“If You Can Dream It, You Can Do It” – Walt Disney
(first posted 4/27/2017) No matter the make or type of vehicle, seeing an exotic concept car go into production with minimal changes is invariably a proud and exciting moment for any car lover. It’s one thing for a production car to feature influence from a concept, but when the concept is essentially put into production form as is, that’s taking it to a whole new level. As for the latter, a prime example is the Plymouth Prowler.
Introduced at the North American International Auto Show in 1993 in concept form, the Prowler was truly a head-turning vehicle that stood out, even among many other exciting Chrysler concepts of the era. Created as a tribute to hot rods of the past, the Prowler deserves at least partial credit with inspiring the “retro” trend that swept Detroit in the following years, with retro incarnations of cars such as the Thunderbird, SSR, Mustang, 300, Flex, Camaro, and Challenger.
Beyond eye-catching elements such as its 20-inch oversized rear wheels, floating front and rear bumpers, and striking overall silhouette, the Prowler’s styling was highlighted by its long triangular-shaped hood with its aggressive IndyCar-style open front wheels. It was quite a sight to behold!
(This featured example boasts non-factory body-colored bumpers, hardtop, and chrome grille)
The ’93 Prowler concept was well-received, and following up on the success of the Viper, Chrysler actually put the car into production with minimal changes to the design. It was just another satisfying piece of Chrysler’s mid-1990s renaissance, which saw the corporation take a more dedicated approach to design, engineering, and internal operations, bringing the automaker out of its K-car rut.
Thankfully, with “car guys” at the helm, emotion played a huge part in the products Chrysler was rolling out, resulting in many exciting concept cars being put into production with little disappointment. Reaching everything from the compact Neon to the Ram pickup to its trio of minivans, Chrysler styling in the mid-1990s was at its most expressive point since the fuselage cars of the early-1970s.
Arriving as a limited production car for the 1997 model year, the Plymouth Prowler was available in just one standard configuration with no options for an MSRP of $38,300 — quite a hefty price tag for a Plymouth, considering its next-most expensive model in the U.S., the Grand Voyager SE carried a base price of $20,755.
In fact, after the $66K Dodge Viper, the Plymouth Prowler was the second-most expensive 1997 vehicle sold by the Chrysler Corporation in North America, more expensive than any other Dodge, Plymouth, Chrysler, Jeep, or Eagle. Just 457 Prowlers were produced for its short 1997 model year.
The only color offered for 1997 was the same as the concept’s, dubbed “Prowler Purple”, so if one wanted a more muted color scheme, umm… “Uh-oh, better get Macco”. For the Prowler’s price, it did come generously equipped, with standard features including black leather seats, remote keyless entry, multi-disc CD changer, and a 7-speaker stereo.
Decidedly more of a show-car than a go-car when compared to the Viper, the 1997 Prowler was powered exclusively by LH cars’ SOHC 3.5L V6, making 214 horsepower and 221 lb-ft torque, which was mated to a 4-speed automatic with Chrysler’s Autostick manual shift mode.
Following a 1998-MY hiatus, among more minor changes, such as the choice of four exterior colors, the Prowler’s second model year of 1999 saw appreciated increases in power, thanks to a new high-output version of the 3.5L now featuring an aluminum block. Rated at 253 horsepower and 250 lb-ft torque, the 1999 Prowler boasted a 1.3-second quicker zero-to-sixty time of 5.9 seconds.
Unlike most non-truck/SUV Chrysler products of the era, the Prowler was a rear-wheel drive car, and the transmission was located in the rear of the car, giving it a near 50/50 weight distribution. The Prowler also notably made extensive use of aluminum in the chassis and body, with components such as the frame, hood, decklid, doors, control arms, and steering knuckles made from the lightweight metal. A key benefit of this was a relatively low curb weight of under 2,900 pounds.
Having gone over the basics, I’ll now address the elephant in the room: Was there ever any intended purpose for the Prowler beyond a creative muscle flex by Chrysler, showing that they could put an extremely expressive and impractical car into production just because?
I mean, was a highly-styled $40,000 2-seat roadster really meant to bring buyers who were looking at minivans and compact cars that cost less than half as much into Chrysler-Plymouth showrooms? Likely not.
