70's Chrysler Daily Driver?

[TexRiv_63]

I am looking for a daily driver car, not a total beater but something that I can park on the street and take anywhere, and it has to be dependable. I love big cars and in my limited search so far have come across a few 1977-78 full size Chryslers. Good looking cars with all the toys but I have never owned a Mopar product from that era. Does anyone out there have experience with these cars? Reliability, problem areas, ease of getting parts, etc? Thanks for any help you can give.

[JFranklin]

I had a '77 New Yorker, it was a comfortable reliable car that liked to drink the gasoline!

[John_S_in_Penna]

The "Lean Burn" engine was replete with problems,

but there is a way to bypass the system.

 

I think the big Chryslers from the late 1970's are

attractive, even beautiful, but according to the experiences

of thousands of people who owned them and reported

their experiences to Consumer Reports, Chrysler

Corporation cars were the least reliable of the Big 3.

I have their reliability summaries, over quite a few

mechanical systems, that document people's exeriences.

 

As you know, the company's sales fell during that period,

leading to financial problems and the well-known bail-out.

People didn't stop buying the cars for no reason.

 

But let's hear encouragement, too, from satisfied owners.

It's not that every example was poor in every system--

just that the percentage of problems was greater.

If he gets a decent car, Don's venture sounds like fun.

Edited April 16, 2018 by John_S_in_Penna (see edit history)

[plymouthcranbrook]

Although not anything like you are looking at I drive my 1980 Plymouth Volare all summer long unless I take my 52 somewhere. Parts availability is great, most parts available at Napa. Never had a breakdown in 25,000 miles. Really just normal maintenance. And easy to work on.  If the weather wasn't so crappy around here I would drive it much more..

[TerryB]

The April 2018 edition of Hemmings Classic Car magazine, issue #163 in their labeling scheme, has a 1978 Chrysler Newport as one of its featured cars.  It's a low mileage example so the owners complaints are most about cosmetic imperfections.  You might find it an interesting read.

[Fleek]

We had a 78 Chrysler Cordba in the 80's. It was a good car.  The only problem we had was the ballast resistor on the firewall would burn out every few months. They are less than 10.00 and easy to install since it mounts on the firewall with one bolt and two plug in wires as I remember it. I kept a spare in the car and could change it in a less than 10 minutes. Nice looking comfortable car. I would not mind having one like it today. Most cars from that era have a quirk or two to keep things interesting and this one was just  a minor inconvenience 

[Harold]

Not full-size by 1970's standards, but definitely full size today.....1971-1977 B-bodies (Coronet/ Charger/Satellite/Cordoba).  Better fuel economy than full-size models (aka C-bodies).  Fairly bulletproof mechanically (the 4-doors were the darlings of the taxi and police markets) and roomy.  A well-equipped four-door or station wagon is much less expensive than a two-door version, and can be bought reasonably if you take the time to search.   As with most cars, rust is the enemy so a western or southern car would be a better bet.

 

Personally, I'd like a stick-shift Aspen or Volare, any body style as long as it's reasonably priced.  Still kick myself for not buying one new....

[Rusty_OToole]

They were good cars and very reliable. And the lean burn cars were surprisingly economical. They got 25% better mileage than non lean burn on the hiway. The system is not very complicated but nobody bothered to understand it.

 

Chrysler engineers figured out that you could get a lot better mileage if you leaned out the carburetor to 18:1 instead of the standard 14:1. But in order to get the mixture to burn you had to advance the timing to 52 degrees from the usual 30 degrees. For this purpose they put a second pickup in the distributor.

 

When you were cruising at a steady speed, with the engine fully warmed up, the electronic control switched the ignition to full advance and worked a solenoid in the carburetor that switched the main jet to lean. This leaned out the mixture and advanced the spark. If you pushed the gas pedal to the floor it would drop back to standard mode for full power. The system ran on standard mode until fully warmed up.

 

Owners reported over 20 MPG on the hiway which was fantastic for a full size V8 car in the late 70s. They had the additional advantage of not needing a catalytic converter.

 

Mechanics who didn't understand the system and couldn't do  a few simple tests, advised changing to standard carburetor and ignition which got them off the hook but cost the customer for unnecessary parts, and killed gas mileage.

[Rusty_OToole]

Mechanical parts not usually a problem. Chrysler tended to use the same engine, transmission, brakes etc on many different models for many years which simplifies things. They are well supported by normal parts stores.

