Quick: What was introduced in the spring of 1964, based on an existing chassis, and was totally unlike anything else at the time?
That’s right! It’s the Plymouth Barracuda.
The commonalities with the Mustang are quite evident, as Paul covered here. Introduced just sixteen days earlier than the Mustang, the Barracuda was based on the Valiant and was offered in both six cylinder and V8 versions.
Totally unlike the Mustang, you could get a four-speed manual transmission bolted to your 225 cubic inch (3.7 liter) slant six. We are still talking about the wonderful ruggedness of the slant six in various articles at CC; when was the last time you read anything here, article or comment, where one was waxing poetic about the various six-cylinder engines found in first generation Mustangs?
The Barracuda also offered the 2+2 seating (or perhaps 2+3 based upon the advertisements) that simply wasn’t available on the Mustang until the 1965 model year. The Barracuda also offered an unusual for the times degree of utility that could be traced to its Valiant DNA; fold down the back seat and you had nearly six feet of flat floor for hauling plywood, making out, or whatever else came to mind.
My nomination for the 1964 CCOTY is the Plymouth Barracuda. Sometimes the trendsetters get overlooked.
Not a bad choice. Just barely pre-Mustang – and well ahead of the Mustang fastback, the “Baccaruda” was definitely a trend-setter, even if others passed it by and left it in the dust. Heck, compare it with the Supra fastback shown a few weeks ago. Someone at Toyota must have liked Barracudas. I’ve read that Fiat’s replacement for the current Challenger may be branded as a Barracuda, as the name has more of a legacy than Challenger (unless you’re a “Vanishing Point” fan).
BTW, for 1965 the Mustang is an obvious choice for the US, but globally the Porsche 911 (first shown in 1963 as the 901 but on sale in 1965) was a hugely influential car that not only lives on, but really made Porsche a household name around the world.
I see someone else remembers the radio commercial!
Hmmm…I don’t know, but LOOKS-wise, these “Baccarudas” (just like the commercials said) are indeed stunners, although a Valiant, but WHAT a Valiant! I loved them and had my first “hot-rod” ride in one with a 273 V8 4 speed in 1965 when I was all of 14!
BUT…I respectfully present my avatar – my 1964 Chevy Impala SS convertible for my CCOTY award. It was the first time the SS was offered as a separate model – plus I really liked the car, so that’s good enough for me!
As far as any other contenders, I can’t think of any worthy mentions – foreign cars don’t count at that time with me, either.
I don’t know if the Mustang qualifies, as it came out as a “1964½” model, but if it does, that would definitely qualify, as the Mustang was THE trendsetter!
The problem with the Barracuda is that it was not an “all new” car like the Mustang it was a fastback Valiant and therefor it did not have the appeal of the Mustang that shared no sheetmetal with it’s Falcon brethren.
As far as waxing poetically about the Falcon Six I’m sure some of our comentors from down under are quite fond of it or at least what it evolved into. Of course they will also likely wax poetically for what the leaning tower of power evolved into also. In the end one outlasted the other and that was the Falcon Six as it is still in production and is scheduled to run for a few more years. Yes it looks nothing like the original Falcon engine with it’s DOHC and VVT but it does trace its roots and shares the basic block architecture with the 144 that debuted in the first Falcon.
Umm really? I agree the Mustang was much more popular, but it was a reskinned Falcon. Compare the dashes on the two and you will see.
The only visible part on the Mustang that was shared with the Falcon was the dash and that went away for 1966. While the Baracuda shared everything visible but the roof, back windows, trunk lid and back seat.
WADR you need to take a closer look at the Valiant and the Barracuda for 64. The front end isn’t even close to the same parts.
I’d say they are pretty darn close to the same parts, a different grille and a slightly different line on the fender. Which is why you can interchange body parts between the two and make yourself a convincing Barracuda wagon or Sedan. Try hanging the front end sheet metal of a Mustang on a Falcon.
