Rust is a car’s worst enemy. Once rust starts, it never sleeps and makes your car a little worse with every passing day. Automakers have been trying to beat rust since practically forever, but not all efforts have been successful. Back in the mid-1970s, Chrysler launched the Dodge Aspen and Plymouth Volaré. These cars were supposed to usher in a new era, but instead, they caused so many headaches that Chrysler was brought to its knees. Their biggest problem of all was rust. These cars rusted so quickly that the U.S. government got involved, and later, even Chrysler’s CEO expressed disappointment in the cars.
This story brings us back to the so-called Malaise Era of car history. The Malaise Era, a term coined by the legendary Murilee Martin, describes a dark period for not just cars, but all of America. The country had just come out of a roaring 1960s, and as the 1970s dawned, American cars looked spectacular and manufacturers were quoting simply ridiculous power numbers in their flagships.
However, the ’70s brought a change in horsepower rating standards – gross power was out and net was in – which made cars seem less powerful. Then came multiple oil crises, fuel shortages, an economic trough, concerns about pollution, and other concerns about vehicle safety. The cars changed with the times, losing weight, getting smaller, and becoming adorned with goofy 5 mph bumpers and emissions equipment. Automakers didn’t quite know how to reduce emissions without also killing power, so the Malaise Era ended up being full of chunky V8s that made less power than a basic four-cylinder does today.
If that wasn’t enough, consumer confidence was also in the gutter thanks to the economy, double-digit unemployment, the Vietnam War, and the Watergate scandal. There was also an anti-authority sentiment, and truckers used their CB radios to warn each other and car drivers about police waiting to ticket drivers for violating the new 55 mph national speed limit.
Automakers eventually figured out how to make the kinds of modern cars we expect today – safe, better for the environment, efficient, powerful – but the consumers of the 1970s were in the thick of it. Car buyers in this era didn’t just have to worry about low power or goofy bumpers, either, but quality fell dramatically, and it seemingly across the board with the American makes.
If you’re like me and were not around in the 1970s, watch a period review (above) of a Malaise Era car by the charismatic Bob Mayer of TV station WTVJ in Miami, Florida. Mayer seemingly routinely tested cars that, while brand new, suffered from a litany of issues, from dirt embedded in paint and rattling interiors to cars that simply refused to start or run well.
So, Chrysler wasn’t exactly alone in building questionable cars. Still, when the Dodge Aspen and Plymouth Volaré launched in 1976, they fell apart so quickly and generated so many serious recalls that they caused a national scandal. The disaster of these twins would become part of the reason why the U.S. government and Lee Iacocca would have to bail out a sinking Chrysler.
Cooking Up A New Compact
Development on Chrysler’s new compact began in 1971 under the codename “Aspen-Vail.” As Motor Trend reports, Chrysler had taken note of the growing compact and subcompact market of the early 1970s. Chevrolet launched the Vega in the year prior, and Ford came out swinging with the Pinto. Meanwhile, AMC punched out the Gremlin. But Chrysler took a more cautious approach than its peers.
In 1962, Chrysler decided to downsize its lineup, which had disastrous results. It wasn’t that smaller cars were bad, but that Chrysler had more or less predicted the downsizing movement perhaps a decade too soon. Either way, Chrysler wasn’t ready to get burned again if it turned out compacts weren’t here to stay. So, it continued into the early 1970s with full-size and mid-size cars. Reportedly, Chrysler scheduled an update to its full-size C-body cars before it got around to launching a new small car.
Of course, this would turn out to be a catastrophic decision as the 1973 Oil Embargo set in. While pretty much the entire American economy took a battering during the first oil crisis, Chrysler was in a particularly rough situation. Sure, it had Dodge Dart, Dodge Colt, and Plymouth Valiant, but unsold vehicles piled up at dealerships as the few Americans who did buy new cars went elsewhere.
By the end of 1975, Chrysler burned through $260 million ($1,565,683,271 in 2025). The automaker then missed paying a dividend on common stock for its first time since 1933. The bleeding was bad, but Chrysler had a solution, and it planned to replace the Dodge Dart and Plymouth Valiant.
The Dart and Valiant were durable and simple cars that had tons of fans. These were cars that just worked and got their jobs done. They were even so popular that, despite having launched as a 1967 model, sales were still strong in 1974, with more than 720,000 A-body copies finding homes that year.
