The Last Really Good Chrysler Product

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004, Geoff wrote:

> You can't swing the dipstick from a dead Chevy without whacking into an
> AA-body, even here in rust-ravaged Detroit.

....and one of them in rust-ravaged Detroit used to be mine. It's a
remarkably clean, unrusted silver '92 LeBaron sedan with big black
European-spec mirrors, glass European-spec headlights, and round
European-spec side turn blinkers just behind each front wheel. Bought it
for $1200 with 125k miles on it, put on an exhaust system, shocks and
struts and a set of brakes, and drove it 45,000 exceptionally dependable,
economical and inexpensive miles before impulsively selling it for $2100.
The new owner didn't know much about cars, but got 15k miles out of it
before failing to tighten the radiator draincock after having loosened it.
The coolant level dropped below the head and the engine cooked.

When I heard about that, I did a search via the Secretary of State,
figuring I might buy it back inexpensively, refurbish it and keep driving
it (or at least snag the Euro-spec lights and mirrors out of whatever yard
it wound up in). Nope, someone had already dropped in a used engine and
sold it on -- its registration is current; it's still driving around, now
probably working on its third hundred thousand miles.

Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Oct 2004, Steve wrote:
>
>
>>>Disagree. The last really good A-body was in '72.
>>
>>IMO, the A-body and B-body [was] perfectly acceptable right through
>>their end of production in '76
>
>
> Sure, but the question wasn't "perfectly acceptable", it was "really
> good".

The B-bodies were always "really good." A 73 was better than a 77, and a
69 was better than a '73, but even a '78 B-body was better than any GM
A-body, which was its nominal competition.

Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Oct 2004, Steve wrote:
>
>
>>>Disagree. The last really good A-body was in '72.
>>
>>IMO, the A-body and B-body [was] perfectly acceptable right through
>>their end of production in '76
>
>
> Sure, but the question wasn't "perfectly acceptable", it was "really
> good".

The B-bodies were always "really good." A 73 was better than a 77, and a
69 was better than a '73, but even a '78 B-body was better than any GM
A-body, which was its nominal competition.

James C. Reeves wrote:

> The 300C is the wrong car for the wrong time. Gas will be at $4.00 to $5.00 a
> gallon in a few short years with China (and other "emerging markets") sucking
> up oil at a 30%+ per year growth rate with supply channels already at full
> production. So, most of them will be left parked in the driveway along with
> the SUVs. Too expensive to drive and no one will want them (so no one will buy
> them off of you). They may be good...(yet to be seen), but part of being good
> is that it fits the times. I wouldn't touch one with a 10-foot pole...it has
> "loosing your shirt" written all over it!
>

Can I have some of whatever you're smoking?

James C. Reeves wrote:

> The 300C is the wrong car for the wrong time. Gas will be at $4.00 to $5.00 a
> gallon in a few short years with China (and other "emerging markets") sucking
> up oil at a 30%+ per year growth rate with supply channels already at full
> production. So, most of them will be left parked in the driveway along with
> the SUVs. Too expensive to drive and no one will want them (so no one will buy
> them off of you). They may be good...(yet to be seen), but part of being good
> is that it fits the times. I wouldn't touch one with a 10-foot pole...it has
> "loosing your shirt" written all over it!
>

Can I have some of whatever you're smoking?

James C. Reeves wrote:

> "Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message
> n.umich.edu...
> | On Wed, 19 Oct 2004, Ted Azito wrote:
> |
> | > But getting back on subject, he was going off on what the last good
> | > Chrysler product was. I'll post his answer-surprising to me-a little
> | > later, but I want your opinions first. What was the last good Mopar?
> |
> | The AA-body (Spirit, Acclaim, LeBaron sedan, export Saratoga) 1989-1995.
>
> If so, one would think that there would still be these models on the road now.
> I don't see them very often. The old A bodies you saw frequently on the road
> well into the 80's.