Especially since the Prowler probably appealed most to the affluent mid-life crisis crowd, whereas all other Plymouths appealed primarily to young families and/or the budget conscious shopper who were probably more excited about the addition of a driver’s side sliding door on the new Voyager than some hotrod show car sitting feet away from it in the showroom.
On that note, however, the Prowler at least had one fan in young blonde-haired child named Brendan who was about a decade away from getting his drivers license. This was in fact, used for the Christmas card my mom sent out that year.
Yet notwithstanding this, there actually was an intended purpose to the Prowler. Beyond any “excitement” it was meant to create, the Prowler was as a matter of fact, the first of a series of retro styled concepts supposedly meant to inspire the designs of future Plymouths. Following up on the Prowler, there were the Pronto and the Pronto Cruiser, both of which heavily influenced the production PT Cruiser. There were also others such as the Pronto Spyder and Howler, the latter of which was essentially a Prowler with a functional trunk.
Unfortunately, the only other vehicle to see production from these concepts, the aforementioned PT Cruiser, was ultimately launched as a Chrysler due to the automaker dropping the Plymouth brand altogether. It only figures that after years of product and development starvation, just as there was a legitimate foreseeable future for the brand, Plymouth was sent to the gallows. Isn’t it ironic, don’t you think?
Had Plymouth been kept on life support, and slowly weened off of it with new products boasting thoroughly unique styling from other Mopars, the brand might have truly had a chance of achieving a level of relevance and success it had not seen in decades. Who knows if there was a legitimate vision and plan, but the idea of a lineup inspired by its final concepts is at least an interesting thought.
Several production Chryslers, Dodges, and Jeeps in ensuing years did indeed owe their designs to radical concept cars. Of course, Plymouth never further benefited from the Prowler and its following concepts, which makes the Prowler stand out even more as an abnormality. Among a truncated lineup of the value-oriented Voyager/Grand Voyager minivan, Neon compact sedan/coupe, an Breeze midsize sedan, the Prowler stuck out like a flamboyant trust fund child put into a family of simple middle-class Americans.
Upon its return, Prowler production shot up to 3,921 examples for 1998, its highest-production year. Apart from the annual color changes, including several special editions, yearly changes were negligible, if any. With Plymouth’s discontinuation, the Prowler transitioned to a Chrysler midway through the 2001 model year, and it was sold exclusively as a Chrysler for its final 2002 model year.
In total, 11,702 Prowlers were produced, with 8,532 of them being Plymouths. If there were indeed big plans for the Prowler, at least in terms of what it was meant to foreshadow, they ultimately did not become a reality. Apart from the PT Cruiser, itself somewhat of a mixed success and indisputably a dead-end venture, the Prowler really was just an artful display of excess.
But in an industry where the norm is usually practical yet boring cars, sometimes a vehicle that places emotion and the power of creativity at the forefront, and costs a lot of money doing so is rather refreshing.
Featured 1999 Yellow Plymouth Prowler – Photographed by Brian Turney, a.k.a. “MagnumSRT8 Brian”
They did the best job they could with the bumper, and blackening it diminishes its presence so I don’t know why you’d go for body colour. Not my car, however.
When this and the Viper appeared, US cars entered my awareness again after a long absence. I do appreciate that they were always low-volume halo products, but the esprit-de-corps glow from actually producing these for customers never seemed to infect the rest of the line – except for the 300.
Ive seen Prowlers with the front bumpers removed and the turn signals relocated. looks better. But boy, that nose would take a beating parallel parking, wouldn’t it?
I knew a guy years ago that removed them. Car looked soooo much better. He never parked it where it could be damaged, so no problem.
I always thought the Prowler was a very silly looking automobile; worse than the PT Cruiser. The few Prowler’s that I’ve seen always had a white-haired old man behind the wheel. Certainly not a vehicle a younger driver would want to be seen in.
KDD writes; “The few Prowler’s that I’ve seen always had a white-haired old man behind the wheel.”
To quote Jerry, Elaine, George, and Kramer: “Not that there’s anything wrong with that”.
Completely different context but I love Seinfeld references though.