Chrysler tasked itself with replacing its two compact workhorses. The Dart and Valiant would be a tough act to follow, but Chrysler would attempt to improve on the compact concept. Originally, Popular Mechanics reported in 1975, while the F-body platform was originally designed to be a replacement for the A-body, Chrysler observed how Ford kept the Maverick and Comet around even after technically replacing them with the Grenada and Monarch. It worked out well for Ford, so Chrysler would do the same thing.
Under The Metal
According to Motor Trend in February 1976, the motoring press apparently expected the F-body cars to be warmed-over A-bodies that were updated on a budget. Instead, Motor Trend claimed, the Aspen and Volaré were nearly clean-sheet designs. The F-body chassis was all-new. It was unitized like the A-body, but used fewer stampings and weighed less.
As reported by Popular Mechanics in 1975, a theme with the F-body was that it was supposed to be a small car that had the interior, ride, and comfort of a big car. Supposedly, this meant that the F-body was designed from the inside and out. Motor Trend says that the body was designed with the aid of computers, and its shape was determined after extensive wind tunnel testing. As a result, Chrysler claimed, the Aspen and Volaré were 10 percent slicker than the Dart and Valiant. Motor Trend went on to report that the Aspen’s and Volare’s bodies were designed to be aerodynamic first, functional second, and aesthetically pleasing third. Changes to the F-bodies included the removal of the roof-drip moldings, the use of thinner glass, thinner side door beams, fewer welds, and high-strength steel rather than mild steel. The F-body twins were offered with two wheelbases, 108.5 inches for coupes and 112.5 inches for sedans and wagons.
Chrysler baked in several elements to achieve its goal of a big car wearing the body of a compact. The F-body cars had an updated version of Chrysler’s torsion bar suspension. In the past, Chryslers had two longitudinal bars, while the F-body sported two transverse bars ahead of the front wheels (confusingly, Motor Trend‘s review mentions only one bar). The bars are accompanied by a large anti-roll bar. The front suspension is mounted to an H-shaped structural member that uses four rubber mounts to isolate it from the body. What’s interesting is that the axles of the Aspen and Volaré are designed to rock forward and backward after an impact. This is supposed to allow the car to more or less “roll” through a bump, and hopefully result in a smoother ride inside.
As for the rear suspension, the twins had semi-elliptical leaf springs, but these were also rubber-isolated like the front suspension. The steering column also had a rubber isolator.
Inside, Chrysler continued the “big small car” ethos. Chrysler claimed that the Aspen and Volaré had an “interior space that’s bigger than a Cadillac Seville’s in seven out of eight important people measurements, like headroom and hiproom.” Chrysler then took another crack at the Seville by saying that a Dodge Aspen could carry six real people in it, unlike the Cadillac.
These comparisons to Cadillac were because Chrysler saw the Aspen and Volaré as being luxury cars. Chrysler touted power windows, power locks, power seats, power sunroof, power brakes, and a four-speed automatic transmission, among other options. As far as the powertrain went, there really wasn’t anything new.
Chrysler’s legendary 225 Slant-6 made a return here, and buyers would eventually have a choice of two V8s. Visually, the Aspen and Volaré had only minor differences in their grilles and rear panels, but were otherwise the same. The interiors had no real differences between the models. This was badge engineering at its finest.
Chrysler was quite ambitious in its statements to the press, and told Motor Trend that the Aspen and Volaré “represent the standard-size cars of the future.” There’s no further detail on how Chrysler came up with such a claim, but of course, hindsight being perfect, we know Chrysler couldn’t have been more wrong.
Car Of The Year
The Dodge Aspen and Plymouth Volaré launched in the middle of 1975 for the 1976 model year. The twins hit the market with a starting price as low as $3,336 for a coupe, $3,371 for the sedan, and $3,658 for the wagon. The automotive press was pleased. Motor Trend‘s crew said that they felt like they had seen something new in the Aspen and Volaré, praised the build that I described above, and claimed that, yep, the twins really did handle and ride like small cars with the identity of a large car. Motor Trend ultimately declared the twins as its 1976 Car of the Year with this conclusion:
There are several criteria considered in the Car of the Year selection process, but there is one that is most important: Which car has made the most significant contribution to the automotive world? Add to that such vital categories as engineering, new concepts in style to include passenger packaging, efficiency in natural resource use, safety, marketing, and creative use of new material and you have a pretty demanding checklist.
