IML: Imperials, New Yorkers and sheet metal

[Tom H <tom_in_a2@xxxxxxxxx>]

Just for the sake of discussion it seems quite
possible that the quality of the steel used in body
panels certainly can change from year to year.  

If my memory is at all reliable I recall that the big
Impalas and Caprices started using a poorer grade of
sheet metal in about '74 which resulted in a lot of
early rustouts.

I have always liked the full-size Chryslers from
'74-'78; the styling of the Imperials and New Yorkers
is *much* cleaner than the Caddies, Olds 98s and Buick
Electras (though I hate the "opera windows" used by
the coupes with the vinyl roofs.)

--- Christopher H <imperial67@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Yeah, Arran, it's an odd and complicated story,
> those last of the big
> Chryslers. They are far better cars than many people
> remember.
> 
> I've never been able to detect a difference in the
> sheet metal or side
> glass, but I suppose a comparison of part numbers
> would reveal the truth.
> Maybe someday I'll measure my side glass versus a
> '77 or earlier NYB.
> 
> As for quality, a lot of it was perception, but it's
> a lot easier to change
> actual problems for consumers than perceived ones,
> something few
> manufacturers realize (the Audi situation with
> alleged "unintended
> acceleration" comes to mind, or think about all the
> fear over air-bag
> related child injuries in the early 90s, but when's
> the last time you heard
> about that, even before smarter air bags?). As for
> Lean Burn, my car has its
> original ELB system, and it's equipped with the
> 400-4bbl, an engine not
> available in California when new because it didn't
> meet emissions standards.
> And yet I have to get it through Smog Check every
> two years, and it passes
> with figures that would make a modern car proud.
> Sure, it's only got 17,500
> miles, but it's still nearly 30 years old with
> nearly 30-year-old
> technology. And it gets similar mpg to my newer,
> smaller, lighter,
> smaller-engine Jeep with modern control systems and
> a 5-speed automatic.
> 
> As with ELB and the '81 Imperial fuel injection
> system, a lot of the
> perceived problems were rooted in customer
> expectation of how a car should
> run and how well dealers handled both the minor
> issues of tuning the cars
> and the major issue of re-educating customers. The
> engine controls of this
> era were fairly primitive, analog computers burdened
> with a lot of vacuum
> hoses and sensors that were essentially two-position
> limit switches. When
> some of these switches fell out of tolerance, cars
> stalled or stumbled, and
> people rightfully were disappointed. It would have
> been interesting if these
> new systems had come about before the gas crisis.
> Instead of having so many
> 400-hp 19-mpg midsize cars today (or nearly 6,000-lb
> SUVs), we might all be
> quite content to be driving 200-hp large cars that
> get 25 mpg.
> 
> The funniest part of the 1970s migration to smaller
> cars is that many of
> them were still equipped with enormous engines.
> Cordobas came with 400s,
> too. Even compact Volares and LeBarons with 318s got
> relatively poor fuel
> economy by today's standards (though my '93 Jeep
> with the evolution of the
> same engine, by then called a 5.2-liter, got better
> mpg than my newer Jeep
> with the 4.7. Again, so much of it was perception.
> So much of it always will
> be. Humans, after all, are we.
> 
> Chris in LA
> 67 Crown
> 78 NYB Salon
> 
> 
> On 6/1/06 6:48 PM, A. Foster at
> monkeypuzzle1@xxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> > Chris;
> >  That is one issue of that magazine that I need to
> get myself as I happen to
> > own a lesser Chrysler of that era. One question
> that I am wondering about is
> > did they actually use thinner sheet metal and
> glass on the 77 and 78 cars as
> > opposed to the 74 to 76 cars? I have been looking
> over a 78 NYB for parts
> > and it seems to use the same glass as my 75'
> Newport.
> >   What I found extraordinary is how may of these
> final C body Chryslers they
> > sold. It looks like they consistantly sold over
> 100,000 cars a year from
> > 1974-77, it's true that they were outsold by the
> Cordoba but they were
> > hardly a failure. I am guessing that the downward
> spiral in 1978-79 had more
> > to do with the bad name that the electronic lean
> burn system, the
> > Aspen/Volare, and other poor quality problems gave
> them then the large cars
> > that they selling. 1978 was the year that the CAFE
> standards kicked in, and
> > there were no full sized big block cars available
> for 79 so I don't think
> > that the large cars can shoulder all of the blame.
> > Best Regards
> > Arran Foster
> > 1954 Imperial Newport
> > Needing A Left side tailight bezel and other trim
> parts
> > 1975 Chrysler Newport
> > Needs the heater repaired.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Christopher H" <imperial67@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: "IML (main)" <mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Monday, May 29, 2006 9:21 PM
> > Subject: Re: IML: The Imperials keep getting
> printed...
> > 
> > 
> > The Collectible Automobile article is actually on
> the O74-78 Chryslers and
> > only includes the Imperial as a sidebar, but since
> the O74-75 Imperial
> > became the O76-78 NYB, it¹s an integral part of
> the story.
> > 
> > The design saga reveals how the Imperial almost
> never made it past O73 save
> > for the desire of a certain design chief who fell
> in love with the waterfall
> > grille idea and wanted to see it brought to life.
> This was the first time I
> > had heard of a connection between the O74 cars and
> my favorite car designer,
> > Elwood Engel. Turns out he even personally picked
> up a knife one day in the
> > studio and carved the little bevel on the ³spare
> tire hump² (a la 1964) on
> > the trunk lid, so I guess I own more
> Engel-supervised cars than I thought!
> > 
> > There are a few small reproductions in the CA
> article¹s sidebar of the
> > design sketches leading up to the O74 Imperial,
> but they¹re too small (and
> > too few in number) to reveal how much of Engel¹s
> earlier Imperials is in
> > this car, and how the design continuity was
> carried through. (I¹ve always
> > thought my O78 and O67 look quite related when
> parked side-by-side.)
> > 
> > There is a much better place to see these sketches
> and more: our own
> > website! A reprint of a fantastic article from the
> WPC Club News from what
> > seems to be 1979 or '80 is at:
> > 
> >
>
http://www.imperialclub.com/Articles/74-75WPC/index.htm
> > 
> > Interestingly, Chrysler seemed to think at the
> time of Imperial's 1975
> > demise that moving its body to the New Yorker
> combined the best of both
> > worlds: The name recognition and appeal of
> "Chrysler New Yorker" and the
> > design of the Imperial. When Chrysler let the New
> Yorker name die in the
> > late 1990s, it was the
> longest-continuously-running car nameplate in the
> > industry. (Funny how they couldn't make Imperial
> as marketable a name.)
> > 
> > Oh, by the way, if you happen to get the new
> (August 2006) issue of
> > Collectible Automobile, you can also see the
> first-ever mass-printed photos
> > of the 1978 New Yorker Brougham Salon Package, a
> model that did not appear
> > in any brochure or PR photography during its one
> model year. Twenty-eight
> > years later, a Salon has finally appeared in
> print!
> > 
> > Chris in LA
> > 67 Crown
> > 78 NYB Salon
> > 
> > 
> > On 5/24/06 8:14 AM, Christopher Middlebrook at
> delamothe@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > 
> 
=== message truncated ===


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


-----------------  http://www.imperialclub.com  -----------------
This message was sent to you by the Imperial Mailing List. Please 
reply to mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and your response will be 
shared with everyone. Private messages (and attachments) for the
Administrators should be sent to webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To UN-SUBSCRIBE, go to http://imperialclub.com/unsubscribe.htm