Being reasonably well off and shopping for a new car in 1965 would have been a nightmare for the indecisive, as there was a virtual bounty of riches in American showrooms. While the Marlin and the Fairlane are often cited as rare misses in a year filled with hits (and even they have their fans), rarely has the automotive industry gotten things so universally right as they did in 1965. That magic still works today, as Hyperpack found out by spotting this 1965 Dodge Coronet 500 parked out front at a used car lot in Pennsylvania recently. The Batman-like window stickers (Wow! Biff! Punch!) are probably unnecessary when you’re trying to peddle a beautiful Mopar classic from one of the greatest years in the game, but they do add a little authenticity to the presentation, if not a little absurdity. But what happened when the Coronet was new on the lot? It had a lot of stiff opposition from not only the Plymouth dealer across town, but also the rest of the Big Four. How did it stack up?
Although 1965 was the year of the Mustang and the Impala (people tend to forget that the Impala was the statistical success of the year, with over a million in sales), there were still plenty of intermediates to choose from. The relative staidness of the Fairlane may have helped sales of the Coronet and its Plymouth-branded companion, the Satellite, but there were still four GM brands with which to contend. The Chevelle, Tempest, F-85, and Special ate up plenty of sales opportunities that may have otherwise found themselves on the doorstep of their friendly Dodge dealer, but that’s always the case.
Not helping or hurting was the “Fratzog” insignia, which is found no fewer than four times on the Coronet’s exterior. As you might have heard, Dodge has resurrected the logo for its newest Chargers. I like using nostalgia for good, so I guess I’m all right with the choice.
If the dealer’s colorful call outs are to be believed, this Coronet is big-block-equipped for a fun Saturday night on the streets of Pennsylvania in 1965, at least if you weren’t hunting for bigger game such as 427 Galaxies or other Mopars with Max Wedges under the hood. The 383 was only available as a 330-horsepower four barrel, which came standard with a 3.23:1 axle ratio regardless of transmission choice. The 3.23 might be the best compromise axle ratio in Chrysler’s catalog; it’s low enough for some torquey fun, but not annoying on the expressway. At the track, this was most likely a mid-to-high 15 second car, which was more than enough real world grunt to handle most other intermediates of 1965 when driven by someone with a little talent behind the wheel.
A neat, quietly patriotic styling touch is the red, white, and blue inserts on the fender trim, which looks especially good on this “Bright Red” (literally, that’s the name of the color, a far cry from the TorRed of a few years later) Coronet.
The Dodge Polara of 1965 with its bigger C-Body platform freed the B-Body Coronet to be what it really should have been all along, a perfectly sized intermediate. At 204.3 inches long, it was eight inches shorter than the Polara and squarely in contention with the GM A-Bodies. I think the ’65 model had the best styling of the four-model-year period of 1962 to 1965, and that’s not always the case; oftentimes, the first one is the best, but it’s common knowledge that the ’62 models were polarizing at best.
The 1965 model squared away any remaining vestiges of the original design’s quirks (aside perhaps from the very “Mopar” roofline) and left behind a relatively benign but attractive car at an equally attractive price point.
How did the Coronet 500 Hardtop compare to its competition? With a base price of $2,637, Dodge sold 33,300 Coronet 500s (in hardtop and convertible bodystyles), and all of them were V8 powered and had bucket seats with a console. Hardtops were also available with a bench in the Coronet 440 line, but let’s focus solely on the bucket seat cars (with a couple exceptions at the end).
How did the Coronet’s linemate, the Plymouth Satellite, fare in comparison? With a base price of $2,612 (almost a wash with the Coronet 500), Plymouth sold 23,341 Satellite Hardtops (which had bucket seats and a console like the Coronet 500). I vacillate over which of the two I prefer, but most of the time I side with the Coronet; its nose and tail simply seem more smoothly integrated to the basic shape. It shared the Coronet’s drivelines, with a 365-horsepower 426 wedge as the top street engine (which doesn’t count the Hemi-powered A990 lightweights).
