Re: [FWDLK] CHRYSLER: an American company

Personally, I think it was the government and tree-huggers that caused the demise of the cars we remember. It was just the beginning of big-brother putting the lid on many things we held dear. Of course, after 1964, many cars (not just Mopars) became rust-buckets.

Smog motors that sucked gas but didn't perform; laws to increase gas mileage has created crappy multiple speed auto tranny's that don't last; more and more safety crap that doesn't always mean more safety but sure does increase the cost of buying and maintaining. The latest scam is the tire pressure monitoring systems. Want to rotate your own tires? Forget it, you need a $500 plug-in to re-program the sensors.

My first car was a '67 Dart 270 w/slant-6 auto: a car that you just could not kill!! I wish I still had it.

Dave Moore

64-300K

----- Original Message ----
From: Brent Burger <cgico@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: L-FORWARDLOOK@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 10:41:38 AM
Subject: Re: [FWDLK] CHRYSLER: an American company

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

    From: "Bill Watson"

    Why all the negative feelings toward Dr. Z?

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

    I have been wondering the same thing.

    If the 1957 cars were the benchmark cars by which all that is good is
measured (as it is for me), at what point did Mopar go from making cars to
nothing more than plastic Tupperware bowls with wheels and radios ?

    Chrysler cars went from jet-age styled Q-ships to lean muscle machines
to just plain obese and lethargic by 1971.  It was incrementally a straight
shot into the toilet from 1957 to 1970.  After that, Chrysler (like all
other automakers) have been building something I don't consider a "real car"
....  just a dumpy box for hauling butts around town.  And before anyone
gets their boxers in a bunch for such a statement, ...  consider ANY car
Chrysler made after 1971 as compared to a 57 New Yorker or Fury and there
simply is no argument.

    It seems to me, any discussion regarding Mopar after 1970 is pretty much
a moot point, a foregone conclusion of chatter about shoe box and beer can
styling, combined with sewing machine motor technology.  With pre-1970 cars
that go begging for restoration, why does anyone waste a moment on concern
for what came after ?

    "Chrysler" has existed in name only for close to 40 years.  Pretty much
the same as Studebaker in my book.  A company that once made some really
neat cars.  Dr. Z could guide the company to make toothbrushes or bridge
railings and it would have no impact on cars.  The days of wine and roses
were given up long ago by the corporate execs.  Building something exciting
was supplanted by a "how much executive perks can I squeeze out of this cash
cow?" mentality, and we all know the rest of the story.

    I am glad DeSoto died with its fins on.

    Car 54, where are you ?

    B.

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

To unsubscribe or set your subscription options, please go to
http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1