Why would a younger driver not want to be seen in this? Younger people dream of sports cars and exotics but few have the means. Older affluent people buy them because they CAN. Younger drivers likely don’t want to be seen in bland appliance grade beige mobiles or granny’s hand me down Buick complete with the box of tissues on the back dash and Jesus fish on the trunk. But beggars can’t be choosers.
Fair statement. It’s like how I view the Corvette. How many kids growing up have a poster of one on their bedroom walls and lust over it every time they see one. Yet, I think that 99% of all Corvettes I’ve ever seen are driven by men with white hair.
Also, from your comment I couldn’t help but think of another Seinfeld reference.
Not true in the 50’s to the early 70’s most people seen driving Corvettes were under 30 and good number under 25 which includes me. Never owned one but drove my friends ’67 427 475hp on numerous occasions. I doubt now at age 66 now I could even get in one.
Well maybe back then, but keep in mind I wasn’t alive in the 1950s-1970s. Just the other day, I saw an elderly man actually park his new Corvette Stingray convertible on the grass in order not to risk having someone park next to him.
I had a professor in college who was in his 60s and owned a late-model Corvette he bought as his mid-life crisis car. Said while fun, he much preferred his daily driver 4-cylinder Honda Accord EX-L.
Those same young people buying them in the 50s-early 70s are the older people who have been buying them since.
Brendan is right, I had a Corvette poster on my bedroom wall, the one with a side view of every year up to the model year the poster was printed(I forget where mine ended), and while I certainly like Corvettes, they have been about as far from my radar as they can be for me in my 20s.
Highest factory horsepower on a ’67 427 would have been 435, not 475.
From the factory,yes. But he had it balanced and blueprinted with tubular headers it was conservatively dynoed at 475hp. This was a guy who during the slot car craze in the early 60’s would pay $100.00 which was in todays money $900.00 for a winning car with silver wire wound and balanced motor and hand built wire frame. I bought the slot car from him when he got bored with it for $15.00 and loaned it to another friend who used it to come in second place in the Portland OR slot car championship. I still have it. I said all this to make the point that money was deterrent when he wanted something. I drove the car once to 130 in third and shifted into fourth and backed off at 160 mph.
Always loved these, and they greatly improved my opinion of Chrysler. Where else could you buy a road car with inboard front suspension ? Only problem was the lights – I don’t think they would be legal in Europe as they look to be too far in from the outside of the vehicle.
I remember seeing this at the 97 NY auto show and thinking how awesome they were. I was 13. Did Plymouth even have anything other than badge engineered Dodge/Chrysler products at the time? I think this car was intended to bring the “Plymouth” name back into the shopper’s lexicon. At least I know this car was the only reason I picked up a Plymouth brochure that year.
Considering that by the time the Prowler came out all Plymouth dealerships where Chrysler-Plymouth showrooms, and the Plymouth was just the car at too low a price point to put a Chrysler badge on it, I was very surprised the car came badged as a Plymouth. It didn’t really matter which badge the car got, because it would be in the same showrooms no matter what.
On the other hand, there was this logic lapse in marketing. Had the cars been badged according to the price market they were selling to, it would have been the Chrysler Prowler from day one . . . . . and the Plymouth PT Cruiser. The former ended up that way after all (although nobody thinks of the car as a Chrysler), and the latter was the original intention. Until it was decided to drop the Plymouth brand.
Sharing the showroom may have been a problem, However the overall idea that it was a direct copy of a show car translated into a limited production car with the corporate entry-level marque wasn’t all that weird. The 1953 Chevrolet Corvette was around $3500.00, at that time that was Buick Roadmaster money.
When Brendan writes: “… the Prowler really was just an artful display of excess…” I say Yes, and thank goodness for that.
Isn’t most of our entertainment some form of excess, artful or not?
When I took delivery of my new 2002 PT Cruiser there were two purple Prowlers next to it in the dealer’s ex-firehouse ready area. As the sales rep was going over the details of the PT with me, my 12 year old son William was staring at the Prowlers as if they were about to come alive.
