K-cars

[dieseljeep]

Originally Posted by davet753

I had a tech who worked with me back in the early 90's who had a nice little Chrysler LeBaron coupe, late 80's model. It was dark blue with tinted windows, and I always thought it was a sharp looking car. It served him well until it got close to 100k miles, and then went south in a hurry. I remember he replaced a bunch of front end parts, followed by a transmission rebuild and a head gasket. He wanted rid of it when it was about 8 or 9 years old, and despite it's looking like new, he liked to never have sold it.....nobody wanted it.

I remember my father trying to talk mom into buying a Dodge Dynasty when he bought a new Dodge Dakota pickup in 1990. She wouldn't hear of it, and readily admitted that while she knew very little about cars, she knew better than to buy a Chrysler product. The little Dakota pickup dad bought went on to serve him well, racking up well over 100k trouble-free miles by the time he passed away in 2001. Mom hung onto her old Monte Carlo for several more years before buying a Lincoln.

She probably heard some of her so-called friends bad-mouthing Mopars.
The Chev M/C was a larger rear wheel drive car which could've had a V-8. The earlier models were super-fugly. I gave them a different name after many of the people that bought them. There seemed to be five on each block in a particular neighborhood.

[Jon A.]

Originally Posted by dieseljeep

She probably heard some of her so-called friends bad-mouthing Mopars.
The Chev M/C was a larger rear wheel drive car which could've had a V-8. The earlier models were super-fugly. I gave them a different name after many of the people that bought them. There seemed to be five on each block in a particular neighborhood.

Yup, one will find fanboys/fangirls of a particular make anywhere who will disparage just about everything else. If I'm looking for pictures of a particular car and stumble on a junkyard find from "The Truth About Cars" I'll usually skip it. I don't know if I've ever seen the writer say anything good about the cars he finds.

I have no idea what a Chev "M/C" is but it sounds like they were almost as popular as Hondas are today.

[maxhifi]

Originally Posted by Jon A.

Yup, one will find fanboys/fangirls of a particular make anywhere who will disparage just about everything else. If I'm looking for pictures of a particular car and stumble on a junkyard find from "The Truth About Cars" I'll usually skip it. I don't know if I've ever seen the writer say anything good about the cars he finds.

I have no idea what a Chev "M/C" is but it sounds like they were almost as popular as Hondas are today.

Monte Carlo....

[Jon A.]

Originally Posted by maxhifi

Monte Carlo....

I see. Well, the 1970-72 Monte Carlos are nice but the 1973-75 models are just nasty. Little wonder a brand new one was deliberately wrecked in Street People. The 1976-77 models were a slight improvement and seems GM decided to wash most of the mud off the name for 1978.

The colonnade-body GMs are at best rather "blah" to me. I'm not ragging on GM though, I'll admit that Ford and Chrysler also made plenty of oversized, underpowered and unattractive cars in the 70s. I am rather puzzled though as to why Khan - or Mr. Roarke - or Ricardo Montalban if one wants to be formal, was willing to plug cars for a company that was doing so badly before Lee Iacocca stepped in.

[dieseljeep]

Originally Posted by Jon A.

I see. Well, the 1970-72 Monte Carlos are nice but the 1973-75 models are just nasty. Little wonder a brand new one was deliberately wrecked in Street People. The 1976-77 models were a slight improvement and seems GM decided to wash most of the mud off the name for 1978.

The colonnade-body GMs are at best rather "blah" to me. I'm not ragging on GM though, I'll admit that Ford and Chrysler also made plenty of oversized, underpowered and unattractive cars in the 70s. I am rather puzzled though as to why Khan - or Mr. Roarke - or Ricardo Montalban if one wants to be formal, was willing to plug cars for a company that was doing so badly before Lee Iacocca stepped in.

You talk about Chrysler doing badly, look what happened to GM a few years back. Same thing! Government bailout! Lee Iacocca had to pay back the loan way early, as he didn't like owing THEM money.
I bought a 1982 Dodge Ramcharger, even though the company future didn't look that bright. I drove it for 13 years. The only real expense was a timing chain at 91K miles. A 318, the best small-block engine in the business.

[Jon A.]

Originally Posted by dieseljeep

You talk about Chrysler doing badly, look what happened to GM a few years back. Same thing! Government bailout! Lee Iacocca had to pay back the loan way early, as he didn't like owing THEM money.

I wasn't ragging on Chrysler either. In fact I find it hard to understand why they were doing so badly in the 70s considering their offerings during the smog era were the best of the big three in my opinion. That isn't saying much, but still. Even their least visually appealing models from back then aren't that bad. Putting the Charger name on a full-size seemed kind of weird though.

Too bad Chrysler was unable to make 2-door and wagon versions of the R-platform cars, which might have done better had they been introduced a few years later. The 1979 New Yorker Fifth Avenue at least with a 360 and dual exhaust came without cats up here which must have been some help at least.

I'm aware of GM's problems from a few years back but I don't hear as much about that. Besides, I was speaking of smog-era vehicles, not those whose biggest advantage is that when they're used up their owners can step on them and return them for a refund.

[dieseljeep]

Originally Posted by Jon A.

I wasn't ragging on Chrysler either. In fact I find it hard to understand why they were doing so badly in the 70s considering their offerings during the smog era were the best of the big three in my opinion. That isn't saying much, but still. Even their least visually appealing models from back then aren't that bad. Putting the Charger name on a full-size seemed kind of weird though.

Too bad Chrysler was unable to make 2-door and wagon versions of the R-platform cars, which might have done better had they been introduced a few years later. The 1979 New Yorker Fifth Avenue at least with a 360 and dual exhaust came without cats up here which must have been some help at least.

I'm aware of GM's problems from a few years back but I don't hear as much about that. Besides, I was speaking of smog-era vehicles, not those whose biggest advantage is that when they're used up their owners can step on them and return them for a refund.

Chryslers problem at the time was poor planning! The wrong product at the wrong time. Lee Iacocca stated that in his book.
When the other US manufactures were started building small cars to compete with the imports, they were still building the old product line.

[davet753]

Originally Posted by dieseljeep

She probably heard some of her so-called friends bad-mouthing Mopars.
The Chev M/C was a larger rear wheel drive car which could've had a V-8. The earlier models were super-fugly. I gave them a different name after many of the people that bought them. There seemed to be five on each block in a particular neighborhood.

Her Monte Carlo was a '77 with a V8. It was a big, ugly, and (despite the V8) slow car that got terrible gas mileage. I never liked it, but she drove it until 1991, ran up over 100k miles, and never had any problems other than regular maintenance.

[MadMan]

Originally Posted by dieseljeep

She probably heard some of her so-called friends bad-mouthing Mopars.

Hehehe lol! Mopar or no car.

Originally Posted by davet753

Her Monte Carlo was a '77 with a V8. It was a big, ugly, and (despite the V8) slow car that got terrible gas mileage. I never liked it, but she drove it until 1991, ran up over 100k miles, and never had any problems other than regular maintenance.

Eh, the big American cars in the 70s were strangled with emissions junk that they really didn't have the tech to compensate for. Ironically, those emissions standards that were trying to help the air quality basically necessitated burning WAY more gas, which I'd imagine would pollute even more. That's also where the notion that foreign cars are better on gas comes from. Because the only foreign cars you could buy at the time were miniscule Civics and Beetles, when all the Americans were land yachts.