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.
I used to read a non-profit magazine that road tested cars. I always noticed(according to this mag) that in the early 70's nearly all Chrysler Corp cars (especially the mid sized and full sized cars) were judged noisier and harsher riding than comparable cars from GM and Ford. However curiously they always generally got better gas mileage than the competitors. There were very few exceptions to this. For example, I remembered in '73 the Mercury Marquis, Buick Electra 225, Chrysler New Yorker, Ford LTD, Plymouth Fury Gran Sedan, Ford LTD, Chevy Caprice were all tested together and the Fury was judged noisier than the Chevy, and the New Yorker was judged noisier than the Chevy, Buick and Mercury. Yet whenever I rode in early 70's Furies for example I thought they rode like a cloud without a care in the world.
However around 1976 all of a sudden the Chrysler Corp cars were noted to be as quiet as the competition but also all of a sudden the gas mileage got worse. By the tail end of the 70's/80's there was virtually no difference between Chrysler and the competition in these areas
Does anyone have any comments about this? I always found this interesting
I can't say much about their mileage, because back then I just pulled up to the gas pump on the farm and filled er up. Those were the days!
Anywhoo... Dodge always had the reputation of having crappy bodies, but unbelievable drive-trains. I'm not sure anybody ever built a better engine than the Slant 6, or the 318 V8. The old Power Wagon was a brute, but it never seems like you saw one without rust or a door falling off.
Not being a Mopar guy, I don't have much else but random observations...
1973 compact sized (back then at least) Olds Omega with a 350 V8 and 4 bbl carb and it got only 11 mpg on a 300 mile trip!
What's weird about that is that my folks had a '72 Olds Delta 88 - complete with the 455 cid engine, and 4-barrel carb. That thing always got 18 mpg on the highway.
It would also squeal the tires for a full city block. Or so I've been told...
I had a 76 Grand Prix that consistently got 20-22 MPG. It also had the 455 (or 450) I don't remember now. My 79 Grand Prix with a 5.1L got around 22-24 MPG. I was not light footed with either one. I also would put tire down for a block, which was one of the problems with it.
have so much more character than cars today. you know what's weird is that what was considered a 'compact" 35 years ago like a nova, maverick, Dart, hornet now if you see an old 70's compact in the streets it looks big and fat compared to what's riding around today. I saw a '74 Dart parked and it looked like it was taking up a lot of space
it's like the same size of what we might consider fill sized today. or maybe it's just built differently
Seems like you and I think alike. I am a huge fan (and owner) of the early 70s cars and have been for years now and have done alot of research.
I too have read articles like that. I remember road tests from then (that I have somewhere) where Ford used to boast about being the highest quality car as far as details go. As a GM fan, it hurts to say, but it seemed so, because if you compare a early-mid 70s FMC to a GM or Mopar you can see. The doors on a Ford seem to close tighter and the fit/finish seems to be nicer. GM was a close second and as much as I liked the Mopars of the early 70s, the fit/finish seemed well behind GM and especially Ford. Doors closed with a harsh clud and the interiors seemed cheap tp me in some cases. The early-mid 70s Lincolns interior seemed to be of the highest quality - alot of padded interior panels and tight fit and finish. GM was good too, especially Cadillac, Buick and Chevrolet. I have had several of each and have observed this. I currently own some of these beasts - a 1972 Chevy Caprice wagon and a 1973 Pontiac Grand Ville sedan- both have nice quality interior for their time. I get about 11-13 mpg with them, but really never measured it. The Pontiac has a 455 and the Chevrolet has a 402. The Grand Ville has a soft and cushy ride as expected. The Caprice does too, but it has the trailer towing package and rear leaf springs, so not as cushy, but my old 69' Caprice had a very softly sprung ride. I also had a 1972 Buick Electra 4dr- again, a very soft ride. Its a whole different story, but in the mid to late 60s (until 1971) GM cars were rated higher in quality that Fords/Lincolns. I can attest to that. My 69' Caprice was 100% rattle-squeak free and the interior was of a high quality. Much higher than the 69' LTDs I had observed, which had mis-aligned interior panels and exposed wiring under the dash on the 65-67 models.