 

I wouldn't be afraid of one as a daily driver BUT I don't rack up high mileages, I am used to old cars and know how to run them and how to fix them.

 

If you know what you are doing, and the size and gas mileage don't scare you, they are one of the best cars you could get for your purpose.

[414TATA]

Bought a new 77 Chrysler Cordoba. Owned it until 1984 at 98,000 miles.  I don't recall having too many issues.  Expect 10 mpg city and probably not more than 15 highway. 

 

Good luck

 

 

[JACK M]

I think if I had my druthers I would opt for a 60s Chrysler over one from the 70s.

Much simpler.

And they can be found reasonably priced, especially the old lady four doors.

[Rusty_OToole]

On thinking it over I wonder if you might be happier with a full size rear drive sedan or wagon from the 80s or 90s? Ford Crown Vic, Mercury, Chev Caprice, Buick, Olds or Cadillac. Or even a Chrysler 300. There was quite a bit of progress in things like gas mileage, reliability and engine life between the mid 70s and mid 80s.

[James-Wahl Motors]

I had a '78 Newport with a 360 as daily driver for a couple years. It had over 100K on it, but was well maintained and I had no problems to speak of, even with the Lean Burn. It was a comfortable car and ran smooth. Even did a couple cross country trips, and towed with it once or twice. I always thought the New Yorkers of that era looked nice. I haven't had to source parts for one for a while, but I don't see why one wouldn't be a viable and affordable driver.

 

On a somewhat related note, my parents had a rent-a-car franchise in the mid/late '70s stocked with Plymouths. I remember them saying the Volares were a lot of trouble but the Furys were good.

 

There is probably a really clean low-mile 78ish Newport still lurking in a garage at the end of my block. The owners retired to Europe and the building has been vacant. Wondering if I'm going to get that call someday...

 

 

 

[JACK M]

How about this one.

Slant six is the most dependable engine ever.

Not a Road Runner !!

 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1962-Plymouth-Road-Runner/253566609112?hash=item3b09bf66d8:g:oCEAAOSwmdVa1VKP&vxp=mtr

[Rusty_OToole]

That 62 Plymouth looks like it would make a great daily driver, real good condition and a low price. That car around here, they would want twice as much for it at least. Is that what they are going for in Carolina?

[JACK M]

I often think if my business ever sent me over to the other side I would buy something like this Plymouth instead of renting a car.

Then drive it home.

I don't think this one will last very long.

[John_S_in_Penna]

3 hours ago, James-Wahl Motors said:

...my parents had a rent-a-car franchise in the mid/late '70s stocked with Plymouths. I remember them saying the Volares were a lot of trouble but the Furys were good.

 

Your parents' experience with the Plymouth Volares

concurs with the respondents to Consumer Reports.

In the 1981 Buying Guide Issue, the 1977 Volare

was rated "Much Worse than Average" in 8 out of 18

reliability categories;  and "Worse than Average"

in another 3 out of 18, for an overall rating of 

"Much Worse than Average."

 

If your child came home from school with "Average"

grades, you'd probably accept them but urge him

to do better.  If he was "Worse than Average,"

you probably wouldn't be happy.  If he was 

"Much Worse than Average," what would you say?

Even so, a majority of Chrysler product vehicles had

overall ratings of "Worse than Average" or "Much Worse

than Average" at that time.  According to the owners

of the time, the Dodge Aspen and Plymouth Volares

had the most faults.  The Chrysler Newports and 

New Yorkers were a step better, being only "Worse than Average."

[Bleach]

I had a 77 Volare and it was a big POS for such a "small" car. It had so many problems and terrible dealer service. I ended up giving it away to my father in law in 1987 since he really needed a car. He gave it back to me a few years later and several hundred dollars poorer because of it. I turned around and sold it for $600, 10% of what it cost new, just to get rid of it. I offered to give him the proceeds of the sale but he declined.

My father in law never held it against me for giving him such a terrible car.

Edited April 17, 2018 by Bleach (see edit history)

[Rusty_OToole]

Chrysler was going through a bad period in the late seventies  because the company was looted for his own profit by Lynn Townsend before he retired. The Aspen and Volare were particularly bad. But, the basic design of the other cars was sound and you would expect the defects to be fixed by now.

