Allpar Forums banner

21 - 40 of 44 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,496 Posts
Besides Robert Anderson, I read once at the Forwardlook forums, some wondered where Chrysler would had been today if Walter P. Chrysler had chosen Joseph Frazer instead of K.T. Keller as his successor?
K.T Keller was a good steward of the company, but he stayed too long. The styling of cars began to change and he thought they should stay the same.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
31,982 Posts
Some of Chryslers problems were self inflicted but many were due to the federal govt.

EG: Illegal for Ford, GM and Chrysler To collaborate on emissions where the Japanese could.

Etc, Etc, Etc......

"Rochester engineer Doug Roe called-- it -- a pell-mell rush to disaster."

These topics have been traditionally banned at Allpar as they are considered political.

Thanks
Randy
Absolutely ridiculous and untrue. This is trolling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KrisW

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,050 Posts
I do not troll.

Which part is untrue??

valiant67 and myself obviously read the same book re emission collaboration.

Thanks
Randy

PS: I see you liked valiant67's post on the topic!!!!

"Each of the Big 3 had to develop solutions separately. Only AMC benefited somewhat from the work other manufacturers did. However, the Japanese were free to share these costs among themselves if they so desired."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,452 Posts
My first new car was a 1979 chevy Malibu. My dad had a friend there so I got a deal. I ordered the malibu, there wasn't a ss option but I ordered it option out like one. 305 was the biggest engine I could get. It was the worst car I ever owned. long story short....By 79 The F body at chrysler had all the bugs worked out and was better then chevy and ford. I could've got a much better drivetrian 318 or even a hot 360. In 79 the F and B body was better then chevy or ford.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,770 Posts
Lean Burn wasn't a huge success liked they'd hoped, it was ahead of it's time and trouble probed after mileage began to add up. I look back at that time and compare it to all the fuel injection computer controlled engines that came in the 90s, and the 70s emmissions standards don't seem so complicated.
Chrysler released those for the street before they were fully tested. Mrs BTB burned up 3 Lean Burn ECUs in the first 50,000 miles in her '79 LeBaron with the 360' motor. They were located on the engine air-cleaner housing and cooked during engine "hot soaks". The "lockup" converter on her 904 Torqueflite also broke when it stripped it's splines. We were told that it would probably do it again so just after the factory warranty expired @ 50,000 miles, we had our local Mopar trans mechanic disconnect the "lockup" function (he recommended that) and we had no more problems with it. We did have to baby it though. He told us that the 360' motor should have come with the 727 Torqueflite mated to it (as in earlier years) and we never would have had any problems with it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,496 Posts
Chrysler released those for the street before they were fully tested. Mrs BTB burned up 3 Lean Burn ECUs in the first 50,000 miles in her '79 LeBaron with the 360' motor. They were located on the engine air-cleaner housing and cooked during engine "hot soaks". The "lockup" converter on her 904 Torqueflite also broke when it stripped it's splines. We were told that it would probably do it again so just after the factory warranty expired @ 50,000 miles, we had our local Mopar trans mechanic disconnect the "lockup" function (he recommended that) and we had no more problems with it. We did have to baby it though. He told us that the 360' motor should have come with the 727 Torqueflite mated to it (as in earlier years) and we never would have had any problems with it.
We had a 79 New Yorker new. It too was a 360/904. It has a noise of rough gears in second, was replaced under warranty. A family friend had new Newport the same year. It had a 360 4bbl with duals and it had a 727. It was quiet as a lamb and never had any trans issues. You are right, no clue other then trying to cut costs to have a 904 in this car. It was kinda the beginning of trans issues with rear drive vehicles that continued into trucks after cars disappeared.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,001 Posts
Caught out with no small car or equivalent when the gas crisis occurred didn't help. By the mid 70s Ford had the Mustang II and Pinto, GM the Vega/Monza derivatives. VW's Rabbit, Toyota's Corona, Corolla, and Celica, Datsun's B-210 the decision not to match Ford GM and AMC in the subcompact arena was a bad one.

Thankfully Chrysler had the Dart and Valiant [near midsize rather than sub or compact] and while way larger than the other manufacturer's offerings sold massively well.

