We car people just want to be right. Maybe it’s because of the many hours we had spent reading and re-reading our favorite books, magazines, or sections of automotive encyclopedias about our vehicles that speak to us. Maybe it’s because of firsthand experiences in ownership, repair work, and / or maintenance and the familiarity gained with automotive workings. Maybe it’s the fact-checker perfectionism, completely independent of the car hobby, that some of us possess and apply in our own lives. About that last thing, I want to be clear that it wasn’t some veiled dig or critique on some people’s need for accuracy. I think of this sometimes when I’m on a plane. (Pilots, please be one hundred percent accurate.)
Maybe what I’m talking about is a combination of things, but we car people will offer up correction out of benevolence and sometimes arrogance, but at the end of the day, I like to think I’m open to correction and would also want to help others by clearing up any misunderstandings, myself. I’ve seen some car fact debates go off the rails, but more often than not, and especially here at CC, folks tend to approach things from a helpful perspective, which is one of the things I like and appreciate about this community.
I recently made a grievous (I should put that word in quotation marks) error when it came to the identification of two first-generation Plymouth Valiants. The Valiant had originally been established as its own make by Chrysler Corporation upon its introduction for model year 1960, but was more sensibly (in my opinion) made a Plymouth for ’61. My friend Keri and I were strolling through beautiful Lexington, Michigan this past August when we stumbled upon a white Valiant two-door that looked to be in great shape. It was a bit of a “twenty-footer”, but it presented really well, and I enjoyed my brief visit with the gentleman in whose driveway it was parked.
“Take all the pictures you want!”, he said warmly after our chat as he headed back inside. Now, as Keri and I had been talking with him for maybe less than five minutes, I could have sworn that I had either asked for confirmation or had identified his Valiant as a ’61. I could ask Keri now, but I doubt she’d remember as she was probably focused on ducking out of all the pictures I was taking. Ultimately, though, I had it set in my mind that this Plymouth was a ’61, and I had labeled it as such on my Flickr page.
Come September, I had ventured to the Roscoe Village neighborhood back home in Chicago for my very first time attending the Retro On Roscoe street festival. This fun and family-friendly event was a showcase of art, music, crafts, and (perhaps the biggest draw for me that day) a vintage car show! It was a no-brainer for me to finish my chores early that Saturday to be able to fit R-On-R into my schedule that afternoon.
Everything about this street festival was great, including the sensory details like the smells of the street food and the sounds of the bands, and also the intangibles like the good vibes from the other attendees. Just as importantly, the mini car show did not disappoint, with the prized rides of many proud owners on display. Among these vehicles was this blue Valiant two-door. One of my favorite things to do at street festivals is to talk with the various people whose things are on display. Add a car show to the mix, and I am a full-on extrovert.
The grille looked familiar, so taking a guess (I’m going to be honest), I asked the owner, “Is this a ’61?” “Yes, sir,” he confirmed. I mentioned how glad I was to see some Mopar representation in what had turned out to be a very GM-centric show. He and I also talked about Virgil Exner’s adventurous styling direction of that time, the inauspicious end of the DeSoto make, and a few other things. “You really know your stuff, man!”, he said, as I probably kicked a pebble with an “aw, shucks” look on my face. Okay, I didn’t really do that, but hey, I’ve been a writer at this car site for a decade now, so I feel like that counts for reason to accept a little credit.
I mentioned that I had just seen another ’61 just a few weeks prior, to which he looked visibly surprised. “Really? Maybe I know the guy.” I pulled out my phone to show him the pictures of the white Valiant that I had taken, and he nodded his head in acknowledgment… until I got to the pictures of the rear of the car. “That’s actually a ’62, buddy,” he said, though in a friendly tone.
“Oh, no, I’m pretty sure it’s a ’61. That’s what the guy said, and look at the toilet seat.” (I had told a white lie, and like I mentioned earlier, I still can’t remember all the details of my conversation with the first gentleman in Lexington. Pride, man. Pride.) “Yeah, but look at the slanted shape of the taillamps and the rear quarter panel stampings. That’s a ’62 you’ve got there.” Dead silence. I felt even more stupid because I had actually written about a ’62 here at CC years ago! That’s what I get for lying.
