Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
True, but I was referring to those who so fondly remember the Dart are usually remembering the performance versions while having a blind spot in their memory of the volume selling Dart. By American car standards of the time, the base inline 6 sedans were very slow. The advantage of the small slow Japanese cars was fuel economy and low price. Their build quality and engineering greatly improved making that another good selling point. Though they were mechanically identical, I preferred the coupe styling of the Plymouth Duster over the Dodge Dart. Almost had one as my first car but bad body work told us it had been in a bad wreck.
But that holds true for cars like the Camaro and Mustang... those were available with a 6-cylinder engine, too.
Also, the Dodge Dart was available as a coupe, too.
Yes, the Japanese cars gave good mileage, but at what cost? Very slow, as mentioned, cramped and uncomfortable interiors and, in some cases, unsafe regarding collisions.
Y'all can be nostalgic for the "simpler" days, when cars were death traps in relatively minor accidents, when "good" mileage was 20 highway, when they spewed noxious fumes up and down the avenue, when they broke down all the time, when they needed a "tune-up" every year, when they were usually "all used up" at 100,000 miles, when front end parts wore out every 50,000 miles, when they didn't start in cold weather... or hot weather... or rainy weather (take your pick!), but I'll take just about any 2013 over any piece of crap from the last millennium.
Wow, a lot of over-generalizations!
They were not death traps in "relatively minor accidents."
Many didn't "break down all the time." (It depends on the make, of course.)
They were not "all used up at 100,00 miles." (Again, depends on the make.)
And the front end parts did not "wear out any 50,000 miles."
To me, a car is just a car. Don't get me wrong, though. I love to drive, and I do appreciate a fine automobile. (In fact, I've owned so many cars that I've lost track of them all. I've even turned wrenches on almost every one of them.)
However, I have utmost appreciation for a machine that's reliable, safe, efficient, long-lasting, and doesn't require a lot of maintenance or repairs along the way.
To that end, we've made great strides compared to the era of the old Dart. That was my main point. At times, I do get a bit sarcastic when making my points, and that devolves into generalizations, but even compared to the 90's, cars have improved vastly--some brands/models in different areas than others, but every one of them has been improved by multiple objective measures (styling and personal preferences aside, of course).
... The most common Darts sold were the extremely dull boring and slow slant 6 versions...Most Darts were the 60s/70s Corolla, appliance reliable transportation. When we think of cars like the Dart, Nova, or Falcon we think of those performance models. We always seem to forget the volume models which had no performance at all. Their virtue was a smooth reliable inline 6 cylinder engine that rarely ever broke down and was easy to work on even for a novice mechanic, something you can't say about most modern cars.
Bought my new Dart Coupe in '67 and it was everything as stated above: dull, boring, and slow, with an added bonus of poor body integrity. However, it started every time, was never in the shop, and lasted for six years, until I tired of putting a church key in the carb after the automatic choke failed. While I have mixed emotions about the old Dart, I would let the new model stand on its own merits.
To me, a car is just a car. Don't get me wrong, though. I love to drive, and I do appreciate a fine automobile. (In fact, I've owned so many cars that I've lost track of them all. I've even turned wrenches on almost every one of them.)
To me, a car is far more than a car. It's a hobby and a big interest. Which is probably why I am at the weekly car show often. I've only owned 7 or 8 cars because I like to keep cars a long time.
Quote:
However, I have utmost appreciation for a machine that's reliable, safe, efficient, long-lasting, and doesn't require a lot of maintenance or repairs along the way.
Then you would have liked my '66 Dart GT. 22 years and 160,000 miles with the original, non-rebuilt transmission (had to be rebuilt only because of too many powerbrake burnouts!). And 24 years and 170,000 miles with the original, non-rebuilt engine (running fine but starting to burn too much oil). I didn't even own my first car (the Dart) until it had 109,000 miles. My brother's '66 Plymouth Fury had a similar history.
