{Chrysler 300} Torsion bars

[Ray Melton <rfmelton@xxxxxxx>]

Hello James -

First:  Is this just a hypothetical exercise, or do you REALLY want to modify your vehicle to a different torsion bar configuration for a minimal change in ride and handling?  

Second:  I can't calculate that directly because my limited anecdotal experience is with a constant length torsion bar, not going to a bar that is 10% longer (the Porsche 911 torsion bar end points are a constant bar length and the companies that manufacture different torsion bars do the spring rate calculation and sell you that particular bar diameter for a spring rate application you request.)  Not only that, but I haven't seen that actual equation for determining a spring rate since college days 60 years ago, but it will certainly include variables such as length, diameter, and modulus of elasticity of that "bar" material (or coil spring, as the case may be.)  But you can probably intuitively guess that the new 44-inch bar would be only slightly larger in diameter than the 40-inch original one to attain the same spring rate; assuming that length is a first-order (linear) variable, the spring rate is constant at 125 lbf/inch, and the rate varies as the fourth power of the diameter (just my very old recollection, but regardless of actual exponent, it's a VERY strong factor), I'm guessing that the new diameter would be ~ 2.4% greater or about 1.03 inches = only about 2 thousands bigger diameter!  If you actually got the exact new torsion bar you are asking for, I don't think you would ever notice the difference (except in the weight of your wallet and the bruised knuckles from changing torsion bars and mounting points!)

Maybe you could go back to your old college physics or Mechanical Engineering textbooks to get the exact formula, input your variables and do the calculations to get the answer you seek today;  but in real life, I'd rather let some manufacturer of torsion bars do those calculations and sell you the bar(s) you want, assuming you could ever find one now!

Ray Melton   300C  cvt in Las Cruces, NM

*************************************************

On 1/25/2024 8:49 PM, James Douglas wrote:

Ok,

 

So, the stock 40-inch bar on the 300K ram is 125 pounds and 1.01 inch. If one wanted to get 125 pounds on a 44-inch bar, what would the diameter need to be?

 

James

 

 

 

From: chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Ray Melton
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2024 16:33
To: John Grady <jkg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: '300 Club' <chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: {Chrysler 300} Re: Can someone do me a favor over the next few days... 1963-1964 Torsion Bars

 

My understanding from setting up my Porsche 911's for track use is that for a given torsion bar length, a larger diameter bar gives a higher spring rate, better for track use but too stiff for comfortable street application.   I also recall that for a given length and material, the "stiffness" (spring rate ) goes up at the 4th power of the diameter, so a 2-inch diameter torsion bar will be 16 times stiffer (lbf/inch) than a 1-inch diameter bar - whether it's a straight piece or wound into a coil.   (A coil spring is just a torsion bar that is wound into a spiral shape.)   For a given diameter of the spring, the longer length will result in a reduced spring rate (pounds force per inch of deflection).  Conversely, shorter length equals stiffer spring.  We always saw that when we cut the coil springs on our cars to get a lower ride height and the ride became very stiff. 

Also interesting:  since the outer part of the torsion bar deforms (twists) the most upon deflection (the very center of the bar doesn't move at all), racers often go to hollow bars to save weight while the diameter of the "tube" - the part that twists the most - only increases a little.

Ray Melton

************************************

On 1/25/2024 2:55 PM, John Grady wrote:

go Carl !! right on! 

John . 

ps - J/Kram “short  “ thicker bars are the answer ? with normal rear  anchors  , if this parameter is to be maximized . But stock not bad either , as Tom says . 

Compromise up to the individual .. ! 

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 25, 2024, at 4:33 PM, Carl Bilter <cbilter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



I don't have 1964 AMA specs, but I have 1963, and we have 1962 on the club site.  FACT:  62-63 New Yorker used 44" length torsion bars, other models used 40".  Sounds like that is true for 1964 as well.  Diameters vary by model.  FACT: 62-63 Newport (exc. wagon) and 300 Sport used SAME diameter bar = .0.99".  Newport wagon used 0.97" bar.  300J used 1.01" bar.  New Yorker used 0.98" bar.  What DID change between 62 and 63 (maybe 64 too?) was the spring rate  of the torsion bars.  1962 was 130 lbs/in at the wheel for all models.  1963 was MUCH less.  1963 = 115 for Newport (exc. wagons) and 300 Sport.  110 for Newport wagons.  125 for 300J.  110 for New Yorker.

