do like the next generation as represented in this New Yorker, but I realize the Plymouth was a step down from the New Yorker. And yes, it had a huge trunk!!
This car was a beauty when parked .
I look forward to seeing how it is now .
I didn’t like these when new but I appreciate them now that I’m a Geezer =8-) .
-Nate
after owning three of those era chryslers they were way to high stock, they looked ridiculous at the stock ride height. I cranked the torsion bars down a bit and put 2″ blocks in the rear between the springs and axle, they look way better and levels out the car. Looks like this guy cranked the torsion bars down and left the rear stock which even makes it look more ridiculous than stck