I love the Christmas card photograph. It reminds me of an old Steve Gordon TV ad for Barney’s clothing store. The ad showed boys sitting on a NYC stoop, deciding what they would do when they grew up. One of them, apparently little Barney, said that they would all need clothes. The ad ended with the phrase: ”Even then he knew.”
With his right hand on the Prowler’s extended left bumper, even then in 1999, Brendan knew.
Nice morning read. Thank you.
I’ve always wondered just how the Prowler managed to pass crash testing standards with floating bumpers like that. We’re frontal impact standards really that lenient in the mid-90s?
I also heard that they were ridiculously expensive to insure-especially in NY,NJ,and Ct. An insurance broker told me that you needed a spotless driving record to insure one, and it still was much higher than an average sedan or luxury car.
CC Effect: At Al Packer Ford in White Marsh Maryland, there was one on the used car section of their lot when I took my Mustang over there to get the infamous Toccata Airbags replaced at their service department yesterday. I hadn’t seen one in years, probably because of the extreme rarity and now time. It was raining, and I was in a hurry and couldn’t grab any pics, but it caught my eye…. but not for the $30K they’re asking according to the listing on their internet page…..
To me, this is an example of Bob Lutz’s ego getting in the way of logic–pragmatic Plymouth was the last division that needed an expensive, extravagant 2-seat toy on the line-up, and it was silly to think having such a car would “generate showroom traffic” with people going home in a Neon or Voyager because they came to “check out” the Prowler.
I know the ploy had worked (to a degree) with Dodge and the Viper. That car made sense for Dodge, however, given the brand’s performance heritage and ongoing positioning as the “sporty” Mopar division. But like Lee Iacocca regurgitating his past product successes even when they were no longer relevant, Lutz started to come across like a broken record: make a hot 2-seat roadster to “build excitement.” It became his schtick, and he was sticking with it, all the way to GM with the Saturn Sky and Pontiac Solstice. And it didn’t work there either.
Like Brendan, I think it was a shame that Chrysler didn’t prioritize the PT Cruiser and its variants for Plymouth (or other 1990’s concepts like the Plymouth Backpack), which were fun, affordable and unique products that could have had a legitimate shot at revitalizing the moribund bargain brand.
The Plymouth Backpack was one of my favorite Chrysler concepts of the era. I agree, a true shame they didn’t put it into production because it actually made sense for Plymouth and was still something very unique.
I was thinking about the Motor Trend cover with the Back Pack on it. (maybe) I didn’t remember the name of the car, though. I like the way the bicycle fits in the bed. I think this would be better and more useful than a Smart Car. I wish I could buy one! Kind of like the Mighty Boy.
I’d like one of these for my lotto garage! 😉
I love the Prowler, and am amused by its critics. It’s one of very few cars where you have to “get it” to appreciate it. It’s silly if one has no awareness or appreciation of “hot rod” culture.
But if you do, it’s a stunning achievement. Yes, it does not have the rumbly V8 of a traditional rod, but, by golly it was mass produced, meets all government regulations AND has technical sophistication not seen in most real rods. And that is a stunning achievement.
I am forever impressed and grateful that Chrysler actually built this. It’s a true homage to an iconic auto enthusiasts subculture.
Amen to that! I remember when these were just being introduced. A factory street rod. You couldn’t build this nice a street rod for the money at the time. It was supposed to compete with the lilkes of Boyd Coddington rods. The bumpers and front fenders were supposed to be removable for a high boy look. If you can’t appreciate a high boy, then you really won’t understand the motivations for this car. Boyd Coddington was hot at the time. Beofre he sold his name and before the TV shows. Chip Foose had some input into the design. This wasn’t meant to compete with any other production car. The Prowler was meant to be a factory street rod. To sell tot he folks who wanted a street rod with tech and warranty and the like.
One criticism of these is that there is no such thing as a ‘factory’ street rod or hot rod. That viewpoint has a lot of weight if you understand the culture. Such cars are built, preferably by the owner, not bought at a dealership. But Ive also seen at least one Prowler with a 6.1 SRT-8 Hemi swapped in. Now THATS a legit hot rod!
True, not an actual Hot Rod, I saw it as a toy for someone who just wanted something different rather than an actual rod. Of course people have rods built for them rather than building them their selves, or they real rods or are they custom built cars!?!
