an impressively restored Newport

If it has sentimental value to the son who restored it, why is he selling? Very limited market for that at $36,500 when he has $60,000 in it. Plus a "frame off" restoration on a frameless unit body car.

A very nice $25,000 car.

1116Arthur said:

If it has sentimental value to the son who restored it, why is he selling? Very limited market for that at $36,500 when he has $60,000 in it. Plus a "frame off" restoration on a frameless unit body car.

Click to expand...

Are you saying this 1972 wasn't a body on frame vehicle?
I always thought the first unibody Mopars were the FWD models, not RWD models from the 70s.
Interesting...

Try the 60s, we had a 1962 Plymouth Belvidere wagon, unibody.

movaldes said:

Are you saying this 1972 wasn't a body on frame vehicle?
I always thought the first unibody Mopars were the FWD models, not RWD models from the 70s.
Interesting...

Click to expand...

2nd gen Chargers (maybe 1st too) were unibody...

movaldes said:

Are you saying this 1972 wasn't a body on frame vehicle?
I always thought the first unibody Mopars were the FWD models, not RWD models from the 70s.
Interesting...

Click to expand...

Chrysler switched to unibody for every pasenger car except Imperial in 1960: Chrysler moves to Unibody (unit-body construction): 1960

Imperial went to Unibody (a modified C-Body) in 1967

1116Arthur said:

If it has sentimental value to the son who restored it, why is he selling? Very limited market for that at $36,500 when he has $60,000 in it. Plus a "frame off" restoration on a frameless unit body car.

Click to expand...

He is banking on the muscle car craze.

People can't get muscle cars (Charger, Coronet, etc) for reasonable prices any more, so stuff like this will only go up in value.

Beautiful car. I wonder what the mpg's on it are? LOL

That is a beautiful car! The price would have been good last year, but in current economic times, it is a tough sell.

movaldes said:

Are you saying this 1972 wasn't a body on frame vehicle?
I always thought the first unibody Mopars were the FWD models, not RWD models from the 70s.
Interesting...

Click to expand...

Yes I am. As others stated if you want a Chrysler car with a frame it must be a 1959 or older. Only frames only Dodge tricks with frames.

This one lists a 400 engine but the Royal version only has the 360.

try2fix said:

2nd gen Chargers (maybe 1st too) were unibody...

Click to expand...

pbrutsche said:

Chrysler switched to unibody for every pasenger car except Imperial in 1960: Chrysler moves to Unibody (unit-body construction): 1960

Imperial went to Unibody (a modified C-Body) in 1967

Click to expand...

Wow...lol
All these years following Mopar, even owning a '68 Roadrunner (for a brief few months), I never knew this.
Thanks for the info!!!

movaldes said:

Wow...lol
All these years following Mopar, even owning a '68 Roadrunner (for a brief few months), I never knew this.
Thanks for the info!!!

Click to expand...

You need to read more ALLPAR Especially the old stuff😀

That should be parked inside the Chrysler offices to force management to understand what a classy, muscular Chrysler brand should be.

movaldes said:

Are you saying this 1972 wasn't a body on frame vehicle?
I always thought the first unibody Mopars were the FWD models, not RWD models from the 70s.
Interesting...

Click to expand...

1960 was the year Chrysler switched everything to unibody, except Imperial, IIRC.

68RT said:

This one lists a 400 engine but the Royal version only has the 360.

Click to expand...

Since the Royal was kind of a package, wouldn't the 400 have been an option? My grandpa bought a new 73 Newport custom, which had the 400 standard, but the 440 was an option.

The Royal was a low-end Newport. A few months ago I watched Superbowl 5 (1971) on Youtube. Chrysler was the primary / only car sponsor. All car commercials were for Chrysler cars. A "Chrysler Royal" commercial was played several times. I had never heard of the "Chrysler Royal" before, except for I think a model that was made in the 1950's. I looked it up on Wikipedia, and sure enough - yes, it was a low-end (read - affordable) Newport version.

My dad inherited his dad's '73 Newport in around 1980. It had the 400. A "smogger" engine. Even poorly tuned, it would push you back in the seat when you floored it.

Since I had a 71 Newport Royal, I researched why it had a 360 when all others had a 383 or 440. It was a budget Chrysler and had the first year of the 360 and was only available with a two Bbl carb. Probably designed to give the Plymouth/Chrysler dealer a luxury model to compete with the Dodge dealer and other brands. Very low end interior too.

I liked the '71 Royal, 68RT. I thought all the 71 fuselage bodies were pretty nice, and the Royal didn't have much trim, unlike most of the rest. I thought it had a sleeker kind of look.