In the first place, I DO see a lot of them around. In the second place,
they probably built about half as many AA-bodies as they did A-bodies
over the years.

And FWIW, I differ from Dan here in that I really never could stand any
of the K-derivative cars. But they were incredibly durable in a
cockroach-and-rat sort of way. At least the ones that didn't have the
Mitsubishi 3.0. :-/

James C. Reeves wrote:

> "Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message
> n.umich.edu...
> | On Wed, 19 Oct 2004, Ted Azito wrote:
> |
> | > But getting back on subject, he was going off on what the last good
> | > Chrysler product was. I'll post his answer-surprising to me-a little
> | > later, but I want your opinions first. What was the last good Mopar?
> |
> | The AA-body (Spirit, Acclaim, LeBaron sedan, export Saratoga) 1989-1995.
>
> If so, one would think that there would still be these models on the road now.
> I don't see them very often. The old A bodies you saw frequently on the road
> well into the 80's.

In the first place, I DO see a lot of them around. In the second place,
they probably built about half as many AA-bodies as they did A-bodies
over the years.

And FWIW, I differ from Dan here in that I really never could stand any
of the K-derivative cars. But they were incredibly durable in a
cockroach-and-rat sort of way. At least the ones that didn't have the
Mitsubishi 3.0. :-/

"Steve" > wrote in message
...
| James C. Reeves wrote:
|
| > The 300C is the wrong car for the wrong time. Gas will be at $4.00 to
$5.00 a
| > gallon in a few short years with China (and other "emerging markets")
sucking
| > up oil at a 30%+ per year growth rate with supply channels already at full
| > production. So, most of them will be left parked in the driveway along
with
| > the SUVs. Too expensive to drive and no one will want them (so no one will
buy
| > them off of you). They may be good...(yet to be seen), but part of being
good
| > is that it fits the times. I wouldn't touch one with a 10-foot pole...it
has
| > "loosing your shirt" written all over it!
| >
|
| Can I have some of whatever you're smoking?
|
|

I did live through the 60's and 70's...let me see if I have some left! ;-)

"Steve" > wrote in message
...
| James C. Reeves wrote:
|
| > The 300C is the wrong car for the wrong time. Gas will be at $4.00 to
$5.00 a
| > gallon in a few short years with China (and other "emerging markets")
sucking
| > up oil at a 30%+ per year growth rate with supply channels already at full
| > production. So, most of them will be left parked in the driveway along
with
| > the SUVs. Too expensive to drive and no one will want them (so no one will
buy
| > them off of you). They may be good...(yet to be seen), but part of being
good
| > is that it fits the times. I wouldn't touch one with a 10-foot pole...it
has
| > "loosing your shirt" written all over it!
| >
|
| Can I have some of whatever you're smoking?
|
|

I did live through the 60's and 70's...let me see if I have some left! ;-)

"Steve" > wrote in message
...
| James C. Reeves wrote:
|
| > "Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message
| > n.umich.edu...
| > | On Wed, 19 Oct 2004, Ted Azito wrote:
| > |
| > | > But getting back on subject, he was going off on what the last good
| > | > Chrysler product was. I'll post his answer-surprising to me-a little
| > | > later, but I want your opinions first. What was the last good Mopar?
| > |
| > | The AA-body (Spirit, Acclaim, LeBaron sedan, export Saratoga) 1989-1995.
| >
| > If so, one would think that there would still be these models on the road
now.
| > I don't see them very often. The old A bodies you saw frequently on the
road
| > well into the 80's.
|
| In the first place, I DO see a lot of them around. In the second place,
| they probably built about half as many AA-bodies as they did A-bodies
| over the years.
|
| And FWIW, I differ from Dan here in that I really never could stand any
| of the K-derivative cars. But they were incredibly durable in a
| cockroach-and-rat sort of way. At least the ones that didn't have the
| Mitsubishi 3.0. :-/
|
|

My mother in law is still driving a late 80's Aries. Of course she is in her
80's herself, so it fits.