To me Boydsters and their ilk weren’t real hot rods either, they were coachbuilders. To me a real hot rod isn’t built by anyone else but the owner, for the owner, using the resources available to the owner or friends. CNC billet machining and $10,000 crate motors from a GM performance catalog you may as well be buying a car from a manufacturer. The entire point of hot ridding is to beat others with much deeper pocket books with nothing more than old junk and ingenuity.
I agree. Chrysler design in the 90’s and even today has been fresh air in a sea of “design by committee” cars. The minivan engine sort of ruined the status of the prowler for me, but the odacity of dodge at the time is commending. I think these cars were meant to sell pt cruisers and mini vans… But who cares. The only thing missing with Chrysler is quality.
Actually the Prowler had the LH SOHC engine, probably due to its being designed as a longitudinal engine to begin with.
Yeah, but if you did have appreciation for hot rod culture you’d surely realize that you can buy a heck of a hot rod for $38k rather than this, but I guess that’s what 11,702 people wanted.
Good for them, but I view the Prowler as a waste of engineering hours. If they’d put that effort into making the PT cruiser better, or improving the Caravan’s transmission that would’ve benefited a lot more people.
These were stunning cars, and I really got excited seeing one for the first time. “WOW” was the first word out of my mouth.
Although the Prowler was basically a running model, and less practical than a Corvette, who cares? It was different and that was a good thing. I was still very much a Chrysler fan back then and would have loved to at least drive one even if not being financially able to own one.
I though the matching trailer was really cool as well.
Every once in a while I see at least one around where I live – in nice weather, of course!
I wonder if the 3.5L had the same fuel rail issue that our 1996 Intrepid had? After our car was fixed during the recall, once in a while it was very hard to start. That and the looming Ultradrive problems we were not yet having prompted me to trade the car in for our 1999 Stratus, the last Chrysler vehicle I would ever own.
We had the fuel rail recall on our 1995 Eagle Vision TSi and later the hard-start-when-very-cold issue. The hard start issue was diagnosed by an independent repair shop that was aware of a “silent TSB” about it, but could not resolve it because they did not have the proper software.
Once the dealer was given the issue and the car, it was quickly resolved. When I asked why they didn’t inform us of this TSB they said “… not all Eagles have this issue”.
We had lots of poor quality issues with this 1995 Chrysler product.
I wonder if Chrysler was more careful with the expensive Prowlers (not that the EV TSi was inexpensive).
Brendan, thank you for acquiring these photographs and writing this up. It purges my mistake of not stopping to get pictures of one I saw a few months ago – parked in a business entrance with a “for sale” sign in the window.
Kudos to Chrysler for building these. I well remember the stink at introduction about these having a V6, not a “proper” V8. The only V8s Mopar had at the time were the 318 and 360, engines that would likely have generated grief as they’d been around since the dawn of time.
The upside is these allowed Plymouth to have one final hurrah before it gasped its last.
There is one of these in my neighborhood, a silver one. My oldest son ran into the owner at a gas station. He was a very nice older man who bought it new as a retirement gift to himself. He has only driven it for fun or as an occasional sub for when his regular wheels are out of commission. I just saw it out again this past week. My kid got several pictures (including one with himself behind the wheel – something I have never had the guts to ask an owner to allow) but they seem to have disappeared.
I am surprised that nobody else has yet mentioned the Great Prowler Debate – would a V8 engine have made this thing a real hit with the hot rod crowd. I remember a lot of grumbling about a car like this being a letdown with V6 power. The one single defining characteristic of almost every hot rod ever built is a chrome-covered V8 engine. The exhaust note of the V6 seemed to take a lot of the magic away.
I just followed a yellow prowler out of a supermarket parking lot last weekend. My 70 year old mother, who was with me, commented on it, saying something like, “I think that’s on some list of the worst cars ever built”. I was a little gobsmacked that she was paying that much attention, as she’s not exactly a “car girl”, but obviously she has been perusing some random ‘best of/worst of’ slideshows on Facebook or something. I thought it was a cool concept, but was at the time and still am a bit surprised it ever made it into production.