We also had a 1972 Lincoln, 1972 Cadillac, 1976 Lincoln and a 1978 Lincoln. All had quality, well built interiors, but the doors on the Lincolns shut with a higher quality thunk. Probably because of tighter door latches and better weather stripping. I als
I have never rode in a early-mid 70s Mopar, but I read too where they had a harsher ride than GM/Ford. I had a 1975 road test against a Lincoln Town Car, Cadillac DeVille and Chrysler Imperial. It said that the Imperial had the harshest ride of the three, but was by no means uncomfortable. It was just not as cushy as Cadillac or Lincoln. I think it said Cadillac had the softest ride, but the trade-off was that the Imperial had the best handling because of the stiffer suspension.
I always agreed and discounted it where Chrysler was still using the outdated leaf-springs on the rear (even on the Imperial, as well as their other cars), where Lincoln/Cadillac
had switched over to rear coil springs. Caddy had been using rear coils since the late 50s and I think Lincoln had since the mid 60s.
GM downsized in 1977 and the Mopars were still really big which may have been one reason they were considered = by then. Ford did not downsize until 1979.
Oh, the 60s-90s Mopars also seem to have the worst electrical systems when compared to Ford and especially GM. I heard/read of alot of electrical problems on the late 60s-late 70s Mopars. My uncle had a early 70s Dodge truck that all of the underhood wiring had melted on. I had a 73' Plymouth Valiant that I could never get the gauges or lights in the dash to work on and read countless stories of problems similiar to these on Mopars. I have had tons of late 60s-mid 70s GM cars and never had any light/electrical problems.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlrl
I used to read a non-profit magazine that road tested cars. I always noticed(according to this mag) that in the early 70's nearly all Chrysler Corp cars (especially the mid sized and full sized cars) were judged noisier and harsher riding than comparable cars from GM and Ford. However curiously they always generally got better gas mileage than the competitors. There were very few exceptions to this. For example, I remembered in '73 the Mercury Marquis, Buick Electra 225, Chrysler New Yorker, Ford LTD, Plymouth Fury Gran Sedan, Ford LTD, Chevy Caprice were all tested together and the Fury was judged noisier than the Chevy, and the New Yorker was judged noisier than the Chevy, Buick and Mercury. Yet whenever I rode in early 70's Furies for example I thought they rode like a cloud without a care in the world.
However around 1976 all of a sudden the Chrysler Corp cars were noted to be as quiet as the competition but also all of a sudden the gas mileage got worse. By the tail end of the 70's/80's there was virtually no difference between Chrysler and the competition in these areas
Does anyone have any comments about this? I always found this interesting
What's weird about that is that my folks had a '72 Olds Delta 88 - complete with the 455 cid engine, and 4-barrel carb. That thing always got 18 mpg on the highway.
It would also squeal the tires for a full city block. Or so I've been told...
Im sure it would. We also had a 72' Delta 88 Royale 2dr back in the 80s. It would do that. As would my old 72' Electra with a 455. I also had a 71' Olds Toronado with a 455 that would do it even more. My uncle did it once while driving it and it was a front wheel drive!
yes i notice we do think alike. i was in tennesee 10 years ago when i drove en route from here in NY to Birmingham Alab i passed thru Knoxville on was it I 81 or 40 or 75 I can't recall but I do recall stopping in a long john silvers in lenoir city i think for lunch
i noticed that about the doors on fords. we had a '66 galaxie 500 which was very very solid and tight and i noticed that in future fords as well. i noticed the tackiness of some of the mopars but despite that i found the big plymouths and dodges to just have something the fords and gm cars lacked. something about the styling, i think those cars tried to be a bit different than the competition and it seemed to work. i did notice that unless the owners took good care of those mopars they got old real fast. i remember i was considering getting a '73 fury in '79 when i got my driver's license but the fury i looked at was so run down i could never get one. instead my first car was a '71 duster which my grandfather gave me in 1982. it only had 32 000 miles on it
are those big gm cars your originals or did you get them used?
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.
I remember they tested a