The other thing I want to mention is that I later came to realize that the grille and trunk lid of the white example are from a first-year, 1960 Valiant. The ’61 had a slightly different grille pattern, sectioned off into chrome squares against a black background, and the continental spare tire-shaped section of the trunk had revised trim, with the original “Valiant” script badge having been replaced with a bar-looking thing. I hadn’t even been correct about that!
Both cars were V200 two-door hardtops from their respective model years. Of about 143,000 total Valiants for ’61, 88,400 (over 60%) were in the upper V200 trim level, and 18,600 were two-doors. For ’62, the overall Valiant tally was 131,700, of which 72,300 (55%) were V200s and only 8,500 were hardtop coupes. All were slant-six powered. For ’61, 170 cubic-inch six with 101 horsepower was standard. For ’62, a stroked-out 225 cubic-inch six with 145 horsepower was also optionally available. The starting weight for a V200 two-door hardtop in either model year ranged from 2,500 to 2,600 pounds.
One other thing that had occurred to me was how the styling of the Valiant, the most successful and longest-lived of the original compact offerings from the Big Three, had gone from looking pretty avant garde when introduced for 1960, to being decidedly passé by 1976, its last U.S. model year – excepting, of course, the popular Duster fastback which shared the Valiant’s front clip and underpinnings.
In any case, the friendly attitude and demeanor of both Valiant owners had added to my enjoyment of both automotive discoveries from just under a month apart from each other. And because neither guy was a jerk about my completely incorrect information, I stayed engaged and gained valuable mnemonic devices to help me identify each model year of Valiant in the future. Both experiences also increased my appreciation for a model from Chrysler’s past that undoubtedly helped its parent company weather some turbulent years. I was going to close by wishing for the owner of the white Valiant that he eventually finds the correct trunk lid but, accuracy be darned, I kind of like his ’62 with that toilet seat on the back.
The ’62 was photographed in Lexington, Michigan on Monday, August 11, 2025. The ’61 was photographed in Chicago, Illinois on Saturday, September 6, 2025.
Related CC reading:
Curbside Classic: 1960-1962 Plymouth Valiant – No One’s Kid Brother
Curbside Classic: 1961 Valiant – Follow The Leader? The Dilemmas Of Art Vs. Commerce
Curbside Classic: 1962 Plymouth Valiant – Doing Too Much
1960-1962 Plymouth Valiant Versus 1986-1990 Ford Taurus – Closer Than They Appear
Curbside Classic: 1962 Plymouth Valiant V200 – Late Jet-Age Era Wagon
It’s interesting to compare these Valiants with the “toilet seat” trunk lids to the badge engineered Dodge Lancer with a regular trunk lid. The Dodge looks so much better, although they sold fewer
The Lancer sold but a fraction of the the Valiant’s numbers. I would have thought that maybe as a slightly upscale Dodge, it might have sold maybe 70 – 80% of the Plymouth’s numbers, but it wasn’t even close. The Valiant / Dart numbers of the ’70s were much, much closer.
The same could be said about the 1962 Australian Valiant, the 1961 Aussie kept the toilet seat but they got rid of it for 1962 Down Under.
https://burnsandcoauctions.com.au/portfolio/1961-valiant-r-series-manual/
https://www.alamy.com/1962-r-series-valiant-produced-in-australia-at-a-car-show-in-glen-innes-new-south-wales-australia-rear-quarter-view-in-green-image461136662.html
“Better by far”!
The Lancer was a better looking car by far… Many years ago I spotted this one (a 1961, I think) in heavy commuter traffic here in SoCal. Appeared to be a very nice survivor.
Your comment about the toilet seat is funny. My ’61 V200 came without it and I insisted the dealer get it put on. I liked it, I like the overall style of the car, one of the very best I have owned in 60+ years of ownership. A well put together car, solid on the road.
I think I just learned something else, because I thought that all V200s that year had the continental-look decklid. I’m glad you had a great experience – solid Chrysler engineering and execution in these cars, from what I’ve read about them. The Valiant was always reliable, from start to finish.