I do think a V8/manual transmission combo would likely have made it much more enticing to the enthusiast crowd, but as someone who’s driving a full-sized 4 door sedan with exactly the same drivetrain as the ’99 upgraded engine/transmission combo in the Prowler I can imagine that the smaller size, considerably lighter weight and excellent distribution would make the Prowler a bit more formidable as a driver’s car than might be readily obvious from the specs alone. But I’ll also be quick to admit, that transmission is no jewel by any stretch.
Concept: AWESOME!
Execution: Meh…
The Prowler, and the 2 seat Thunderbird, and the Pontiac Solstice/Saturn Sky all demonstrate that if you take a mundane drive train and don’t offer differentiation & performance, you will end up with an overpriced niche product.
Did have a neighbor with the original purple one with a rack on the back for 2 sets of golf clubs.
I’m 50/50 on the Solstice/Sky being in the same category as the Prowler and Thunderbird. The biggest problem with the two former was the hokey ‘flying buttress’ folding top that required exiting the vehicle to lower/raise the top. That was just flat-out dumb.
In fact, a great CC would be on the rare Solstice GXP targa coupe, which appears to have been recently reincarnated as the new Miata RF coupe. Unlide the GXP, which had a folding, cloth targa top (in addition to a removable hard shell targa top), the new Miata RF has a motorized, retractable targa top.
I am, however, 100% behind adding the Chevrolet SSR in with the Prowler and Thunderbird.
During my brief stint selling cars, my dealership actually got one of these. For Portland, it would have been a no-brainer but Roseburg? Unusual indeed! I got a chance to drive it and even with a V6 it was surprisingly quick. But the 3.5 HO was putting out comparable numbers to GM and Ford’s V8’s at the time so there’s that. Why the 4.7 V8 wasn’t in the frame rails Ill never know. As a 6’1 beefy guy I was just glad we had the top down. With it up, things would have been tight. That car wasn’t on the lot a couple days before an older guy plucked it right up.
These certainly are cool and interesting cars. Its easy to criticize the execution if you forget all the regulatory hoops Ma Mopar jumped thru to make this happen. But having the clanking brass cajones to build a thing like this is one reason I’ve always loved Mopar.
I have always assumed that the Prowler was done largely for internal benefits to the company, not for sales or even halo status. “We did something no other car company did” is great for morale, especially after the Iococca years where marketing *was* the product.
Their only original product at the time was a 2 seat V6 purple hot rod. Wonder why they are no longer with is.
When did dodge Chrysler go out of business? Lol.
May 7, 1998 ?
I think Jax was referring to the Plymouth brand.
He was.
I was
It’s a good thing the Prowler had relatively good looks, because it had a lot going against it. Besides lacking a V8 or manual transmission, there was the high price, which also included very high insurance thanks to all the expensive aluminum parts. Then, there was the relative lack of individuality, something critical for a vehicle of this type.
But, worst of all, was it suffered the same issue as, say, the Ford Pantera, in that the people on the outside were getting a much better deal than the driver/owner on the inside. Supposedly, they rode like a buckboard, much of which was due to the very large diameter wheels. Then there was the tiny carrying capacity and fuel tank. Outward visibilty wasn’t exactly good, either. They just weren’t very much fun to drive.
Not to mention the dealer gouging. My favorite Prowler story occurred about, say, six months after the last Prowler rolled off the line. There was a final, limited edition version called the ‘Woodward Edition’. It was nothing more than a stock Prowler with a two-tone, black over red paint job. I think the MSRP was something like $2700 more than the normal, single color Prowler. While that seemed kind of high for a two-tone paint job, it was nothing compared to what one Cincinnati area Chrysler dealer wanted over the base MSRP: a cool $100,000. That’s right, the ADM was $100k ‘over’ MSRP for a Prowler with nothing more than a factory two-tone paint job. I remember when I saw the little ADM sticker and thought it was a prank, that someone had sneaked in and put a fake sticker on the car’s window. I was laughing when I asked the one forlorn salesman in the deserted showroom if it was a joke, and he, straight-faced, said, “No”. As one might surmise, it wasn’t more than a couple years later that Chrysler dealer closed up. The building sat empty until it reopened as a Fiat dealership. Hopefully, selling them at a much more reasonable price.
