RE: [Chrysler300] 1955: 300 or C300?

["Rich Barber" <c300@xxxxxxx>]

>From the inside front page of my 1955 (Litho 8-55)

CHRYSLER 

SERVICE 

MANUAL 

MODELS

C-67 (WINDSOR), C-68 (NEW YORKER),

C-69 (CUSTOM IMPERIAL),

C-70 (CROWN IMPERIAL) AND

C-300 (CHRYSLER)

 

A few lines down is printed:

  In order to use this Manual to best advantage the cor-

responding or superseding car models must be understood.

The supersedence of these models is as follows:

                              1953                     1954
1955

Windsor....   C-60 (6 Cyl.)        C-62 (6-Cyl.)        C-67 (8-Cyl.)

New Yorker....C-56 (8 Cyl.)        C-63 (8-Cyl.)        C-68 (8-Cyl.)

Custom Imp... C-58 (8-Cyl.)        C-64 (8-Cyl.)        C-69 (8-Cyl.)

Crown Imperial. C-59 (8-Cyl.)        C-66 (8-Cyl.)        C-70 (8-Cyl.)

Chrysler-300.......................C-300 (8-Cyl)

 

There were no Saratoga models 1953-1956.

 

It would appear that the authors of the service manual just wanted to call
the 300 car Model a Chrysler 300 when using words and C-300 when using
shorthand.  Interesting that the word Chrysler does not appear for any other
model.  

 

On page 284 of the service manual, the heading is:

C-300 CHRYSLER ENGINE

 

Many places in the service manual don't even reference the 300 in any way
and one is instructed that unless differentiated, the service procedure is
generic.  

 

My 1955-58 Chrysler/MoPar Parts Manual version printed Oct. 10, 1957 lists
the 1955-58 Chrysler 300's as follows:

 

MODEL__________________   _YEAR______

C68-300               Chrysler 300        1955

C72-300               Chrysler 300        1956

C76-300               Chrysler 300        1957

LC3-S*                  300D                     1958

*:  In the body of the manual, the term LC3-300 is used for 300 parts.

 

All these Model designations are subsets of the then-current New Yorker
model designation and those in the LH column are used to differentiate or
include the 300's with parts number groupings.  In the early years the parts
guys did not reference the letters until 1958, and then, only in passing.  

 

I'm looking at a blown-up version of the classic ad for the Chrysler 300
"The Car That Swept the Field" at Daytona." and all references within the ad
are to "Chrysler 300".  Anyone else spot the New Yorker wheel covers on the
car?

 

Conclusion:  Chrysler called the 1955 300 models "Chrysler 300" or "C-300"
depending on the environment.  I tell those that ask that the 1955 Chrysler
300 was never called a Chrysler 300-A as Chrysler did not know that they
were creating an iconic marquee that would live for 17 years, go into
hibernation for 29 years and be reincarnated.  Mercedes-Benz also had a 300
model in 1955 but they did not add a letter to the model that changed each
year.  Other marques may have added letters or numbers to their model
numbers to designate the years but I'm not familiar with any of them.  Early
Chrysler 300's seem to be unique in this regard and the reincarnations have
sold well, no doubt partially due to the panache of the marque.  Now they've
even hung the designation "Chrysler 200" on their compact model.  That's
pretty lame and not very creative, but it seems to be working.  At least
they have not restarted the letters.  A Chrysler 200-B???  OMG, NO!

 

Including the 1955 Chrysler 300 as the first letter car seems fair and
appropriate even though it was not so christened at the time.  The C in
front of "300" has basis at the corporate level and does provide a somewhat
lame excuse if one needs the hard line definition, but most of us agree that
it should be included.  Inclusion of any Chrysler 300 as a letter-car after
1965 is also a stretch and one with which I am fairly comfortable for the
'70 Hurst and a little less so for the 1979 Cordoba 300.  Maybe we should
think about the 1955-79 models as Classic 300's and the 1999-date as
Contemporary 300's.  Chrysler's work defining and naming the older models is
done and past.  Definition of a letter car is now up to us.  I'm still
hoping that Chrysler will stick a Chrysler 300 hood and grille on a
Challenger, remove the B pillar, stuff it with the 392 Hemi and call it a
Chrysler 300 AA, maybe.  Offer it in three colors without backup lights, air
conditioning or outside rear-view mirrors for that classic look.  Then, we'd
have another opportunity to chit-chat as to whether it was a letter car.

 

Identification of the 300 models on the VIN tags also varied over the years
with the prefix "3" placed in front of the "N" for New Yorker from
1955-57-resulting in VIN's like 3N55 (plus 4 digits).  300 engines also
carried various designations to differentiate them from other Chrysler
engines of the year.  The 1955 engine serial numbers begin with 3NE55,
followed by four digits-seldom, if ever, matching the VIN.

 

I enjoy seeing Club Consultant John Lazenby's personalized license plate on
his C-300 which reads "PRE-B".  Cool and creative.  CA would not issue me a
plate reading "1955 300" as all-7-digit plates are reserved for
government-owned vehicles-so I went with 1955 CCC.  There's more than one
way to skin a cat.

 

More than most needed to know or hear, but those are my thoughts after being
immersed in the Chrysler 300 world since 1955.  Permission granted to use
any, all or part in the Club News.  Corrections, constructive criticism and
alternative philosophies welcomed.

 

 

Rich Barber

1955 C-300

1964 300K Convertible

1964 300K Coupe

 

 

 

From: Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Andy Mikonis
Sent: Saturday, March 02, 2013 10:12 AM
To: chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Chrysler300] 1955: 300 or C300?

 

  

I have always wondered, is it correct to call a 1955 a "C300" instead of
just "300"? The car doesn't have C300 on it. Neither did the sales brochure,
advertising, or some articles I found reprinted in old News-Flites written
about the car in 1955 and 1956. Yes, I know the technical literature has the
C, but so did all the years. My 1961 service bulletin calls it a C300-G, but
nobody calls a 300G a "C300G." An undated Chrysler press release titled "The
Chrysler 300 Story" refers to the "current 1961 300G" gives the history of
the 300 series and calls the 1955 the 300, not C300.

The first place I can find it used publicly is in Bill Carrol's "Beautiful
Brute" series from Car and Driver in 1961. He wrote: "Production 1955
Chrysler 300s (then called the C-300)". Is this where it started? Also note
he said THEN called, not NOW called. Perhaps he was referring to that
internal engineering designation. If the car was not badged C300, nor was it
originally marketed as a C300, is it proper to call it a C300? Discuss.

Better yet, write something for the Club News. I'm wrapping up the Fall meet
coverage issue, and then it's back to the 1955 feature. I only have two
short submissions so far. HELP!

Andy
Club News editor





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

To send a message to this group, send an email to:
Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx or
go to http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/Chrysler300/join and select the "Leave Group" button

For list server instructions, go to http://www.chrysler300club.com/yahoolist/inst.htm

For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylangYahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Chrysler300/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Chrysler300/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    Chrysler300-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
    Chrysler300-fullfeatured@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    Chrysler300-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/