From: Christopher Hoffman <imperial67@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 19:59:11 -0800
I think what I said was that it's confusing within the Imperial line during
the years that Imperial was a make rather than a Chrysler-brand model.
The models were both trim levels and bodystyles. There's actually little
point in trying to pin them down as any one of the three terms, since the
entire brand consisted of a single carline in (for 1967 and 68, as an
example) three levels of trim and five distinct bodystyles (each with its
own roofline).
It'd be easy to argue that a Crown is both a model and a trim level.
Chrysler was expert at blurring these lines. Prior to 1974, there were both
New Yorkers and New Yorker Broughams, so Brougham was a trim level, New
Yorker was a model, and the combined Newport-New Yorker was a carline. But
after 1975, there was only the New Yorker Brougham, so the three-word name
(New Yorker Brougham) identifies a model, with no trim level variations
offered except maybe the 1978 Salon, which could be argued to be nothing
more than an option package.
>From the government's perspective today (don't know how it was back then),
every model needs to be certified (including EPA testing) individually, so
it's cheaper for a manufacturer to call something an option or trim level
versus a separate model.
Chris in LA
Mark McDonald (tomswift@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> ANYWAY . . . you say one thing that I'm not too sure about. Yes,
> Imperial was both a brand and a carline, but aren't there different
> models within the Imperial carline?
>
> Wouldn't the LeBaron and Crown be considered different models? Yes,
> they are different trim levels too, but they have different names on
> 'em . . . I've always thought I had an Imperial (carline/brand) Crown
> (model) convertible (bodystyle). Yes? No?
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network