I have been around Hot Rods for good part of my professional life and when I saw a Prowler in the front page of Road and Track I was really impressed. Sure the biggest sin was the V6 under the hood but anyway …
When a dying brand gets the chance to produce something really cool, for sure it is the last nail in the coffin .
All that really died is the name Plymouth…. Which is still dodge…. Which is still Chrysler. Nothing other than a name has died.
He said “dying brand” not dying corporation. “brand” and “name” are the same thing. Plymouth was a brand and that died it also was a seperate division from Dodge. Mercury, Pontiac and Oldsmobile also died, even if Ford or GM didn’t.
Well, GM kind of did die, didn’t it? Although whether it did or not in their eyes seems to depend on which one benefits them at the moment. When they want to talk heritage then it’s the same great company. But when they want to eliminate liability for bad ignition switches then it’s a whole different company. That remains the strangest bankruptcy I have ever seen.
True, I was just referring to the fact that although Plymouth was a Chrysler brand, it was -for the historical record- as seperate “brand” from Dodge, Chrysler, etc.
For a more philosophical answer see where I mentioned May 7,1998 above ?
Thanks for the post Brendan!!!!
Lots of information I did not know about a car I actually like.
It’s nice to be reminded how daring Chrysler was in the 1990s. The quality problems were real, but in so many other ways it was truly a car guy’s company (albeit one run on a shoestring). We can certainly complain about the Prowler’s powertrain, but let’s cut them some slack: they also gave us the Viper!
Brendan, I also want to mention that I appreciate how carefully written your articles are. A proper plural apostrophe always warms my heart!
Loved it from the start. If I had the bucks, I’d go find a purple one with matching trailer and transplant a warmed over 4.7 into it. In fact, except for the V-8 sound, I could go with a 3.6 Pentastar with the 8 speed auto. That should be fast enough to satisfy anyone but a dyed-in-the-wool drag racer.
I wasn’t quite 20 when the prototype came out, and I was blown away when I saw it in the car magazines at the time! A fantastic piece of styling that was both frivolous and adventurous, and so unlike any other new car of the time. I was disappointed at the V6/auto combination, as it implied a style-over-substance philosophy that wasn’t deserved given the intelligence of the engineering and the multitude of bespoke parts. But upon reflection, the V6/auto perhaps actually was the intelligent choice versus the old-tech V8s Chrysler had on offer.
My grandparents had owned a ’59 Belvedere from new (it was sold around the time I was born), so I had been raised to be aware of the Plymouth brand even though it exited the New Zealand in the 1960s. As I grew up and got more and more interested in cars, I realised the Plymouth of the 1980s and 1990s was a far cry from the earlier years and was just another generic brand. But when the Prowler came along, Plymouth was suddenly doing something outside the norm – and in a good way! – and that halo effect made the brand interesting again in my eyes. But despite that, it was obvious it was too little, too late.
I didn’t see my first Prowler in the flesh until sometime around 2006-8. I was sight-seeing on a winding coastal road and came up behind a silver car with the widest rear end and tyres I thought I’d ever seen. It wandered slowly along, the occupants enjoying the scenery as much as I was; except I also got to enjoy studying the Prowler’s styling. It looked just as good in the metal as the photos – although the photos didn’t really convey how wide the rear end was. All in all, a fantastic end note for Plymouth, and one which I applaud for its sense of mad fun and sheer individuality! Thanks for the article Brendan!
I found the Prowler interesting but not as much as the Viper. The Viper was a real car. The Prowler was a fake Hot Rod and a joke to me. It never grabbed my emotions. I think that I would be embarrassed to own one, or even drive one. For that kind of money I could have a barely used Corvette or an early Mustang Mach One or Camaro. Still the automotive scene was richer for it’s existence.