 

So, for New Yorker from 1962 to 1963, both years used 44" bars, spring rate went from 130 lbs/in to 110 lbs/in.  (Rear springs got softer too).   The New Yorker WAS designed for a softer ride.  AI is correct! And I agree with John - simply amazing what AI deduced.  

 

Anecdotally, Tom McCahill's review of the 63 New Yorker noted a growing trend toward mushier suspension:  "The boys at Chrysler have allowed a bit of softness to creep into the great torsion-bar suspension and it doesn't corner quite as crisply as it once did.  But don't get the impression that the cornering and roadability are bad, because there's nothing to out-corner it in the other camps.  It just isn't quite as sharp as it was."  He goes on to say, "some lunatics in sales research still feel that what Americans really want is a softer, mushier ride even if it kills them."  

 

Carl B.  

 

 

------ Original Message ------

From "John Grady" <jkg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

To "Bob Merritt" <Bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Cc "James Douglas" <jdd@xxxxxxxxxx>; "chrysler 300 club" <chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Date 1/25/2024 9:24:11 AM

Subject Re: {Chrysler 300} Re: Can someone do me a favor over the next few days... 1963-1964 Torsion Bars

 

excellent info , key is in the definition of rate as you say  but those two apps are also different lengths - just by  wb .

So from that alone the ny er bar in 64 would be longer ,(!)  and apparently stiffer (???) if rate means pounds per inch . at fender(?) as installed ?  pre Loaded in car or on bench at rest ? that set of deflection numbers  would    be inverse it seems , to AI thing .  But  a longer spring would not rise up in resistance force as fast ( hard to explain all that) so more excursion occurs at a more constant force even if higher force to turn it . ? target for ny ‘er ? “ smoother ride over big bump ?  Other suspension parts might change too ? 

Short would get resistance  increase faster , so although numbers look  other way in Hollander —that fits both 300 handling and lighter car —- does not move as much before stiffening ?) .

Suspension tuning is complicated ..

Also a chance somehow Hollander etc  swapped numbers , or I do not know how “ rate “ is defined . I don’t 

 

really interesting stuff , lot of work in this to give NY a different ride  …. 

 

I vaguely remember criticism of T bar in press of the day as being “ too stiff “” rides like a truck” etc compared to Lincoln or Buick/ Cadillac . I LOVED  it stiff around corners , remember thinking what babies in their smooth soft spring strollers. 

But marketing at mopar might have screamed do something to soften NY er? 

 

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 25, 2024, at 9:49 AM, Bob Merritt <Bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



Hollander's interchange manual says

62-64 Newport & 300 take bar #15

64 New Yorker takes bar #16.

Hollanders doesn't give lengths.

#15 has rates in the 604-611 range.

#16 has rates in the 702-709 range. Hollander does not say what they mean by rate.

 

#15 can be used on 60-61 Windsor, 61 Newport 62-64 Newport & 300 and some DeSotos and Dodges

#16 can be used on 59 Saratoga & Windsor exec convert, 59-61 300, 60-61 Saratoga & NYr, 62-64 NYr,

and some DeSotos and Dodges.

There is nothing in the 1964 factory service manual about the NYr torsion bars or any special

procedure. What we need is someone with a 63 or 64 NYr

or the AMA specs for 64 (I don't have it)

or get a hold of Chris Pinder <kmaniak@xxxxxxx> He is amazing with 64 stuff.

 

Bob

 

 

 

 

On 1/25/2024 9:04 AM, John Grady wrote:

I beg to differ ; i learned more from that AI about this than anything anyone has  posted here .

I am amazed , not sure it is correct ( IS IT ?)about two length bars are in same wheelbase?  . 

For the  same very complex Chrysler calculations of end loading , fatigue life manufacturing tooling etc , (dating to mid fifties ) easiest way to increase spring rate is shorten the bar , if within design parameters already known . More likely the other way around , lengthen it? New Yorker on swb  felt “ stiff” compared to Caddy , so make them longer in a now shorter wheelbsse  car .  easy to check that fact  about two length bars .. same wheelbase ?? .