But they were caught out with a line of major gas hogs. The Cricket didn't add much volume, nor did the Colt from Mitsubishi, sort of the same as the others but not the same [and ironically in the case of the Colt, better cars than Vega, Pinto and Gremlin]. People were running from big cars with their 10 mpg fuel consumption

Chrysler also laid off a bunch or engineers in the mid 70s according to "Going For Broke" a book that chronicles the 70s at the company. That torpedoed the quality control on the F Bodies and added to the decline of their reputation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,499 Posts
Caught out with no small car or equivalent when the gas crisis occurred didn't help. By the mid 70s Ford had the Mustang II and Pinto, GM the Vega/Monza derivatives. VW's Rabbit, Toyota's Corona, Corolla, and Celica, Datsun's B-210 the decision not to match Ford GM and AMC in the subcompact arena was a bad one.

Thankfully Chrysler had the Dart and Valiant [near midsize rather than sub or compact] and while way larger than the other manufacturer's offerings sold massively well.

But they were caught out with a line of major gas hogs. The Cricket didn't add much volume, nor did the Colt from Mitsubishi, sort of the same as the others but not the same [and ironically in the case of the Colt, better cars than Vega, Pinto and Gremlin]. People were running from big cars with their 10 mpg fuel consumption

Chrysler also laid off a bunch or engineers in the mid 70s according to "Going For Broke" a book that chronicles the 70s at the company. That torpedoed the quality control on the F Bodies and added to the decline of their reputation.
We could wonder what if Chrysler had a plant to make the Cricket in North America instead of importing it from the UK if things could had been different? Some others had saw a bigger potential for the Cricket-born Hillman Avenger derivative Dodge 1500 in Argentina when VW acquired Chrysler South America operations and continued to make the Dodge 1500 to the early 1990s. The same question could be applied for the Simca 1100 alias 1204.
Simca 1204 USA: la frenchy de Chrysler ! (at https://www.carjager.com/article/simca-1204-usa-la-frenchy-de-chrysler )

I always thought then the Datsun B-210 was a subcompact when the Datsun 510 was a compact but the 510 was replaced by the lesser successeful 610 and 710. One big mistake from Datsun until they do a more bigger one by replacing the Datsun name by Nissan.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,496 Posts
We could wonder what if Chrysler had a plant to make the Cricket in North America instead of importing it from the UK if things could had been different? Some others had saw a bigger potential for the Cricket-born Hillman Avenger derivative Dodge 1500 in Argentina when VW acquired Chrysler South America operations and continued to make the Dodge 1500 to the early 1990s. The same question could be applied for the Simca 1100 alias 1204.
Simca 1204 USA: la frenchy de Chrysler ! (at https://www.carjager.com/article/simca-1204-usa-la-frenchy-de-chrysler )

I always thought then the Datsun B-210 was a subcompact when the Datsun 510 was a compact but the 510 was replaced by the lesser successeful 610 and 710. One big mistake from Datsun until they do a more bigger one by replacing the Datsun name by Nissan.
Remember the Simca connection actually became the Horizon.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
36,919 Posts
Here is the distinction;
You can discuss current and former reactions of Chrysler and and the auto industry to regulations.
Where topics go off the rails is when politics are injected and the discussion moves to the validity or non-validity of the regulation. That’s when topics get shut down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KrisW and GasAxe

·
Valued Member
Joined
·
2,245 Posts
Chrysler also laid off a bunch or engineers in the mid 70s according to "Going For Broke" a book that chronicles the 70s at the company. That torpedoed the quality control on the F Bodies and added to the decline of their reputation.
I worked at Engineering from 1966 to 2007. They basically closed all of the Engineering Center from Thanksgiving 1974 to March of 1975. Then slowly brought back people for the next couple of years. That is why the "R" body launch was absolutely the worst ever.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,050 Posts
Here is the distinction;
You can discuss current and former reactions of Chrysler and and the auto industry to regulations.
Where topics go off the rails is when politics are injected and the discussion moves to the validity or non-validity of the regulation. That’s when topics get shut down.