I initially though the Prowler was kinda silly; not in a bad way, but almost an inside joke, “what can we get in production and get people talking” way. By contrast, I found the Vioer almost unbelievable, so much more daring than any Corvette … and it’s still in production. Anyway, my respect for the Prowler went up a few notches when an older engineer at work, a very hands-on and talented guy, bought one. He had a pretty long commute too, but I suspect the Prowler was more suited for it than his previous daily driver, an elderly 88″ wheelbase Series Land Rover. FWIW I also like PT Cruisers, and the Chevy SSR and HHR.
Such a great piece and enjoyable read, Brendan. I’m late to the comment party because I wanted a chance to read this in its entirety, along with the comments (to avoid duplication). Brian also took some great pictures.
Reading this, I couldn’t help but feel a little sadness for all the moxie Chrysler seems to have lost from its last, truly powerhouse era. People love them or hate them (along with the PT Cruiser), but I’m firmly in the “love” column when it comes to the Prowler.
Its retro duds really speak to me, and while I’m a car lover, I’m never going to need to drive the biggest, baddest, fastest, most-tech laden car out there – and to me, this car oozes both class and a little badassery in the proper balance that so few cars can pull off.
V6? Automatic? So what. A stick would be fun, but as I’d (hopefully) be taking it out only on weekends (and not trying to drag-race anyone in it), I’d deal.
Ultimately, though, I think if Chrysler had kept Plymouth around and focused mostly (or entirely) on retro-themed cars, it would have been a dead-end. I don’t think the U.S. needed another type of entry-level, “budget” brand that Plymouth was born as, but I think there could have been some other unifying theme for Plymouth under which these retro cars (including the PT Cruiser, and Pronto Cruzer) could have fit.
A little late here, but thanks for doing this car justice. A very fine write-up, and your connection to it as a kid was obviously a key part of it. This car is a toy, so it makes sense that kids of time were able to relate to it so well.
I’m afraid I was at a stage of life at the time where I utterly failed to do so. Which is why I would have been a the wrong one to take on the Prowler.
I remember how long and drawn out development was between concept tease and actual production car, think the current NSX – that sure looked fresh in, what was it 2009? And only nearly a decade later is it finally in showrooms(is it yet?) – The Prowler was the same way. I remember the prototype in the magazines as a kid, I greatly admired it, actually being kind of into that period of hot rod that I now have come to despise. The problem was that I was 5 when I was into the concept, and it didn’t actually make production until I was 10, that kind of span feels like a damn lifetime as a kid and I had pretty much lost any interest in hot rods by that point and beyond my bubble it seemed like that whole smooth Hot Rod look had pretty much run it’s course with anyone else as well.
For most it just became a pioneer of retro, but with the practicallity of a Boydster, but without the power of one. The custom PT Cruiser crowd who were ruining cruise nights across the country were immediately predated by the mercifully smaller Prowler crowd with the tacky add on aftermarket accessories (that our feature car is unfortunate enough to sport in abundance, only missing the Prowler trailer to complete the look) to try rationalizing taking up spaces for actual classics. Just sideshow novelty cars.
I also disagree somewhat, because I think the production changes hurt the original design. The bulged out headlight pods look awful, as does the side marker light (originally integrated with the main lights in the concept) as do the black rear fender chip protectors(I’d rather have the chips) and the overall stance just seems taller as well, really throwing off the rear proportions. And darker colors worked better, I love yellow in the right cars but these were not the right cars. Silver and Yellow unfortunately seemed bo be the most common years around here
I I always thought they they should have put an open pickup bed on the back, like a classic Model A Roadster pickup. Then, classified as a truck, the front bumper could legally go away.
I was hired to make audio recordings of the Prowler. Flew to Chrysler’s secret test track. I think it was Arizona. It was just me, an engineer and one of two prototypes in existence. When I was finished recording, I asked if I could drive it. He said “sure”!
I’ve always been moderately appalled by these. I appreciate the effort, but I hate the kind of hot rods it was designed to resemble, and it was so thoroughly compromised I couldn’t see the point. It was much less appealing than the 1997 Plymouth Pronto Spyder show car, which was far more attractive and seemed like it could have been a real car. (I’m of a mind that the Pronto Spyder was also better-looking than the Pontiac Solstice, which had decent proportions and awkward detailing, like it couldn’t decide if it wanted to be a muscular roadster or a cute cartoon car and ended up being satisfactory as neither.)