Is it true? 

Imagine making a torsion bar , immense tooling  . Use it over this way rather than skinny bar that fails much too soon in fatigue 

Again learned more in that AI answer  in a common sense engineering aspect , than  15 posts on here . I can accept it knows more detail than  I do . Inherent to what it does . Then you can

parse out the rest. 

Not sure how you ask it questions , but I am amazed the thoroughness of that answer . And unbiased by “ opinions  “. Built in resistance to BS . I really 

like that . 

jg 

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 25, 2024, at 8:42 AM, James Douglas <jdd@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



A regurgitation of what we already knew. This is why AI is more hype than substance in many areas.

 

None of this explains why the Newport got the same length bars as the 300 just in smaller diameter.

 

None of the cush verses sport explanations fits for that.

 

What I was looking for is a technical reason they did it not a marketing one.

 

James

 

From: Bill Werick <bill@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2024 05:30
To: 'Rich Barber' <c300@xxxxxxx>; James Douglas <jdd@xxxxxxxxxx>; 'Noel Hastalis' <cpaviper@xxxxxxxxxxx>; 'John Grady' <jkg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: 'Bob Merritt' <Bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: {Chrysler 300} Re: Can someone do me a favor over the next few days... 1963-1964 Torsion Bars

 

Here’s the artificial intelligence guess (ChatGPT 4):

<image001.png>

You

why are the torsion bars on 1964 Chrysler New Yorkers longer than those on the Chrysler 300K?

ChatGPT

ChatGPT

The torsion bars on the 1964 Chrysler New Yorker are longer than those on the Chrysler 300K primarily due to differences in design philosophy and intended vehicle usage. Here are a few reasons:

1. Ride Quality and Comfort : The Chrysler New Yorker was designed with a focus on luxury and comfort. Longer torsion bars can provide a softer, more comfortable ride, which would be in line with the New Yorker's luxury car status. The longer bars allow for greater flexibility, absorbing road imperfections more effectively.
2. Vehicle Weight and Distribution : The New Yorker and 300K might have different weights or weight distributions. Longer torsion bars could be used to better support a heavier vehicle or a different weight distribution, ensuring proper suspension performance and vehicle stability.
3. Handling Characteristics : The Chrysler 300K, being a more performance-oriented model, would likely have a suspension tuned for better handling and responsiveness. Shorter torsion bars can provide a firmer ride, which is typically desirable in performance cars for improved road feel and handling precision.
4. Design Evolution : The torsion bar suspension system was a key feature in Chrysler vehicles during this era. The company experimented with different lengths and setups to optimize performance and comfort for various models. The differences between the New Yorker and 300K reflect this ongoing development and specialization for different market segments.
5. Market Positioning and Brand Differentiation : Chrysler might have intentionally differentiated the suspension setups of the New Yorker and 300K to cater to their respective target audiences. The New Yorker was aimed at buyers seeking luxury and comfort, while the 300K appealed to those looking for performance and sportiness.

These factors together contribute to the decision to use longer torsion bars in the Chrysler New Yorker compared to the Chrysler 300K. It's a reflection of the different priorities and design goals for each model within the Chrysler lineup.

 

 

Bill Werick

Culpeper VA

 

 

From: chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Rich Barber
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2024 4:09 PM
To: 'James Douglas' <jdd@xxxxxxxxxx>; 'Noel Hastalis' < cpaviper@xxxxxxxxxxx>; 'John Grady' < jkg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: 'Bob Merritt' <Bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: {Chrysler 300} Re: Can someone do me a favor over the next few days... 1963-1964 Torsion Bars

 

To use up oversupply of long bars??

 

Rich B. in rainy CA.

 

From: 'James Douglas' via Chrysler 300 Club International < chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2024 7:41 AM
To: Noel Hastalis <cpaviper@xxxxxxxxxxx>; John Grady < jkg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Bob Merritt <Bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: {Chrysler 300} Re: Can someone do me a favor over the next few days... 1963-1964 Torsion Bars

 

That is why I find it interesting. 300 and New Yorker same wheel base in 1964 but different length torsion bars.