It may well be impossible for any car to outscore its competitors in all those categories. And we would be less than candid if we told you the Aspen/Volare did. But taken as a complete package, the new cars from Chrysler Corp. have one of the highest overall rankings we have seen, and certainly the highest this year.
We feel the Aspen and Volare have made the most significant contribution to the automotive world for 1976. And the Chrysler Corporation is responsible. We feel the award is Chrysler’s well-earned recognition. As for the Aspen and Volare: Try them, you’ll like them.
Most Owners Loved Them
In May 1976, Popular Mechanics conducted a survey, asking tons of Aspen and Volaré owners how they felt about their cars. The number of people in the survey was not published, but Popular Mechanics said that the participants represented 329,590 miles in Aspens and 244,472 miles in Volarés. Some 48.8 percent of Volaré owners in the survey drove the wagon, while 33.6 percent of Aspen owners had the wagon equivalent of that car.
Popular Mechanics noted that buyers overwhelmingly loved the wagon over the sedan and coupe for its ability to carry both passengers and luggage on long trips. These people also loved the Slant-6, with 73.9 percent of Aspen buyers going for the leaning tower of power and an equally impressive 64 percent of Volaré buyers choosing the same engine.
Owner demographics were interesting. Most Volaré owners were between 30 years old and 49 years old while most Aspen owners were over 50 years old. Likewise, more than 50 percent of the owners of both cars had only a Volaré or Aspen in their fleet. Nearly all Aspen and Volaré owners also did at least one repair themselves.
Some people loved their cars, from Popular Mechanics:
A North Carolina retiree; “The Aspen [wagon] is more car for the price than l have ever seen. The room is unbelievable, and options are unlimited. Chrysler Corp, cars cannot be beat, as illustrated by their 13-month, no-mileage limit warranty, The Aspen is another example of a Chrysler Corp. winner!”
[…]
From a Milwaukee insurance clerk: “Excellent handling. Our Aspen holds the road beautifully, takes turns readily, fantastic to steer and park.” An Iowa student: “Handles, drives, and feels like a big car.” A Michigan maintenance worker who drives an Aspen coupe with the Six: “Good acceleration if it’s wound out properly.”
Nearly all respondents had compliments to give to their cars. An impressive 100 percent of Volaré owners said that their cars had good front seat comfort, with 94.3 percent of Aspen owners reporting the same. An overwhelming majority of owners also had praise for rear seat comfort. Owners also noted features, handling, and styling as huge pluses. About three-quarters of Aspen and Volaré buyers said that they would buy another.
There Were Big Issues
Then, things started falling apart. The Popular Mechanics survey said that 17 percent of the owners had braking system problems, 12.9 percent of the cars had carburetor problems, and 10 percent of the cars had speedometer issues. Some had oil leaks right off of the dealership sales floor. About a quarter of the owners complained that they weren’t getting near the EPA’s numbers for fuel economy. The complaints continued, from Popular Mechanics:
What are some of the major complaints of Aspen and Volare owners?
“Squealing brakes — and they say they can’t fix this’ groans a New York machinist, and he’s not alone. “Gas mileage on this six-cylinder, four-door sedan Aspen is not up to my expectation,” grumbles a retired Floridian. “Gasoline spills out on side of car when filling,” gripes a Louisiana bank examiner.
An Illinois restaurateur: “Brakes squeal, engine races, rear door out of line, hard to start at times, otherwise okay,” A Wisconsin building inspector: “The trunk is so shallow I can’t get a case of beer into it,” Florida soil packager: “I’ve found poor workmanship, poor trunk design in coupe, short rear-seat legroom.”
Overall, Popular Mechanics said, about half of Aspen and Volaré owners thought that their cars had good to excellent build quality, and the other half thought their cars had average or poor build quality. Sadly, these complaints would not be the end of the twins’ problems.
Between March 1976 and May 1978, the Aspen and Volaré would be slammed by eight major safety recalls. The issues included in these recalls included stalling due to a failed carburetor accelerator pump, hood latches that didn’t work, fatigue failure of the control arm supports, brake line corrosion, power braking system delays, seat belt locking mechanism failures, and, finally, an alternator belt that rubs on the fuel vapor return line, which can cause a fire. One of the car’s recalls was pretty stupid, and indicated that the tire pressure label in the glovebox had the wrong pressures printed on it.