I'm still a bit confused and am trying to figure out the difference between these 2 posts:

You posted:

"At the time anti-trust laws were very strict. Each of the Big 3 had to develop solutions separately. Only AMC benefited somewhat from the work other manufacturers did. However, the Japanese were free to share these costs among themselves if they so desired."

Thinking along the same line and in agreement I posted:

"Some of Chryslers problems were self inflicted but many were due to the federal govt.

EG: Illegal for Ford, GM and Chrysler To collaborate on emissions where the Japanese could.

Etc, Etc, Etc......"

There are many more regs I think were detrimental but I only responded in agreement to your post.

Then Bob Lincoln commented on my post:

"Absolutely ridiculous and untrue. This is trolling."

I can't see why I'm a lying troll and you are not.

For the record, I don't think your post was trolling or in any way incorrect.

Anti-trust laws are no doubt govt laws.

I'm sure we have read the same books, mine was not opinion, I also read it and agreed with you.

At the same time, Bob Lincoln gets to openly disparage me and my post.

For the record I try and post things I know to be true, not just my opinion, unless clearly stated.

Also, I think it's unfair some members are allowed to bash other members, while others are not.

Not that it matters as I would never accuse another member of lying and or trolling.

Thanks
Randy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
179 Posts
Discussion Starter #34
Remember the Simca connection actually became the Horizon.

The two cars that the company actually sold thousands of were the Horizon and Omni. It was another case of having a product come out late in the game. And they were good cars but Chrysler needed to sell more than one line to stay afloat.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,726 Posts
For the record I try and post things I know to be true, not just my opinion, unless clearly stated.

Also, I think it's unfair some members are allowed to bash other members, while others are not.
Perhaps you shouldn’t come right out of the gate commentating on how your posts will be banned. Usually in other forums complaining about banning just ends up getting you banned anyway.;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bob Lincoln

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
36,919 Posts
We had an R body. Other then the trans issue it was a decent car. Can you elaborate?
I remember reading a study on these cars years ago. There were several examples, but the only one I remember now is that the paint was mismatched between the metal body, the fiberglass (like the header panel) and the soft bumper fillers. Plus they built these cars (and others) stacking them up on lots to keep the factory running. Then pushed them off to dealers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,496 Posts
And that could've been. Our car was an ordered car. It was black with a red interior. It also had their first electronically tuned radio which the dealer advised us not to get. We did anyways. I've been racking my brain trying to remember what our friends car had that made it come with a 360 4bbl and 727. It had to.have been trailer tow, because ours had what was called open road handling package. This was basically a police suspension with heavier springs, bigger shocks and rear sway bar. His though had increased cooling and even a power steering cooler. I remember on the left valve cover it said Windsor engine, premium 360.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
36,919 Posts
And that could've been. Our car was an ordered car. It was black with a red interior. It also had their first electronically tuned radio which the dealer advised us not to get. We did anyways. I've been racking my brain trying to remember what our friends car had that made it come with a 360 4bbl and 727. It had to.have been trailer tow, because ours had what was called open road handling package. This was basically a police suspension with heavier springs, bigger shocks and rear sway bar. His though had increased cooling and even a power steering cooler. I remember on the left valve cover it said Windsor engine, premium 360.
There were only a few ways to get a 360-4 in the R body:
1) You ordered a police car, code A38 on the data tag. Generally not for the public to order.
2) You ordered the A36? (I think) heavy duty trailer prep group. This gave you the same 360 motor the police got, the 727 transmission, and 3.2 gears (at least in 1979). This option may have disappeared for 1980 and was definitely gone for 1981.
3) You ordered the 360-4 emissions motor. This motor was identified by a J code in the VIN (unlike the L code motors above). This wasn't a HD motor so it likely had the 904 based transmission. You had to either get California emissions or high altitude emissions packages to get this motor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,050 Posts
For the record I said topics, not my posts

Thanks
Randy

"It's too bad historical current events topics are banned here."

Bob Lincoln posted: "Absolutely ridiculous and untrue. This is trolling.

Obviously some members are more ban proof than others.




Perhaps you shouldn’t come right out of the gate commentating on how your posts will be banned. Usually in other forums complaining about banning just ends up getting you banned anyway.;)
 
21 - 40 of 44 Posts
Top