Introduction and 1951 Firewall Tag Question

[Tim_M]

Hi all,

 

My name is Tim, and I live just outside Philadelphia. I've lurked and learned on these forums for a long time, but this is my first post. I'm in my 30s, but I specifically love cars from the 40s and 50s, so this forum seemed to be the best place to ask a question about a 1951 Chrysler I'm looking at.

 

The car is a 1951 Chrysler New Yorker Newport hardtop that's being advertised as an original, unrestored example with 15,482 miles. So, the claim is roughly 218 miles per year for 71 years. Given the number of survivors from an original run of fewer than 6,000, that might make the car unique or close to it in 2022.

 

The door jam serial number of the car is 7189485 (attached image), which is in range for a 1951 Chrysler New Yorker. So far, so good.

 

My confusion stems from the firewall tag just below the cowl (attached image). That has a model code of 46, which seems to code for a 1949 New Yorker, Saratoga, or Town & Country. From all the research I've compiled, there doesn't seem to be any way this tag could be model and year correct without a model code of "52," a 1951 New Yorker. The tag does specify paint code "78," which seems to code correctly for either or both of its body color (Arizona Beige) and roof color (Buckskin Tan). Separately, this tag just seems to be coded for less information than I usually see on Chrysler products from the same era.

 

Also, this tag is painted over. Since I've seen both bare metal firewall tags and painted tags on Chryslers from the period, I'm not certain which way it shipped from the factory. But if the tag isn't supposed to be painted, and it doesn't code for a 1951 New Yorker, then it raises larger questions about why it's there and the story about the mileage/originality.

 

I haven't reached out to inquire about the car yet, and I felt I should rely on guidance from this forum first. Is there any way this 1951 car could have wound up correctly paired with this particular firewall tag from the factory?

 

You can see the car here: https://www.schmitt.com/inventory/1951-chrysler-new-yorker/

A separate dealer appears to have offered the same car years and 1,000 miles ago: HERE

My impression is that the prior dealer took more revealing photos of the car's actual condition.

 

I don't have an engine block serial number for this car yet. Thanks so much for any assistance or guidance you can provide.

 

Best,

Tim

 

 

[Gunsmoke]

Nice car, appears to be '51 New Yorker. The phillips head screws suggest this plate has been added, normally they were riveted. Similarly, the door # looks pop riveted, also not likely original means of fastening. May take some effort to pin down correct year/model ID plates. I stand corrected, here is a pic off internet of a 1951 Chrysler cowl tag, shows phillips screws, same general detail as yours has. 

Edited May 8, 2022 by Gunsmoke
added pictures (see edit history)

[Tim_M]

Thanks, Gunsmoke.

 

I've looked at quite few of these tags over the years, and the screw-fixture seems to be a legit factory practice for this period of Mopar. But for all my time at shows and Google image searches, I've never known for sure whether this tag was painted in body color or shipped as bare metal when delivered from the factory. I've seen both.

 

Normally, if a car this old is in reasonably original condition, I'd just move to the inspection phase and get on with it. But a body tag years removed from the build year would be a red flag on a supposedly original sub-16,000 mile car. Was there heavy corrosion requiring surgery at one point? Could this be a major crash repair with parts from another car?

 

It would be great if Chrysler Historical were still around, but like many on this board, I haven't been able to confirm whether that service still exists. I'm pretty confident in the car's billing as a 51 NY'er Newport coupe - the roofline, wheelbase, interior trim, and grill are correct. Collectively, those features are tough to piece together if not originally equipped from the factory.

 

The car does look like it might need some electrical attention almost immediately judging by the images, but I'm realistic about old cars and their needs. I've never bought an old car without expecting to immediately put some money into it. That's been true for 15-20 year old cars, never mind cars built during the Korean War.

 

Best,

Tim

 

 

Edited May 8, 2022 by Tim_M (see edit history)

[JACK M]

Good looking car to be sure.

[c49er]

I doubt very much that car has only 15,000 -16,000 original miles.

**Bullseye headlamps are gone

**Passenger side striker plate replaced with a used one

**the 8 cylinder brake booster under drivers side of floor is missing

**the original style trunk mat is missing

**someone sprayed the u der carriage to hide all the dirt and surface frame rust shown in the first ad..

**the first ad shows lots of grease on the rt side backing plate and knuckle support/king pins from lots of lubing... unlikely on a 15,000 mile car

**In person looking at behind the dash looming at wiring, listening to the 331 hemi lifters would tell more about if a true low mileage car

**seat covers most likely newer

**drivers arm rest work too much for low mileage.

I think the car has been refurbished as necessary and nicely done.

It has a beautiful mottled original wheel.

Wires were not a factory option on 1951 or 52 Chryslers.🙂

[Tim_M]

9 hours ago, c49er said:

I doubt very much that car has only 15,000 -16,000 original miles.

**Bullseye headlamps are gone

**Passenger side striker plate replaced with a used one

**the 8 cylinder brake booster under drivers side of floor is missing

**the original style trunk mat is missing

**someone sprayed the under carriage to hide all the dirt and surface frame rust shown in the first ad..

**the first ad shows lots of grease on the rt side backing plate and knuckle support/king pins from lots of lubing... unlikely on a 15,000 mile car

**In person looking at behind the dash looming at wiring, listening to the 331 hemi lifters would tell more about if a true low mileage car

**seat covers most likely newer

**drivers arm rest work too much for low mileage.

I think the car has been refurbished as necessary and nicely done.

It has a beautiful mottled original wheel.

Wires were not a factory option on 1951 or 52 Chryslers.🙂

Thanks, C49er. I had the same reservations about the undercarriage, which appears to have been masked where necessary and otherwise coated with black Rust-Oleum. That was what originally led me to think twice and ask the experts here. I've decided to pass on this one.

 

All of the prior dealer's photos revealed slightly lesser condition than the current dealer's photos, which appear to be super-saturated and color shifted to create a golden glow inside and out.

 

Multiple coats of grease on the front end steering geometry look exactly as you say - way more than 220 miles a year. There's also this frightening-looking (attached) aged electrical hub, duct tape insulation, and what appears to be a crude attempt to ground the system with a secondary wire of low quality.

 

Basically, the undercarriage spray was enough by itself to make me look elsewhere. That's a cheap tactic that speaks volumes about the dealer's integrity and descriptions of the car's overall condition. The price of the car is mental for a '51 New Yorker, and I'd only consider that kind of price if the car were 100 percent original and virtually unique in condition. $40K+ buys a loaded '51 Imperial convertible, which is the ultimate Mopar from that model year. That, and it's probably best to buy from a private seller. These volume classic car retailers all seem to be hustlers who will do the minimum maintenance and disclosure necessary to sell a car.

 

Thanks again,

Tim

Edited May 15, 2022 by Tim_M (see edit history)

[Narve N]

The body color data tag is likely correct, however the NewYorker clearly has been repainted. Here is my 52 Saratoga firewall, with several production stamps from its assembly (in Los Angeles by the way). I cannot see anything like that on the otherwise nice NewYorker.