The issues with stalling were not limited to just the Aspen and Volaré, but to the Dart and Valiant, too. In 1978, Driver magazine reported, Chrysler announced what was then its largest recall in history, which covered 1.3 million Aspens, Volarés, Valiants, and Darts to fix the broken carburetor accelerator pump issue. The recall was so huge that, initially, Chrysler didn’t even have enough parts to carry out the recall.
You’d think that engine stalling isn’t the worst thing that could happen, but this got serious. Reportedly, Chrysler recorded 27 crashes attributed to the carburetor issue, of which seven resulted in injuries. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s numbers were worse, and allegedly counted 52 crashes and about 1,000 complaints attributed to the stalling problem.
Rapid Rusting
Yet, the most visible of the Aspen and Volaré’s issues were not the safety problems, but rust. Apparently, as the twins were originally designed, the front fenders had a huge open hole that allowed water to get into the fender. This was especially bad in the “salt belt,” as cars driving through the winter would get salt spray into the fenders, and the salty mush would just sit there, rotting out the fender.
Allegedly, some of these vehicles began rusting before they were even a year old, and some people claimed to have seen rust right on the showroom floor. All of these issues came at just the wrong time. Chrysler was already battered by the Oil Crisis, and the Aspen and Volaré were supposed to be Chrysler’s saviors, only to cost the company even more money, bringing the automaker closer to collapse. Chrysler was dealing with the setup for its future loan guarantees from the government while at the same time battling these recalls.
As the Washington Post reported in 1980, Chrysler might have known of the issue, but initially didn’t do much to solve it:
Chrysler set aside $45 million last year to cover potential claims for rust damage on the Aspens and Volares after the FTC began an inquiry; therefore yesterday’s announcement does not represent a new financial setback for the automaker.
[…]
The FTC said its settlement with Chrysler could affect 200,000 Aspens and Volares, one-fifth of the total produced by Chrysler in 1976 and 1977. To qualify for free replacement, the fender must have rusted on the top near the windshield, where a design defect permitted salt water to accumulate during winter driving, causing severe erosion, the FTC said.
The FTC also charged that Chrysler earlier had been willing to replace the rust-damaged fenders only to customers who complained hard enough.
Check out this TV news report:
Notices were mailed to car owners in 16 northern and central states, plus Maryland, Minnesota, and West Virginia. However, the offer to have your fender replaced applied to any 1976 or 1977 Aspen or Volaré anywhere in America so long as your fender began rusting before the car was three years old. Allegedly, the design flaw was fixed in the 1978 model year.
Unfortunately for Chrysler, the damage was done. In 1977, Chrysler sold 327,739 Volarés and 266,012 Aspens. By 1980, the last model year for the twins, they sold 90,063 units and 67,318 units, respectively, and many of those were fleet sales.
What happened here? How could Chrysler fail so hard? As Paul Niedermeyer of Curbside Classic explains, Chrysler screwed up by launching the twins before they were ready for primetime. Apparently, these cars were an early example of how the companies of today launch unfinished products and then fix them later.
Lee Iacocca Weighs In
Lee Iacocca, who took the reins of Chrysler in 1978 to fix the disaster that the company was in, did not have nice words to say about the Aspen and Volaré. Curbside Classic quotes his autobiography:
“The Dart and Valiant ran forever, and they should never have been dropped. Instead they were replaced by cars that often started to come apart after only a year or two. When these cars first came out, they were still in the development phase. Looking back over the past twenty years or so, I can’t think of any cars that caused more disappointment among customers than the Aspen and the Volare”.
Of course, it should be noted that Iacocca wasn’t there for the development of the Aspen. But he did have to clean up the mess and right the ship. Chrysler only just barely avoided heading into the abyss thanks to federal loan guarantees, and the Aspen and Volaré helped push Chrysler into such a terrible position in the first place. The K-cars would end up being Chrysler’s magic pill.
This is one of those weird cases where a car is an Unholy Fail, not because it failed to sell. Indeed, the F-body twins sold quite a large number of copies. But the cars were still such a huge blunder that Chrysler canned them, replaced them, and ran away as far as it could.