How about the aforementioned Fairlane? With a lukewarm makeover and a High-Performance 289/271 as the (rare) top engine option, it seems outmatched by the Mopar duo, and buyers agreed: with a base price hovering in the $2,500 range (less for the six and more for the V8), the Fairlane 500 Sports Coupe sold only 15,141 units. It seems that nobody pictured the new Fairlane as a sporty car.
How about the Chevy juggernaut and the Malibu Sport Coupe? Chevy didn’t do a very good job of breaking down production by model, but the Malibu SS Sport Coupe had a base price of $2,484 with a six and $2,590 with a V8. Over 81,000 examples of the Malibu SS found buyers, enough to make it the year’s intermediate sales champion.
Pontiac was hot throughout the ’60s, and although the LeMans Hardtop Coupe didn’t sell quite as well as its Chevrolet equivalent, it found 60,548 buyers in this bodystyle alone, but even though bucket seats were standard, the console was an option. Its base price was $2,501, and a four-barrel 326 with 285 horsepower was the top engine option in non-GTOs.
The $2,784 Oldsmobile Cutlass Holiday Coupe was significantly more expensive than the LeMans, but it still sold well at 46,138 units. Behind the Chevelle’s optional 350-horse 327, the Cutlass may have had the gutsiest small block in the category with an optional 315-horsepower 330. Bucket seats were standard in the Cutlass Sports Coupe, but the console was not.
The last of the BOP trio was the Buick Skylark Sport Coupe, which was another popular GM A-Body with 51,199 sold (46,698 of them V8s). The Buick was actually a little less expensive than the Oldsmobile (so much for the Sloan Ladder) at $2,622 for the V6 and $2,692 for the V8. The most powerful engine in a non-Gran Sport Skylark in 1965 was a 250-horsepower 300 small block. The 300 is not a Nailhead, by the way, nor is it a Baby Nailhead; in fact, the two engines couldn’t possibly have less in common. Cylinder number one isn’t even numbered on the same side. (Rant over.)
The Skylark is the only car but one in our comparison to have a standard bench seat (buckets were optional); I know this for a fact because the car pictured above is my car and it has a bench seat. According to the “Daily Car Report” I ordered from Sloan Museum, 32,562 V8 Skylark Sport Coupes had bucket seats, so the majority of buyers ordered them.
I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention the Rambler Classic 770-H Hardtop, which packed engines up to a 270-horsepower 327. It sold 5,706 units with a base price of $2,548, and as you might expect, it’s the other car with a standard bench. The Classic is a handsome car, but it clearly didn’t stand a chance against the General Motors (and Mopar to some extent) onslaught.
It looks like the Coronet 500 fared pretty well against its sporty intermediate counterparts in sales, and more than held its own in drivetrain options. It’s true that because Chrysler Corporation didn’t offer specialty models such as the GTO, 4-4-2, and Gran Sport in 1965, the standard bucket seat models from competing makes come up looking artificially thin in a powertrain comparison, but including them would only serve to complicate an already lengthy discussion. It’s missing the most important point anyway: What happened 60 years ago is irrelevant when you’re looking at a hot 383-powered Dodge on some random used car lot today. WOW!
Related CC Reading
Curbside Classic: 1965 Dodge Coronet 500 – Family Carma (by Paul N)
COAL: 1965 Dodge Coronet 440 – My First Car At Age Fifteen (by SP1990)
COAL Outtake: 1965 Dodge Coronet – A Good Friend Finally Gets His Mopar (by Ben Dinger)
Back in ’84 I almost bought a ’66 Coronet 500 hardtop. Canary yellow, black interior, bucket seats, console and floor shifter for the Torqueflight that was behind a poly 318! Could have been mine for $500. Not knowing Chrysler’s future, I passed. Sigh…
I drove past the car again today. Still there in the rain this morning. Looks good on the corner I must say. I enjoy the crispiness and lightness of these B body MoPars compared to the larger ones that come around in ’66-’70.
Out of curiosity, do they have a price tag on it?
I am not sure If I got that in my picture set.??