 

Length, clocking and diameter are the main variables in a torsion bar suspension. What I do not get is why on the New Yorker they went longer on the bars. If they needed more load for a heavier car, they could just increase the diameter.

 

Anyone have any ideas?

 

James

 

From: Noel Hastalis <cpaviper@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2024 7:26 AM
To: John Grady <jkg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; James Douglas < jdd@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Bob Merritt <Bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: {Chrysler 300} Re: Can someone do me a favor over the next few days... 1963-1964 Torsion Bars

 

Good Morning John,

 

'63 and later - all 122" wb

'62 - all Chryslers 122" wb EXCEPT NYer that remained 126" wb.

 

Noel

 

On 01/22/2024 9:17 AM CST John Grady < jkg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

 

 

? did they still have two wheelbase in 63,64 ; most of what I am talking about is change from lwb 60,61 to swb 62 .. then up . 62 and 3,4 same ? 

NY and 300 are the same all years ? i think so 

jg

Sent from my iPhone

 

On Jan 22, 2024, at 9:21  AM, James Douglas < jdd@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Bob,

 

I have not gone hunting for frame sheets for 1964 300 versus the New Yorker yet. But in the Master Parts Book for 1964 they show the same part number for both sub frames.

 

The only two front suspension parts that I see are different in the MPB, and admittedly I did a quick look not an exhaustive one, was the torsion bars and the anchors.

 

The bars are longer, and I think but have yet to confirm, that the anchors are as well.

 

James

 

From: chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Bob Merritt
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2024 4:15 AM
To: John Grady <jkg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: {Chrysler 300} Re: Can someone do me a favor over the next few days... 1963-1964 Torsion Bars

 

There is a video comparing

long and short wheelbase stub frames at

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAyFrL91JWE

It might answer some of these questions.

 

On 1/19/2024 2:18 PM, John Grady wrote:

i often wondered what was really changed factually between long and short frames 60-62 . James’ notation / discovery of possibly special rear bar sockets if confirmed answers a lot of questions. Despite two lengths of bars too . 

i was trying to figure out why TTI exhaust headers ( nice stuff) are  listed for 62 but not anything before that ( i wanted for an F) . They did not know , saying we never put it in an F . So went at it with tape crudely for 30 minutes . Most if not all the wheelbase change is between the front wheel centerline and the front door hinge seam ? 

so to my mind even more room is in an F — but relationship of steering box to engine would be a lot different as steering box location still  relates to fire wall / steering column angle . That stays the same , as you move front wheels closer to fire wall on swb   ,torsion  bars will move back ( a lot if same length) . Engine in same place re firewall , so is more over front  wheel centerline then? 

So although relationship of exhaust to block starter and transmission stays the same , other stuff moves related to all of it  ?

steering box ,  torsion  bar mounts etc but body itself including firewall / door seam must be the same  , as if frame and front fenders were  “ sectioned “ between  firewall and rest of front of it — but then steering box would slide forward, closer to front cross member  ?

crude description , I know . has anyone gotten into this ? 

Related question , aftermarket “ smaller” performance steering boxes ( Borgeson) seem to have same fitment issue , confusion . No help at all there . ( by the way , F and  G stock box are  slightly different , (!!!) longer casting  at column connection ( that got  me once).  

But at some point the later  swb steering box involves the K frame ? anybody know about that or when it happened ? F G and back , the box bolts sideways to frame rail as we know . I call it like a Ford pickup . But later boxes seem to have a “foot”  against the K frame . I assume —but do not know — J and K are like 62  ? 

Admit to being out my comfort zone on this , just trying to understand header issue and steering box mounts/ changes   . Thinking was ,—-  if an issue , smaller box may help  if header pipes want the same space , and why is 62 ok 60 not ? 60 should have more room  

Tony R has K ex manifold in F , so why the special  405 ones ? or maybe those two are close , or different swb/lwb 62 to 60 , 62 being tighter ? Or J/K more compact than 405? 

gets interesting .,,

J 

Sent from my iPhone

 

On Jan 19, 2024, at 9:53  AM, Bob Merritt <Bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

 

All Chrysler models in 1963 and 1964 had a 122" wheel base.