It’s a shame, too, because it sounds as if it weren’t for the safety issues and the rust issues, the Aspen and Volaré were decent cars. I mean, how many cars can say that 100 percent of their owners love their front seats?
If there is any lesson to be learned from this saga, it’s that if you’re working on an important project, it’s almost certainly better to get it good rather than get it out fast. Sure, being late to a party sucks, but getting there early just to fall flat on your face is probably worse. Unfortunately, far too many companies are still releasing “beta” products to the public.
After our 1973 Westfalia blew it’s 6th engine, and burned up(I wasn’t there, and missed the joyous occasion), my dad was gifted a Volaré wagon from his brother that lasted a year or two. He was Fred Flintstoning it by the time he gave up on it, the rust was so bad.
Interestingly, CR saw great promise in them, at least until the reliability surveys came back.
Every time I read a Motor Trend “quote” from an owner, I wonder who they think they are fooling. The corporate speak is so, so obviously not something a normal person would say in a normal conversation.
They did NOT offer a four speed automatic, only the usual 3 speed auto.
Who among the Big 3 actually had a four-speed automatic back then?
Nobody…that was the point. Streeter did not check her facts.
Honestly, “old” cars are miserable. Just another example of misplaced nostalgia.
They have a charm, but one must avoid domestic products from the malaise era.
Where I used to live an elderly woman drove an absolutely flawless brown Volare. This was remarkable for two reasons:
– Because of the many issues, flawless Volares otherwise don’t exist.
– The woman couldn’t drive for shit. She almost hit me several times.
I really dig the coupes… Also sailplanes, more ad copy should include gliders.
We had several of these cars in my family when I was a kid – ironically the opposites of the cars pictured here. Right when they first came out, my dad bought a ’76 Volare wagon in beige with the plastic wood siding, just like the Aspen shown in the picture above (no that’s not my dad with the black and white sport jacket!). We actually got a lot of “nice car” compliments at first. When the slant 6 threw a rod after only 2 years, he traded its remains for a ’78 green Aspen wagon just like the Volare shown above, again with the slant 6. Why dad, why?? That one lasted a little longer, but in ’83 he traded it in for a light blue K-car wagon. We had all the greats! He also had his mother/my grandmother buy a green Aspen sedan with the 318 V8, and she too complained about fuel economy. It was the last car she owned before she couldn’t handle driving any more, and I still feel sorry that that was her last driving experience.
The actions of Chrysler here remind me of when Boeing went from being an engineering company to a financial company. Chrysler was known for its engineering. I had a co-worker in Anchorage who had a ’78 Volare coupe as her first new car after college. Everything in Anchorage rusts, and this was an epic piece of crap.
I took Driver’s Ed in Dodges, from the most successful dealer in town, including a couple of Coronets and a Dart. Our small city of 50,000 was full of Darts and other Dodges. Those were ’73s and were nice cars. My Dad bought and sold older cars all the time, and I drove a ’65 Plymouth wagon, a ’67 Dodge A100 van, a ’65 Dart and a ’63 D100. Two 318s and two slant sixes. The D100 with a slant six and three-on-the-tree was surprisingly great fun to drive.
I also have driven K cars. Nothing was really good past the retirement of the Dart. My Dad also later had an Aspen wagon with a slant six and a four-on-the-floor. That was an epic sort of combination, and I don’t recall any rust.
Honestly the Fox body Fords may have been the most forward thinking until the FWD revolution.
Chevy is doing a great job of making sure the frames get good and ugly in a very short amount of time on the new Silverados. I worked on a friend’s 2022 and it was somehow worse than my 1998.
I’ve seen the half-cuts sitting on dealership lots, and the tops of the frames are already completely orange. I think they’re not actually dipping them, just spraying them, and the sunlight’s enough to completely bake off the coating. The bigger issue seems to be that when the enamel flakes off it takes the paint with it. It’s so bad you can see it staining the gas tanks and the axles from the dripping.