Fact is the Barracuda doesn’t hide it’s Valiant roots very well at all, The Mustang on the other hand does not look anything like the Falcon and only shared it’s dash with it for the single long introductory year. The Barracuda is a Valiant with a new hat, the Mustang is a Falcon that went to the gym and got a entire new set of clothes. Which is why the Mustang was the most successful new model introduction ever and the Barracuda is a footnote.
I have stayed out of this discussion up to now, but I would agree that the Mustang is much different from the Falcon, compared to the Barracuda/Valiant. In fairness to Chrysler, however, I think that by the standards of early 1964 (pre-Mustang), the changes to the Barracuda body were extensive.
Consider that for the most part, you made a car sportier by designing a hardtop. Look at the Gen1 Falcon, or the Corvair. Trim jobs and maybe, if lucky, a hardtop or ragtop. This was even true in the big cars. The degree of difference of the Barracuda was striking – the entire back half of the body was completely different – and for a single model. Nobody had done this outside of the T-Bird/Riviera class. The only reason the Barracuda’s differences look so tame now was because the Mustang came along a few weeks later and doubled down on what the Barracuda did. With Mustang, the whole body was different, not just the back. I think that if Ford had botched the Mustang’s styling so that it would not have been the huge hit that it became, we might not have seen the model proliferation that we got later, at least for awhile.
Considering how risk-averse Chrysler had become under Lynn Townsend, I think that it is pretty amazing that the Barracuda made it out at all, and certainly with the degree of difference from Valiant that it got, especially since there was already a hardtop and a convertible in the Valiant line. For once, Chrysler actually beat GM to the punch on this segment, and even had a second generation ready by the time the first Camaro came out.
I do agree that it is pretty amazing the the Barracuda made it out the door at all, considering the general state of Chrysler at the time. They did have the general idea of the Barracuda early on in the development of the Valiant though as evidenced by this styling exercise.
I would also add that in ’64, Plymouth specifically advertised the Barracuda as “the Valiant Barracuda,” so Chrysler-Plymouth was making no attempt to disguise the Barracuda’s kinship with the Valiant. By contrast, Ford took pains to distinguish the Mustang from the Falcon in styling, proportions, packaging, and marketing.
Only the dash gauge cluster DESIGN was shared. They were not interchangeable. Falcon was horizontal with full trim, Mustang had two “pods”. Are you confusing it with a Comet?
Thank you for educating me. I had not realized the Barracuda came out a couple weeks before the Mustang. The Mustang seemed to get more press and I was under the impression the ‘Cuda was an ad hoc response by Chrysler.
Even though the Barracuda came out first, I think it kind of was an ad hoc response by Chrysler. As I understand it, it was known in advance that Ford had something coming in this segment of the market, though exactly what may not have been clear. The Barracuda was Chrysler’s attempt to pull a competing model together relatively quickly and cheaply.
“…was totally unlike anything else at the time?”
It is very much like a Valiant, with a fast back glass window. Some have even called Valiant notchback coupes ‘Barracuda’ in error. It is more like the Duster, compact car with different rear roofline.
The Mustang had completely different body panels, interior, and options than Falcons, so it was the first true Pony car.
Note: when you enlarge the first image, you can see on the lower right next to the taillight, in a script font, “Valiant”.
IINM, in 1964 the Barracuda was technically a subseries of the Valiant (“Valiant Barracuda”). Starting in 1965, it was marketed as a distinct model (“Barracuda”).
The same would play out with the Duster — the ’70 was the “Valiant Duster”, the ’71 and later just the “Duster”.
This gets my vote, if only for sentimental reasons. My Dad drove one of these, and he mostly kept the rear seat folded flat (and it did fold completely flat, a feat many cars today can’t match) so that my siblings and I could lie supine in the rear compartment, watching the world go by through that big, curved backlight.
I don’t envy kids today, lashed into their safety seats, hoping to steal a glance over the overly-high beltlines of contemporary cars.
I would argue the Falcon did this in 1963 1/2 with the new fastback roofline “Sprint” V8 or “Futura” 6 or V8, both available btw with 4 speeds.