Quote:
To that end, we've made great strides compared to the era of the old Dart. That was my main point. At times, I do get a bit sarcastic when making my points, and that devolves into generalizations, but even compared to the 90's, cars have improved vastly--some brands/models in different areas than others, but every one of them has been improved by multiple objective measures (styling and personal preferences aside, of course).
More than a "bit" sarcastic, I would say. When talking cars (and other subjects) I try not to exaggerate things. Some things have not improved in cars. For example, a typical '60s Mopar is more reliable (and better built) than a typical '90s Mopar. Cadillac had their best reliability up to about 1970, although they were good throughout the '70s, too. Older ('70s and earlier) cars usually have much better visibility than new cars, because they don't have the chopped-off trunk/high belt-line or sloping front hood. And you could buy old cars with nice, soft seats, not the stiff seats which even Cadillacs have now.
Then, of course, almost everything is computer-controlled on new cars. That has both advantages and disadvantages.
Driving is my hobby. I never particularly cared what I was driving, as long as it handled reasonably well, and worked well enough to cruise 70-75 on the interstate without white knuckles.
I did have preferences--I've pretty much always liked Honda since I first drove my step-dad's '85 Civic, and liked the smooth engine, good fuel economy, the way it handled (I called it "light with bite," referring to the lightweight steering and the way it would "bite" into a corner without a lot of body roll), and the way it never seemed to break down compared to the VW's and various American cars the rest of the family owned. Today, that '85 Civic would be virtually unacceptable to me--a low and slow 70 HP 2,000 lb. death trap with no safety features except seatbelts and a padded dashboard.
I really only wrenched (and took high school auto shop) in order to A) learn how cars work for my curiosity, and B) to keep them working longer on a low budget so that I could keep on driving.
I'm certain I would have appreciated your Dart back in its day--177,000 miles would make me happy indeed--but now that it's 2012, I'd prefer the modern version.
Different strokes for different folks. Some people like working on them and customizing and restoring old beauties, some people just want to hit the road and drive. I'm the latter.
Driving is my hobby. I never particularly cared what I was driving, as long as it handled reasonably well, and worked well enough to cruise 70-75 on the interstate without white knuckles.
I did have preferences--I've pretty much always liked Honda since I first drove my step-dad's '85 Civic, and liked the smooth engine, good fuel economy, the way it handled (I called it "light with bite," referring to the lightweight steering and the way it would "bite" into a corner without a lot of body roll), and the way it never seemed to break down compared to the VW's and various American cars the rest of the family owned. Today, that '85 Civic would be virtually unacceptable to me--a low and slow 70 HP 2,000 lb. death trap with no safety features except seatbelts and a padded dashboard.
I really only wrenched (and took high school auto shop) in order to A) learn how cars work for my curiosity, and B) to keep them working longer on a low budget so that I could keep on driving.
I'm certain I would have appreciated your Dart back in its day--177,000 miles would make me happy indeed--but now that it's 2012, I'd prefer the modern version.
Different strokes for different folks. Some people like working on them and customizing and restoring old beauties, some people just want to hit the road and drive. I'm the latter.
They never drove one Fleet. If they had...they would know the 340 with a 4 speed is a VERY VERY fast car.
Yes, the Mopar 340 was a great engine. Plenty of power for their size, relatively lightweight and rugged.
In my top 10 favorite cars, one would be a 340 Mopar... a '68 or '69 Dart GTS with Torqueflite and 3.91 gears.
Every muscle car magazine has mentioned that the 340's rated horsepower (275) was underrated. It was more like 300 hp.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When talking cars (and other subjects) I try not to exaggerate things. Some things have not improved in cars. For example, a typical '60s Mopar is more reliable (and better built) than a typical '90s Mopar. Cadillac had their best reliability up to about 1970, although they were good throughout the '70s, too. Older ('70s and earlier) cars usually have much better visibility than new cars, because they don't have the chopped-off trunk/high belt-line or sloping front hood. And you could buy old cars with nice, soft seats, not the stiff seats which even Cadillacs have now. 