When I was just 4 months old, my parents bought a 1977 Dodge Aspen station wagon with the 225 Super-6 Slant 6 engine and automatic. It was their first new car. The car spent its entire life in the southeast and southwest. Our car never had any rust issues. The only major manufacturing issue was the transmission, that went out after about 5 years. The replacement was from AAMCO with a lifetime warranty (every year the car went in for its annual inspection as part of the warranty, and never had to be replaced again). It was our primarily family car until 1992, at which point it had over 250K miles on it. When I went to college, it was the car I took for about 4 years. While in college it crossed over 300K miles. It went back to my parents for a few years, and then I bought it in 2007 to restore it/mod it. Now living in California, and after CA stopped the 30 year rolling excemption for SMOG checks, it passed when it came in and in 2 years. But in 2011, it didn’t pass and I wasn’t in a situation where I could cost effectively get it to pass, so it was sold. At that point, it had about 360K miles on it.
I still miss that car and wish that the situation had been different and I could have kept it.
When the F-body cars debuted, they were compact cars for Chrysler. The F-body also spawned the M-body cars in 1977, which were the luxury compacts; Dodge Diplomat, Plymouth Gran Fury/Caravelle, and Chrysler Lebaron (and eventually the 5th Avenue). The wagon was also the basis of the Town & County station wagon. These were the same underneath, and the doors were shared between the platforms.
The same platform also spawned the J-body coupes, the Dodge Mirada, Chrysler Cordoba, and Imperial. These all used the longer wheelbase of the F-body sedan/wagon.
The Diplomat and Chrysler Fifth Avenue were considered Chryslers large cars by the time they went out of production in 1990, even though they were “compact” when the platform debuted.
I still kind of dig an early eighties Cordoba LS. They should have just called it a 300 since it clearly was intended as such with the bullseye grill and monotone color schemes. The Miradda was ok, but just slightly less handsome. And although slow by todays standards, if you find an LS from 1980 with the 360 in it, they were at least on par with the Corvettes at the time with around 200 hundred HP….sadly
For the automakers, rust is a feature not a bug. Farming and heavy machinery manufacturers seem to have it figured out. They’re just screwing the customer a different way; DRM.
If you’ve ever been around john deere loaders, you’ll know how bad they start to rust in about 4-5 years.
Dodge Once Built Cars That Rusted So Fast That Even Chrysler’s CEO Was Disappointed In Them
I bought a a 1976 Volare new and I dispute this claim of early rusting. My Volare fell apart so soon that it never had time to rust.
It’s a shame these were so legendarily crap, because the coups are pretty good looking cars!
I have to admit, I had never looked into these chassis specs before, I honestly thought the Volare/Aspen was just a tarted up Dart/Duster like GM did with the Nova by the end of the 70’s.
Dodge had the already terrible Thermoquads mixed in with the Lean Burn systems that really screwed up drivability as I recall though. And the E-Coat process – Dipping bodies before paint for rust proofing was pretty new then, so I have heard of issues with air bubbles resulting in more rust. But the whole front suspension changes causing things to literally fall off is a little new to me.
Thermoquad! 1 out of 3 Enginemasters approved.
https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/threadcount-storage/photos/images/000/001/260/web/df_thermoquad_gray_1.jpg?1564084888
” The issues included in these recalls included stalling due to a failed carburetor accelerator pump…”
We had one with the 318 and could never get the carburetor dialed in right. It always sputtered. I wonder if that recall never got taken care of. No rust issues, though.
The Japanese cars of that era were incredibly rust-prone as well. My friend’s 1976 Civic offered a fabulous view of the road beneath it in 1981.
As were the GM products not vented when dipped in the new rust proofing systems…ironically.
Hmm. Sounds like this was where Chrysler got its cheap quality reputation. But rusting in Chrysler (and in GMC/Chevrolet products) isn’t new. The 50s Chryslers tended to rust away too.
The Chevrolet cars weren’t any better than these- they constantly broke down too, minus their quality problems.
70s Squarebodies (especially early models) had a BAD reputation for being rust buckets (even though they claimed it was “corrosion resistant”), minus other serious problems (saddle tanks exploding when T boned).
As for the oil crisis, it affected all manufacturers. I don’t know how the fuel economy of muscle cars compared to each other (eg: 426 hemi versus a 390 SBC of a Chevrolet), or whether Chrysler suffered badly.
Their trucks were decent, some engines were legendary. Look at the 318 magnum and 225 Slant 6. Those ran practically forever. The Dodge Diplomat cars were pretty good too. Early Mopar L heads were notorious for withstanding abuse in the 30s. The Cummins is a good engine too.