Robert, I also don’t like the toilet seat….but that pales in hearing about a 64 year old told about the guy who got it new from the dealer. A car, or any physical object for that matter, that has accompanied you for that kind of time must be amazing. Congratulations on that!
I always thought that it was a weird styling quirk to have a two door car that looked as though it was supposed to be a four door instead!
I agree that more could probably have been done to differentiate the two-door’s greenhouse and roofline.
I will confess to being one of those guys who is pretty sure of himself, but am also one open to evidence that I’m wrong.
These are easy cars to confuse – I an still unable to reliably ID early Valiants by year. But I still remember a baby blue one owned by friends of my parents when I was a tot. It had the cat’s eye taillights and the toilet seat deck, and I remember walking around and around it, taking in the many details that seemed so strange to me at maybe age 4 or 5.
Within the context of 2025, it’s those slightly alienesque styling details that I find the most fascinating on these cars.
Doubtlessly I am in the minority with this option; but I find the 4 door sedan a better looking car than the 2 door models were.
I have the same opinion of the 1971 AMC Hornet and the 1977 Chevy Nova.
I agree with two of your choices above for sure, but I do like the look of the two-door 1975 – ’79 Chevy Nova.
Poor Chrysler couldn’t afford to tool up a proper coupe roof for the two door hardtop which makes this a somewhat unfortunate mongrel. These coupes were pretty rare on the ground; nice to see two survivors.
It’s interesting to see in Chrysler’s history how one dry spell or setback could then affect its product line immediately after. The quality control disaster of the beautiful ’57 cars, combined with the economic recession of ’58, surely must have affected the Valiant program budget – hence the shared roofline. Paul, I hope you can appreciate that I didn’t refer to these as “coupes”. LOL
Maybe it’s just me, but from the front perspective, that light blue Valiant looks like a 1963 Studebaker Lark.
I absolutely agree. The prominent trapezoidal grille looks handsome on both cars.
I’m less enthusiastic over the front-ends of the 1st gen Valiant/Lark. Really, to any of the ersatz Mercedes grilles that Studebaker plastered on the Hawks, beginning in 1956. I wouldn’t call them particularly bad and they were unique among domestic manufacturers.
Still, I’m much more partial to the more conventional front-end of the 1961-62 Dodge Lancer.
Great finds! Every time I see a first-gen Valiant (and it’s been at least a decade since my last sighting, in the Portland suburbs if I remember correctly), I always stop to absorb some new detail or styling flourish (Exner gave us a lot to look at) and file them away in my always perfect memory banks (ha!), ready for instant recall at the approriate time. While I do like to be right, I am open to corrections when provided by another self-annointed expert, of which there seem to be many in the CC readership.
Of the three domestic compacts introduced for the 1960 model year, I have always favored the Valiant, which seemed to strike a great balance in size, performance, engineering innovation, and styling breatkthrough (although admittedly overdone). While I cannot deny the ground-breaking innovations of the Corvair, I find it unfortunate that the cheap, barebones Falcon seemed to become the template for the industry.
Exner often gave us a visual feast. What’s interesting is that, at least aesthetically, the Detroit three often served up the same template as we had seen in the original three compacts. Ford gave us Escorts which were the least visually daring; Chrysler gave us Neons which pushed the stylistic envelope, and Chevrolet gave us Cavaliers which seemed inspired by European design. Actually, the Corvair was the reverse – it seemed to have inspired European design. But still, the Fords often seemed the most basic.
The initial RWD Escort with its “dog bone” grille had a certain character, especially the sporty ones with the Type 49 body shell: https://auctions.manorparkclassics.com/auction/lot/19-1969-ford-escort-twin-cam/?lot=752&sd=1 The Mk2 RWD car was about as generic a small European car as it was possible to make in the late ’70s: https://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C1288726 That’s what the FWD Escort we got was building on — porridge in a different bowl.