 

On 1/19/2024 9:22 AM, Cox Mail wrote:

Are New Yorkers long

Wheel base cars?

They have a totally different sub frame then

The shorter 122" sub frames.

Bob Haag

 

On Jan 19, 2024, at 9:16  AM, 'James Douglas' via Chrysler 300 Club International <chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

 

Well,

 

Learn something new every day.

 

Turns out that the New Yorkers uses a different length torsion bar. Which means they used a different sub frame.

 

I thought the different part number in the master parts book was due to a different diameter. But it is both different in diameter and length. All the other front-end parts are the same according to the master Parts Book.

 

Seems odd. The New Yorker bars are 44 inches long while the Newport and 300 are 40.

 

I guess I will eBay them at some point as they are of little use to me.

 

Thanks all for the measurements.

 

James

 

 

 

From: 'James Douglas' via Chrysler 300 Club International <chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2024 08:07
To: Jamie Hyde <jamie.hyde@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Chrysler 300 Club International <chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: {Chrysler 300} Re: Can someone do me a favor over the next few days... 1963-1964 Torsion Bars

 

Hi Jamie,

 

I am scratching my head. I will have to check the bars up at the house this weekend. I could have sworn that I measured them, and they were 44 inches long. Those bars cam out of a 1964 Chrysler New Yorker.

 

Is it possible that the New Yorker and the 300 used different length bars? Or was there a change to the subframe in 1964 from 1963 and the bars are longer?

 

I will also have to get under the 300K here in San Francisco on the cold wet concrete and see if I can get an in-car measurement. 

 

Jamie, can you take a caliper and get me a very exacting OD on the 607 bar?

 

Thanks, James

 

 

From: chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Jamie Hyde
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2024 06:26
To: Chrysler 300 Club International < chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: {Chrysler 300} Re: Can someone do me a favor over the next few days... 1963-1964 Torsion Bars

 

James , the 607 bar out of my J is 40" long. 

On Tuesday, January 16, 2024 at 11:32:49  AM UTC-5 James Douglas wrote:

If anyone has a set of torsion bars out and accessible for a 1963-1964 Chrysler, can you measure the length and note the bar number?

 

I have a paperwork conundrum. I have a set that came out of a 1964 New Yorker, and I thought I measured them, and they are 44 inches long. But my paperwork here in San Francisco says that the bars for a1963 300J, and presumable the 1964 300K, are 40 inches long. Hence the conundrum.

 

Also, I am still hunting for a set of 606-607 bars and if anyone has a set, they will sell please let me know.

 

James

--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/a2708d8c-6a80-4840-afb8-42fd479ff0dcn%40googlegroups.com.

--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/CY5PR19MB61712BF52B697FECBD4CDB6693722%40CY5PR19MB6171.namprd19.prod.outlook.com.

--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/CY5PR19MB6171D021BADB7084AB2EF56593702%40CY5PR19MB6171.namprd19.prod.outlook.com.

--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/441BF38A-51EF-4E5D-9325-3FA2833B80E7%40cox.net.

--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/6bf2f025-0338-4a01-aff6-ec4444406325%40simplexco.com.

--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/a05abfae-7d5a-42cf-8d36-d8b46de5aef3%40simplexco.com.

 

--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/609E5619-E1E5-4C34-BA52-D2CB5873AA3C%40gradyresearch.com.

--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/CY5PR19MB6171CEB9C03E6A37DB193C1393752%40CY5PR19MB6171.namprd19.prod.outlook.com.

--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/00d601da4d77%2432ba5450%24982efcf0%24%40ez2.net.

--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/82954874-6689-4FE7-864F-BB05ED75BE92%40gradyresearch.com.

--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/5B673744-BFC5-49B0-A192-545F878AE23E%40gradyresearch.com.

--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/31325FCE-1D99-45E5-AEB5-8F7EB94352AA%40gradyresearch.com.

--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/SJ0PR20MB534148E3D306064572999C30C0792%40SJ0PR20MB5341.namprd20.prod.outlook.com.

-- 
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/SJ0PR20MB5341E48D799598A6B66B9634C0792%40SJ0PR20MB5341.namprd20.prod.outlook.com.