Chrysler and Dodge spent too much time marketing cars to young people, and I believe they were quick to pick up on the rebellious attitude of adolescents in the 60s and 70s, as well as the hippie culture. Sure, other manufacturers did too (the Camaro for example, but not nearly to the same extent).
I remember seeing an ad for the Charger 500, that involves a man and his wife. His wife (a typical lady of the 50s) was deposed by two younger women who entertained him (much to her disgust).
When I look back, I feel the ad was borderline promoting going against family values. Sure, there are plenty of controversial ads for every car manufacturer, but this is NOT the way to do it. Dodge still promotes rebellious behaviour (Charger and Challenger street takeover controversy for example, that resulted in backlash).
Or, the adult toys that Dodge promoted in the 70s. EVERY SINGLE ONE had some lady or the other dressed inappropriately (sure, I can find this in Ford’s free wheelin brochure and early 70s Chevrolet truck brochures, but still). It literally screamed rebellion and bad behaviour (I don’t understand how this is appealing to young women but anyway).
Bottom line- I know people will hate me, but I somehow link Dodge with bad behaviour.
Is behaving like a bad boy the ONLY WAY to get women?
I don’t think so.
what is inappropriate dress for women actually mean to you? Were you alive in the 1970’s? A serious question here. By then most all Americans were quite used to the women and girls dressing pretty much however they wanted to.
I sure don’t hate you, yet I wonder about your take here regarding what is or was considered to be inappropriate for women to be wearing.
No I wasn’t alive in the 70s.
By innappropriate, I mean’t hippy-like culture. Provocative clothes. Exposing wear is what I meant. There are people who like this, but coming from a conservative culture means showing off in public is a BIG NO.
The ads filled with ladies at the beach, and men having fun (maybe I am a little jealous as I do NOT have the same freedom as them, but at the same time I am okay with not having the same freedom).
In our culture it is pretty much frowned upon to wear whatever you want in public. At home its acceptable, but not outside.
Each to their own. Not interested in shoving my views, otherwise I would get told to [EXPLETIVE DELETED] off.
Thanks for your point of view. I understand this better now, and appreciate you taking the time to respond to my comment.
Welcome.
I learned to drive behind the wheel of an Aspen wagon with the leaning tower of power. I learned to drive stick in our 3-on-the tree Dodge pickup. Our family liked the Aspen quite a lot, and ours didn’t seem to have the same number of problems others did. Perhaps we got lucky. Ours also didn’t rust out as quickly because it was garage kept and not on the salted Pennsylvania roads quite as much as it could have been.
I still like the styling to this day, and my family was exclusively Mopar from roughly the years of 1977 to 1990, covering my teenage years. During that time we had a ’75 Valiant, a ’77 Aspen, a ’77 and ’82 pickup, an ’83 Aries, and an ’87 or ’88 Dodge 400 if I remember correctly. I suppose I’m looking through some nostalgia-tinted lenses.
Mercedes,
Thank you for the well-researched story, but not the anxiety attack as I take possession of a new FCA car this weekend 🙂
At least I live in a beautiful region with no-salt roads!
Chrysler Australia replaced the slant six in 1970. Personally I found that overheating was a constant problem with them. Not just in my car but my brothers as well and to a lesser degree our fathers. They were replaced by the Hemi 6, originally just a 245, then late a 215 and a 265cu in. I also owned a couple of Hemi 6’s, the best being a Charger R/T, featuring a 265 blue printed and balanced that put out 340hp at the wheels, a bit of a beast in its day. The R/T came standard with triple Weber 45DCOE carby’s, fun to keep in tune.
It’s a shame because they are actually good looking cars with a solid power train. Too bad quality was so terrible.
Thanks Mercedes, now “Leaning tower of power” is forever etched in my brain. Shame that it was installed in such a Pisa crap.
I applaud the setup.
I like the angle you took here.
I have had a friend with one of these, and it was maybe the only car I’ve ever seen that spent its entire life in south Texas and managed to develop rust holes. The rust was one thing, but the car was just really poorly built. I remember walking out to the parking lot and seeing smoke coming out from under the hood, where the fuse block just spontaneously caught fire for no reason. My friend did not find our jokes about the car self-immolating out of disgust with itself very funny.