And there certainly was interest in hopping up the 6 back then.
http://www.dearbornclassics.com/the-ford-falcon-six-cylinder-performance-handbook-1960-1970this-is-the-book-you-6-cylinder-fans-have-been-waiting-for-the-falcon-performance-handbook-is-filled-with-performance-tips-parts-picks-interchange-recommendations-and-advice-on.html
Admittedly the light weight of the 260 V8 made any 6 seem passe.
The Falcon and Galaxies weren’t real fastbacks like the Barracuda. The Plymouth was the first fastback on the streets since the late-’40’s GMs. And though I guess a Falcon is a pretty deadly predator if you’re a rodent, the Barracuda name took aggressiveness to new level for Detroit. I recall this car makIng a huge impact when it came out … the name and the shape and the window.
That back window was supposedly the largest single piece of automotive glass ever made up to that point. Has there been anything bigger since?
Was the back window of the third-generation Camaro/Firebird larger? I recall reading that it was the largest single piece of automotive glass ever made, although auto writers and company PR people aren’t always concerned about historical accuracy.
These were great cars!
The first car I ever drove on the open road was a 1965 Barracuda Slant 6 with pushbutton transmission. Only problem is I was 14 at the time! It could be the reason why I’m loyal to Mopar even now– another reason would be that my first car was a ’62 Plymount Fury 318 V8 with column shift, but that would be a story for another day.
My friend’s mom, a widower piano teacher had a White with gold interior ‘Cuda with the upscale wheel covers and that huge rear window. While she was giving a typical 45 minute piano lesson (you could hear the keys banging through the wall of the garage), we would open the garage door– ever so carefully– release the parking brake and carefully drift the car backwards down the driveway. A push up the street when we were out of earshot and we’d start ‘er up– I will always remember that distinctive Mopar ‘R-r-r-r-r-r’ starter sound before the good old Slant 6 would fire up.
If there was ever a car that was the typical ‘old lady’s car’, this car was it– spotless, full tank of gas, ready to go!
We had about 30 minutes to drive around the neighborhood– this was in broad daylight, mind you– I can’t imagine any neighbors not seeing this– before we coasted to the foot of the driveway and reversed the procedure just as the last piano notes were being banged out. I’d jump on my Schwinn Collegiate and head home just in time to run my paper route, no one the wiser.
Those were the days– lazy, crazy, hazy days of summer filled with many good memories.
If the Barracuda got more bodies differences to distinguish it from the Valiant, we could talk about “fish-car” instead of “pony-car” although some earlier Mustang pictures of prototypes or pre-production models showed a cat instead of a horse and some folks begin to think of Ford Cougar, we could had some “cat-car” or “feline-car”.
We could also wonder what if Roy Abernathy didn’t screwed the Rambler Tarpon project into the Marlin? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rambler_Tarpon
It didn’t help that it carried a Valiant badge on the rear and in the radio dial too.
Yes the person who designed what became know as the Mustang wanted the name Cougar and the initial clays had a Cougar in a pen instead of the horse in the corral on the grille.
Hank the duce wanted Thunderbird II, however market research showed that Mustang was the most favored of the 3 among potential buyers.
Of course the designer who was part of the Lincoln Mercury team eventually got his way.
In Canada, it was sold as Valiant until the 1966 model year since it still was a separate division in the Great White North.
The Barracuda was also sold and badged as a Valiant in South Africa
http://www.flickr.com/photos/45904802@N08/5021485186/
In the U.S., the 1964 Barracuda was technically a subseries of the Valiant (“Plymouth Valiant Barracuda”). Starting in 1965, it was marketed as a distinct model (“Plymouth Barracuda”).
As Stephane alluded to, from 1960-66 Valiants were sold in Canada by both Plymouth and Dodge dealers, but were badged as neither, just as “Valiants”. In various years the Canadian Valiant lineup included models similar to U.S. Plymouth Valiants, models similar to U.S. Dodge Darts, and models that were a cross between the two. Because Dodge dealers had Valiants, the 1961-62 Dodge Lancer and 1963-66 Dodge Dart were not sold in Canada in their U.S. form or under their U.S. names. Starting in 1967, Canadian Plymouth and Dodge dealers began selling compact lineups that were similar to those sold by their U.S. counterparts.