 

Personally I like the style of the early seventies fuselage style models.

 

The truth is all American cars were lousy at the time. Chryslers were far from the worst.

[padgett]

I always liked the Cordoba, perhaps because I've never had one.

[plymouthcranbrook]

I remember my 77 Chevy suburban that I bought used in about 1983. Already badly rusted, but the 350, 4 speed trans and other mechanical stuff worked great.  Sometimes i wish I still had it.

[John_S_in_Penna]

3 hours ago, Rusty_OToole said:

The truth is all American cars were lousy at the time. Chryslers were far from the worst.

 

Rusty, in your experience, or from what you know,

which ones were worse?  It's always interesting to

hear people's experience from thousands of miles of driving.

 

In my 1981 Buying Guide Issue from Consumer Reports,

about the only vehicles worse than the Aspen/Volare were

the imported Fiats and the Audi 100.  Others that were

unreliable were the AMC Pacer, the 1978-79 Chevrolet Corvette,

the Chevrolet Monza, the Dodge pickup truck, certain years of 

the Volkswagen Dasher...

 

The big Ford Motor Company cars, and the big GM cars,

were actually rated "Better than Average."  That's probably

one of the reasons that Oldsmobile was booming at the time.

Edited April 17, 2018 by John_S_in_Penna (see edit history)

[61polara]

I had a '78 Cordoba with the 400 CID.  It got much better gas mileage than the 360 both with lean burn.  I would average 18-19 mpg.  I'd love to find a solid one of these.

[Bleach]

19 minutes ago, 61polara said:

I had a '78 Cordoba with the 400 CID.  It got much better gas mileage than the 360 both with lean burn.  I would average 18-19 mpg.  I'd love to find a solid one of these.

 

You got better mpg's than I did with the Volare and it had a 225. It was a slug too.

[61polara]

I only had one problem with the '78 Cordoba and it happened to me 3 or 4 time in 100,000 miles.  In 40-50 degree weather, if it did not fire on the first crank, it would flood the engine to the point of wetting the spark plugs.  Plugs had to be changed or pulled and dried to get it to start again.

[Rusty_OToole]

73 - 74 Monte Carlos broke out in baseball size rust blisters when a few months old, a result of painting them with water based paint. All makes would rust out within 2 or 3 years in the northeast. Parts stores kept stacks of Chev V8 cam kits on the shelf because most of the cams wore out prematurely. Valve seat recession was a big problem with Chevs and other makes too. Vegas of course were in a class of their own for engine failures. Then they put Vega transmissions in V8 powered full size station wagons and sedans with predictable results (a life measured in weeks or months)

 

GM cars would usually give a warning before a total mechanical failure. Not so Fords. They had a habit of the engine going dead with no warning and for no reason leaving you stranded beside the road. Then from 10 minutes to 2 hours later they would start up again for no known reason. Starters and other parts would fail with no warning. I knew a millionaire who had the rear axle in his Lincoln Town Car replaced 5 times under warranty before he got a good one. An architect with a very expensive new Country Squire wagon that went by on a tow hook every month or 2.

 

Chrysler products in my experience were far from the worst. The Aspen/Volare was a dog that was rushed to market with insufficient development. The $3 ballast resistor was such a well known weakness that most Mopar owners carried a spare in the glove box. The Lean Burn models came in for a lot of stick, mostly undeserved. I saw some Darts with pretty rough looking bodywork but they were pretty reliable. For quite a while 80% of corporate car sales were Darts and Valiants, they had a reputation for economical reliable service that was unbeatable. This was when nobody wanted big cars anyway. But all in all I would take a Chrysler product over a Chev or Ford, and usually did.

 

AMC made some good cars in the seventies and eighties at least I liked their looks, their comfortable ride and reliable service. A lot of people liked them. Of course today nobody has anything good to say about them but back then they were well thought of.

[Guest]

Rusty_OToole....After reading your comments and working for GM and Chrysler in the 60's and 70's I know why I drove a 1930 Pontiac as my daily driver since 1959.

[Rusty_OToole]

My nomination for the worst car ever made goes to the 70s Pontiac Firenza. This was an English Vauxhall sold in Canada by Pontiac dealers.

 

The only car to have an owner's club formed for the purpose of seeking redress from the company that sold them. One time they organized a rally and parade from Toronto to GM headquarters in Oshawa, a distance of less than 40 miles. Less than half the cars made it without breaking down and one or 2 caught on fire.