I believe it was a ’62 or ’63, but a college classmate had a blue 2-dr with the 225 slant-six with Chrysler’s Hyper-Pak: longer intake and exhaust manifolds, big 4-barrel carb, camshaft, and other stuff, all off the shelf from your local Plymouth dealer. It was definitely the hottest car in town at the time.
IIRC, the Hyper-Pak was initially installed on the 170 slant-six, which was more of revver than the 225. But I wouldn’t be surprised if the Hyper-Pak dealer kit would work on the 225, as well.
It was a good performance upgrade for the A-body before the LA V8 became available.
I read about the Hyper Pak when I was originally putting this together, and was fascinated by it. I left it out of my rundown of powerplants because I couldn’t find a way to give enough information about it and not add another tangent. It also seemed to be a much lower-volume offering.
I’m glad you two mentioned it.
IDK if there’s already been a CC on the Hyper Pak. If not, seems like it would be a good topic for one.
FWIW, the dealer-installed Hyper Pak coincided with the short-lived NASCAR compact series of 1960-61 and I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that the two went hand-in-hand. The short version is that, at that early stage of the compact game, neither Ford nor GM were too interested in developing high-performance versions and Chrysler, being the lone purveyor of performance development for the Valiant, simply ran away with the NASCAR series and it was cancelled after only two races.
BTW one correction, the 145HP 225/6 became optional mid year ’61.
However mine is the standard 101HP 170/6.
The quickest way to tell the difference visually is the length of the upper water pump inlet hose.
It is about an inch long on the 170/6 and two inches long on the 225/6.
P.P.S., the 225/6 was a $47.35 option over the standard 170/6 beginning in mid 1961.
Two lovely survivors .
-Nate
I was also glad to see them – and fascinatingly within four weeks of each other. I can’t remember the last time I had seen even one two-door first-generation Valiant, let alone two.
I can not put my finger on why I think the two-door Valiant or Dodge Lancer attracts me. I did not even know Valiant had a two-door.
My partner of 20 years once told me he had an early 60s Valiant in the late 60s when he was in high school. We never really discussed cars during our decades together perhaps because most of our time together was in NYC, developing careers, and cars were not an issue.
He did enjoy my cars, a 1976 Eldo convertible, a 1985-86 Dodge Colt hatchback that I had to teach him how to shift. About 2000, I moved to the ME for work, left my 1996 Sebring LXI with him in NYC, and I lost count how many times that car was towed for parking violations. I had a gas station garage in NYC where he could take the Sebring. The station owner once emailed me he would pad-lock the hood if my partner ever opened the hood again. Perhaps he was trying to put water in the tires because all those nodules looked the same.
I see an early 60s Valiant or Lancer and I think of my companion for 20 years, His first car, and not a car guy.
I like that these Valiants brought back these memories for you. Thank you for sharing them.
Owners of these Valiants should hold a convention at this office building here in northern Virginia. Officially, it’s called the Tycon Courthouse Building, but colloquially it’s always been known as the “Toilet Bowl Building.”
One hundred percent, they should. This could not be more perfect a venue. Sponsored by Ty-D-Bol.
Eric703:
This museum just bowls me over….!
https://www.guggenheim.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/architecture-srgm-extrior-aerial-view-square-e1493157618691.jpg
This museum just bowls me over….!😂
https://www.guggenheim.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/architecture-srgm-extrior-aerial-view-square-e1493157618691.jpg
The 1960 and 1961 Valiant had the cat’s eyes taillights. The 1962 has the round taillights located where the reverse lights were on the 60 and 61. The white car featured at the top is a ’62 with a ’60 trunk lid.
I love toilet seats of any kind! sooo useful!
Installed a ’61 toilet seat on my ”61 Lancer. Looked very cool on that ugly and unique car.
It’s name was Virgil.
After the chief stylist! I love it.
By “toilet seat” I thought it was in reference to the early Valiant’s vaguely Edsel-esque front grille!
I guess, due to the sloped back trunk styling, there needed to be an impression in the trunklid to provide room for the spare tire.
The early Valiant’s grille, to me, doesn’t so much remind me of the Edsel’s horse collar thing, but I suppose I could see it if the Edsel’s grille was stretched horizontally. Yes, I can see it now.