Yes! if you zooooooooooom in on:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/149826863@N07/54785605075/in/album-72177720313273644/
asking price is $31990.
Well, it is a dealer. If it’s as nice as it looks I guess that’s not crazy, but it’s too rich for me! My Price is Right guess would have been $24,995.
Good looking car. Not sure I would have chosen it over the GM offerings either.
Seems a little overkill to have emblems on all 4 corners. Just 1 each front / rear would look better.
As usual though, I wouldn’t mind owning it today.
My grandparents were MoPar loyalists. They bought a ‘65 Coronet, trading-in their ‘63 Polara. Both cars were four-door sedans, both “Hearing Aide Beige.” The ‘65 was to me, age five, beautiful. Clean looking. I’d love to find one now, but we rarely see them. Great article, and I thank you for taking me back in time.
Great writeup and food for thought! I’ll admit that up to a certain point in my life, the more angular, traditional styling that Chrysler employed in this era did little for me, especially compared with the more curvaceous offerings from other makes.
In 2025, though, I find this look refreshing, especially given the rounded forms of pretty much everything new.
I found it interesting that the Plymouth equivalent, the Satellite, was only a few dollars cheaper!
Thanks Joe. I really do like the Coronet, and would have certainly bought one if the right one came along at the right time, but I like the BOP trio the best. When I bought my Skylark, I would have also been happy with a Cutlass. Tempests were a little more expensive even back then, so they were out due to price if nothing else.
Nice history and comparison of offerings from the competition. I think that for styling the Pontiac has it over the Chevrolet. As for the Fairlane, “Hey, Grandma! Nice looking car for you aa your friends to go shopping!”
I continue to believe that the Chevrolet version of the 1964-65 A body was a stylistic dullard compared with the BOP versions. As a kid who spent years around a 64 Cutlass hardtop that would fit right into today’s discussion, I find the Olds to be right up there behind the Pontiac as the best looking of the lot. The Buick was close on their heels, but the Chevy was not even in the conversation. I am still trying to figure out what it is about the Chevelle that fails to work for me – I think there is a certain “thickness” to it that does not affect its BOP siblings.
I think it might just be the extra length, JP. I think the Chevelle is about seven or eight inches shorter than the BOP cars, so maybe they look a bit stubby in comparison? I’d still drive one though.
The ’65 is an improvement over the ’64 which is dull as dishwater-about as bland as the ’65 Fairlane.
I think it’s a combination of the shorter length and the more skirted rear wheel openings that really screw up the look compared to BOP A bodies
The 64 front end looks ramblerish which doesn’t help, but the 65 front end is pretty nice looking at least(I actually like it better than the 66 a lot of people seem to hold in high regard)
I have never warmed to the 1965 B bodies. When I was younger, I was surrounded by the Oldsmobile and Pontiac A body cars in this trim level and found them far crisper in their styling. The Mopar versions seemed unable to jettison the slightly oddball factor that had dogged their products after 1957-59. Now that I have gotten older, I look at these 65 versions as interesting cars that had most of their personalities removed, sort of like how Ford sucked most of the personality out of the styling of its Galaxie/LTD by 1968. I now see the 1964 version of the Dodge as the peak balance between conventional good looks and the unique personality these cars were born with.
What is interesting is how much of a non-factor Ford was in this segment in 1965. I have not done the homework, but the Fairlane seems so much smaller than the GM/Chrysler cars in this segment.
I’m loving the glassine paint .
I too remember those millions of beige 1965 Dodges, good cars all of them if a bit thirsty .
-Nate
I like it now, but no price displayed, are the selling it or is it the suck you in car on that lot to get you to stop n look, in 65 I could not have got one or any of its competitors new without major hassles and tariffs being imposed, now however there are several just in the area where I’m staying including one in full NASCAR nostalgia livery.
I always thought that these were handsome looking cars, but likely would have preferred the Pontiac or Buick in this comparison. But at the age of 5, I probably wasn’t in the market for a car back then. ;o)
Nice write up, Aaron. I thought that maybe you were visiting PA when you saw this car, but then realized that you likely pulled it off of the Cohort…. I still need to figure out how to use that. LOL.