In light of the above marketing scheme, it makes sense that the 1964-66 Barracuda was the “Valiant Barracuda” in Canada, then became the “Plymouth Barracuda” for 1967. IINM, for at least part of the 1964-66 period Barracudas sold in Canada were actually imported from the U.S. I don’t know if the U.S. factory installed Canadian badging on these cars, or if they were shipped to Canada with U.S. badging and then converted once they arrived.
I think then the US factory installed Canadian badging right from the start or they could had been built at the Canadian plant in Windsor, Ontario.
These were good cars, but everytime I see that huge rear window, I wish that Chrysler had instead introduced it on the 1962 Plymouth Fury Super Sport as originally planned by Virgil Exner.
The Super Sport (planned before Chevrolet claimed the name) was to be a top-of-the-line edition of the Fury. It was part of the full-size Plymouth line before the disastrous downsizing ordered by Chrysler management while the car was under development.
Seeing it on a Valiant is a letdown. Plus, the 1967 Barracuda makes a much better ponycar than this car, which reeks of compromise. (The 1967 Barracuda is also much better looking than a comparable Camaro or Firebird, in my opinion).
This car is a very good competitor to the Falcon Sprint or Chevrolet Chevy II Nova hardtop. As a competitor to the Mustang or even the Corvair…it just doesn’t cut it.
I won’t knock the Barracuda, but let’s just pretend Ford had simply grafted a big window fastback onto a 2-door ’64 Falcon. Would we think that was special today?
I like this car quite a lot but in the south texas area this would be known as a solar oven with wheels. A straight six with a stick is still very high on my list of things we should never have gotten away from. I would have been happy with any of the big 4 (as he includes rambler american).
I remember the original Motor Trend review. They busted (figuratively) the rear glass “oven”…and they tested it in Los Angeles in the springtime.
I had one. White/Blue interior, 273/auto……..in Palm Springs 1979. It was a nice old used car at the time. Everything you touched inside was chrome it seemed……..the door handle, the horn ring, the shifter……..every dash control……..did I mention it was in Palm Springs………..where it’s HOT???! You needed oven mittens to operate.
Poor car, I moved to Los Angeles. It got hit. It got stolen. It got vandalized…….rear window no less.
I’ll take one with a hyper pak slant 6 and a 4-speed.
To correct one small point, the six-cylinder Mustang was also available with a 4-speed, the UK sourced Dagenham, in 1964.5-66.
I also rode in the back of what Dad called a “Backabooka”, unrestrained and staring at the world through that huge glass backlite. This article and the comments got me thinking about highway safety. I heard on the news last night that fatalities went down 2% last year. We’re double the population and triple the registrations of my childhood while having longer commute time. I also remember the edict coming down from Auburn Hills to BOLO for the first head-on collision of air-bag Chryslers in real-world conditions. Natural selection isn’t what it used to be.
How could I forget this car? Well, I was not quite 1.5 years old upon release of the original model… Actually, I had a very memorable ride in a 1967 version, 273 & 4 speed, sitting underneath the big glass window. The car was a lot of fun!
My wife’s family had a number of motorheads in it, starting with her grandfather. After her grandmother died, gramps got remarried several years later. In the interim between marriages, he owned a ’57 Bel Air, a ’59 Corvette and a ’61 or ’62 Corvair Monza. After he remarried, his new wife insisted on a ‘proper’ car, something befitting a man of his ‘age’ (IIRC, he was in his mid-late 50’s at the time…)
Much to his new wife’s consternation, he drives home in a (I think) 1965 Barracuda, with V8 and 4 speed. Yellow with a black interior. As you can imagine, she was not impressed. They kept the car however, until his death. After his passing, she drove the car until the mid 70’s upon which she bought a Volvo. Hmmmm…
I never met the man, but from family stories, apparently he was quite the character. I would have loved to have seen the expression on her face when he drove up in that yellow Barracuda!
OTOH, if my wife told me to do the same thing that she asked of him, I’d roll home in a new ‘Vette! Or a 2003 Buick Century…
The only person I have to impress with my car is me.