I like your theory about why the toilet seat trunk lid was needed, but I do also then wonder if the horizontal surface of the reshapes decklid of the ’62 was then raised for added clearance.
Not at all: The spare tire was under the trunk floor, like in most modern cars. The decklid was just a stylistic affectation.
Aaron:
I call it misleading.
I remember these from my childhood – well, the sedans anyway. Very special, very upmarket-seeming family sedans here. Very strange to look at too; different from anything else but not unpleasant. As Stephane says above, we lost the toilet seat for ’62, but still kept a faint reference to it with that strange mid-trunk badge. The Dodge Lancer pictured above was much neater.
Kudos to the owner for keeping the car on the road, even if it is a mix-and-match of different model year parts.
Peter, I think that in the spirit of the approaching Halloween holiday in the U.S., it’s appropriate that the white car is a Valiant-Frankenstein of sorts, to paraphrase the idea in your last sentence.
Glad so many think they’re attractive. Although we had three Valiants as kidmobiles growing up, none of them were from that first generation. Really good cars, but really ugly.
I could have misidentified this car at first as well, your brain gets blinded by the toilet seat.
Shame about the awkward hardtop roof, imagine a short sloping roof without those horrible fixed panes.
My favourite of these is the 2 door sedan.
Our car shows in Australia are usually well represented with at least one of these cars, they were always popular even when they were just obsolete old cars, so plenty of these left.
And there have been a few Lancers, wagons and Hardtops imported in recent years.
It’s cool to learn of the appreciation for these in Oceania!
Greetings.
It was great meeting you that day.
I am the owner of the ’61 Valiant V200 2-door hardtop pictured at Retro on Roscoe, a show I help run.
It is 1 of 18,586 built.
That white ’62 pictured also has a ’60 front end and grille.
It is missing the hood trim that all ’62s had.
’62 also moved the hood release to the top of the grille where it was visible, versus the center medallion latch on ’60/’61s.
All ’60s were 4 doors including wagons.
When Valiant became a Plymouth model in ’61, the V100 2 door sedans and V200 2 door hardtops were added to the line up.
’62 ushered in the Signet 200.
Thank you for your write up.
David, it was great meeting you and photographing your Valiant that day. There’s always a part of me that hopes the vehicle owners see these features, so I’m glad you did. Retro On Roscoe is such a fun event – I’m glad I ventured out for it for the first time this year.
The white car seems to be a bit of a mixed bag of parts to me.
It has ’62 taillights with a ’61 deck lid and a ’61 Front clip.
A peek under at the gas tank and front suspension would help to tell for sure. – Also, where is Daniel Stern to lend his expertise in all things slanted and early A Body MoPar?
Unless it was somehow a crossoverver at the production facility using up the last bit of ’61 parts on a car that was built with ’62 quarter panels and tail lights.?
The ’60’s and ’61’s have a different trunk floor and gas tank, along with front suspension bits that do not interchange with the ’62-’66 A-body Platform.
Lexington seems like a nice community for a weekend trip from my location… maybe I need to go and see for myself.
Any pictures of the dashboard and steering wheel?
I did not get pictures of the interior, though the owner had make me feel very welcome to take them.
The model year was answered in the write-up: ’62 with ’60 front grille / clip and trunk. Don’t feel bad – very occasionally if I don’t have time to read an entire article but still want to show support and interest, I’ll still comment. I’m sure many of us have done this.
Got it. My speed reading has failed me once again.
We’re all here to have fun. 🙂 And I appreciate all the information in your comment. Just by your handle, I’m sure you’re a wealth of Mopar info. And I also miss Daniel Stern’s various bon mots.
Hiya, JD. Thanks for the nod!
Yup, as Joseph confirms, the white car is a mixed bag. ’60 front clip and trunk lid, on a ’62 body (look closely at the 3rd pic and you see the ’62 dashboard and steering wheel). So I guess the owner was kinda-right: on average it’s a ’61!
This was not a thing.
Daniel, you have always come through. Thanks, Man!