Here’s one that I shot in the end of June in 2018 at our local Cars and Coffee. Apologies to JPC for not shooting the Stude next to it. For it to be more than 7 years later and for me to remember that I had this car on my iPhone means that it must have made an impression!
Here’s what really grabbed my attention when I walked by this car… Its interior. Wow indeed….
Not sure what was lurking in the engine room, but it most likely was a V8 judging by the dual exhaust. Whether this was a 318 or a 383, I have no clue, but I doubt that it was the venerable 225 aka The Leaning Tower of Power….
Well, there’s a sign on the windshield that says “383”, so that’s what I assume it has. Quite rare for the Coronet and at 330 hp should make this quite a performer. Of course the 426 Hemi was also available and a terror on the dragstrip, but quite finicky for street use. The 383 would have been a nice compromise.
I like the interior more so than the exterior. Have to say that, for me, the high point of interiors has to be between the years 64-67 with peak being 65-66.
I definitely would have taken the Satellite over the Coronet, primarily due to the busy styling of the multiple fratzogs adorning the four corners of the Dodge. Better still, the 1964 Plymouth Fury (same size as the 1965 Satellite) is an even cleaner design.
As an aside, I read a few comments on Mopar websites that claim the cylinder heads of the 383-4v were similar (if not outright identical) on all of them through the mid-to-late sixties. Chrysler made a big deal in ads for the 1968 Road Runner 383 having 440 heads. That would mean the only real difference of the Road Runner 383 was the 440 camshaft. Maybe someone of the CC best-and-brightest can shed some light on this.
In 68-70 all, meaning 383 and 440, received the same heads (906 open chamber) whether HP or non-HP. The 383 HP used the same springs as the 440HP. The 383 LP and 440 LP used different springs among them. The 383 HP cam was the same as the 440 HP cam. Exhaust manifolds the same as there were no HP or LP exhausts other than 2bbl vs 4bbl. Obviously the intakes are different since B block and RB block.
The heads on a 65 383 would have been 516 closed chamber heads with smaller exhaust valves (1.60 vs 1.74) than what came in 1968 is my understanding.
That’s fine for 1965 and 1968-70.
But what about 1966-67? The debate seems to surround the earlier 440’s 915 cylinder heads in that it’s suggested they were also used on the 383-4v.
IOW, the 1968-70 was ‘not’ the first 383 to get the 440 heads.
The AMA specifications are revealing on this point; see page 8:
https://over-drive-magazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/1967-Dodge-Coronet-Charger-AMA-1-29.pdf
Here is something on Mopar heads concerning the 400 and misconceptions:
https://www.hotrod.com/articles/cylinder-heads
Thanks for the link to the Hotrod article and easy to see where the confusion arises. As mentioned previously, all 1968-70 big-block wedge Mopars got the same 906 heads, from the 383-2v to the 440-6v. Chrysler simply didn’t tell anyone about it (other than the 383 Road Runner and Dodge Magnum). 1967 and earlier did ‘not’ use the same heads across the board.
What’s interesting is that someone with a 1967 or earlier 383 could get a cheap performance boost if they found a 1968-70 383-2v in a boneyard in something as mundane as a station wagon since those heads would be identical to what was used in high-performance big-blocks during those years.
It certainly has a lot more curb appeal than our beige ’65 Coronet wagon did. But yes, in 1965 this was not a stylistic standout. But then a lot of Mopar buyers were buying because what was below the styling.
David Pearson’s many wins that year in a ’65 Coronet didn’t hurt either. My anecdotal observations back then in the mid-Atlantic states that younger men of a certain inclination towards racing bought these in disproportionate numbers. They had a vibe to them, more purposeful than the very highly styled GM A bodies.
Makes sense…there weren’t many GM intermediates on NASCAR tracks, and those that were there were also-rans without any real factory support (after 1963).