 

http://www.autofocus.ca/news-events/features/the-firenza-fiasco-is-the-canadian-nader-corvair-affair-you-never-heard-about

Edited April 18, 2018 by Rusty_OToole (see edit history)

[TexRiv_63]

Thanks for all the response, sounds like these cars are worth a look. Not interested in a B body as I just sold one. I'm really looking for a big 9 passenger station wagon but if I can't find that maybe a 4 door hardtop....

[Rusty_OToole]

Yeah the big 75 - 78 Town and Country wagon with the 375HP 440 engine and all the toys. Back in the day you could have bought a Cadillac for what one cost and got a Chevy as change.

Edited April 19, 2018 by Rusty_OToole (see edit history)

[John_S_in_Penna]

4 hours ago, TexRiv_63 said:

 I'm really looking for a big 9 passenger station wagon but if I can't find that maybe a 4 door hardtop....

 

Don, a station wagon like you describe would be

a very scarce car, and worth preserving.  People think

of rarity in terms of production numbers, but that is no

longer the case for many cars:  Certain glamorous models

get preserved, while many others, once routine, are almost

never seen.  I know you'll be careful, but please don't

let your enthusiasm take a rare station wagon from

a beautiful survivor to a banged-up grocery shuttle.

 

 

Edited April 19, 2018 by John_S_in_Penna (see edit history)

[TexRiv_63]

21 hours ago, John_S_in_Penna said:

 

Don, a station wagon like you describe would be

a very scarce car, and worth preserving.  People think

of rarity in terms of production numbers, but that is no

longer the case for many cars:  Certain glamorous models

get preserved, while many others, once routine, are almost

never seen.  I know you'll be careful, but please don't

let your enthusiasm take a rare station wagon from

a beautiful survivor to a banged-up grocery shuttle.

 

 

 

John, I guess you haven't followed me much on this site or you would know that scenario would NEVER happen. The more likely outcome will be me spending too much money improving the vehicle that I will never get back!

[TexRiv_63]

Well, I was looking at a 77 wagon but when I finally got pictures it was too rough for my purpose. I'm now expanding my scope to include 60s and 70s Imperials... Always liked Imperials but never owned one.

[George Smolinski]

Tex,

If you're still looking, here's one in the MPLS CL:

https://minneapolis.craigslist.org/hnp/cto/d/1968-chrysler-newport-custom/6553023344.html

IF THE ADD IS STILL UP THE CAR IS STILL FOR SALE!!!!

$3500/OBO
NADA at$4k+

1968 chrysler newport custom
94k original miles
383 engine

All original except wheels obviously
Dont have the originals, didnt come with them when I aquired it.

This is a restore that I am no longer able to do.
Lost storage and hate to see it rot outside.

One shot of starting fluid and it fired right up after sitting outside all winter.

I have a couple of standing offers and I am planning on selling it to the most reasonable one. (need the space)

Pictures are worth a thousand words so please carefully look at the pictures before texting me questions that the pictures could answer.

Thanks,
Garrett
Six12seven03seven98four

Text perfered

[John_S_in_Penna]

Don, in the new thread titled "Spring Carlisle 2018,"

there is a nice looking 1976 Chrysler Newport 4-door 

hardtop among Cutlass Guy's pictures of the car corral.

The contact information is even visible on the windshield

in the picture, in case you don't mind a car as far away

as Pennsylvania.  

 

 I'll copy the picture here, for what it's worth:

 

Edited April 23, 2018 by John_S_in_Penna (see edit history)

[Bloo]

Out of everything presented in this thread, that 68 Newport is a clear winner IMHO. I guess if you were looking for creature comforts, it probably doesn't have them, but after a little sorting, it will be bulletproof. Sell the wheels, get some stock ones, or better yet some magnum500s, and drive... and drive... and drive....

 

 

Edited April 23, 2018 by Bloo (see edit history)

[James-Wahl Motors]

On 4/17/2018 at 10:48 AM, James-Wahl Motors said:

 

There is probably a really clean low-mile 78ish Newport still lurking in a garage at the end of my block. The owners retired to Europe and the building has been vacant. Wondering if I'm going to get that call someday...

 

 

 

 

Well, it happened today. I did NOT get the call. Probably a good thing