I actually prefer the Plymouth over the Dodge. I like the front much better. The Fairlane and Rambler would come in dead last. Just before those would be the Comet Caliente. The BOP trio always struck me as full size cars back then when compared to the Mopar and Ford twins. However, I always wanted to get my hands on a 65 Malibu back in the 70s to work on. Rhyme or reason but the Malibu would be #1 and the Satellite #2 in my pecking order.
I thought about including the Comet, but it would have probably had to have been the Cyclone to match up with the bucket seat models, and I guess I’ve never classified it as an intermediate. I’d probably take a Comet over a Satellite or a Coronet, and I like it way more than a Fairlane.
This Coronet 500 looks quite nice in resale red and white, but $32K? I recently bought a new midsize car for a price within striking distance of that number. I realize the comparison is apples and oranges, but still….
I agree with most here that the BOP midsizers would be my first choice, with Pontiac edging out the other two. I also agree with JPC that the 1964-65 Malibu is a letdown compared to the BOP group. I think it’s simply too bland overall, which was rectified nicely for 1966-67.
That “Pontiac”, if the inside was white, is my aunt/uncle’s, new ride in “65”.
Even though I’m mainly a Ford guy the Buick would be my pick of the litter for the 65 intermediates. Second place would have to go to the MIA Comet Cyclone, heck it even has “portholes” like a Buick, with the Poncho at 3rd. From there it is a little harder to choose but probabaly the Olds, Chevy, Ford. No interest in the Mopars or AMC.
I do think the Fratzogs starting off the ridge on the front fenders is a nice little touch.
The perfect sized cars, I like these Mopars, the Satellite as well, hard to pick one over the other, love the distinctive rooflines
Then its the Chevrolet, I’ve always loved the 65, of course the GM cars are way ahead of everyone else in styling, But the Mopars have their charms,
The few times I have seen these Coronets and Satellites at car shows, I’m left with the impression they have a bit more quality built in to them over the late 60s B bodies
If we are just talking about styling I think this is my ranking.
Pontiac – hands down the best looking of the group
Plymouth – I like the way they managed to give the 4 year old B body a pretty good family resemblance to the brand new C body Fury.
Buick – depending on color and details these 2 could easily swap.
Rambler – I know they weren’t cool, but this is one of my favorite ’60s AMCs
Olds
Dodge – Both a little too boxy for my taste, but I think the Cutlass has better details.
Chevy
Ford – Bland at best, maybe cheap & awkward depending on my mood.
Our neighbors had a 1965 Coronet sedan in metallic turquoise. Not a bad-looking car, but very conservative. They kept it well into the 1970s.
The hardtop coupes and convertibles have a nice, no-nonsense look about them. The Coronet was certainly good enough for Miss Jane Hathaway on The Beverly Hillbillies.
For me, the choice at the time would have been a toss-up between the Olds Cutlass and Plymouth Satellite. Today I would seriously consider the Rambler 770-H, as it’s so rare.
I’d agree on the last two if we were comparing post sedans but the GM hardtop roofline is just so right.
The ’65 Fairlane is a facelift too far and looks like the generic not-new but not too old car on the cover of a parts store flyer circa 1968.
Sorry, this was meant to be a reply to Dan Cluley’s comment.
The attraction of this era of MOPAR was the excellent suspension design, especially if properly equipped. A police spec 383 Coronet or Plymouth with 11 X 3 inch drum brakes great overall performance for the era.
I had a lot of Mopars from this era around me, my grandmother’s last car, bought a few months before she died was a ’65 Polara. A friend’s dad had a Coronet with a 413 in it, I’m not sure what year it was, but it was the quickest car I had been in at the time they had it. This car has a good color, I don’t mind the roofline, or the white roof, but those Fratzogs are obnoxious. Especially the ones tacked onto the back end, they look like something out of a JC Whitney catalog or a local long gone place, Midnight Auto Parts, which seemed to have endless loads of ugly accessories in stock. Give me any non awful colored 383 and up B Body Mopar from ’68 on up to ’74, and I would be very happy.