This is the first legitimate curbside E-Body Barracuda ever at CC. How odd is that? An icon of the pony car era, but presumably the survivors have all become garage queens. Early in CC’s days, I did see a very original and slightly scruffy one driving on the street, but I never saw it again. It’s probably a hemi ‘Cuda clone now.
But nifticus has finally come through, with a pretty basic Barracuda sport coupe. Almost certainly it’s got a 318 V8 in front of the Torqueflite. It’s like most pony cars actually were bought back in the day, contrary to what many assume. Who knows; it might even have a slant six under its long hood.
There’s a good reason they’re none too common: they sold poorly. Even in its first E-Body year (1970), only 57k were sold, compared to almost 200k Mustangs. And things only went downhill from there. The new E-Body Challenger outsold the ‘Cuda, but even the combined sales of both were not exactly stellar. The pony car boom was a short-lived one, and folks were moving on to either larger cars or smaller ones, or just cheaper ones, like the madly popular Duster. That’s the car that really killed the ‘Cuda.
The basic interior is not exactly the most cheerful one in the world, but this one certainly has held up well. It really does remind me of my mom’s ’71 Coronet station wagon in that same green.
The E-Body’s styling has of course been reprised in the modern Challenger, which has become remarkably successful, creaming the Camaro and outselling the Mustang in 2021. Payback!
What’s made the new Challenger so successful? Perhaps it’s because it’s based on a sedan, and is taller and roomier than the Mustang and Camaro. Maybe folks actually like a bit of height even in their muscle cars?
Here’s a Car Show Classic on the ‘Cuda:
Car Show Classic: 1970 Plymouth Barracuda Gran Coupe – The Broughamiest ‘cuda Around
Probably one of the most beautiful vehicles every designed. This looks like a fine much-loved example.
It’s really nice to see a clean non-muscle version of a “muscle car”, especially since I remember that well over 90% of the Mustang-class cars sold were invariably the six cylinder/small block V-8 with a two barrel carburetor, automatic transmission, standard wheels and tires version. Aka, the ‘secretary’s car’.
This car makes me think of Mannix (which I’ve been watching a lot lately). The subdued color on his Darts and ‘Cudas made for a more believable private eye-mobile than his gory custom Toronado of season one. A few underhood shots showed that his ‘Cuda had a 383. Sorry for the aside…the featured car is a beauty, and certainly rarer these days than a 440 or a Hemi clone, as mentioned.
Ahh, Mannix. Great show and Connors’ is a great actor. I have several seasons on DVD. Love his dark green Mopars.
It has been about 5 years, but if you are interested in the cars of Mannix, CC comes to the rescue: https://www.curbsideclassic.com/uncategorized/curbside-tv-the-cars-of-mannix/
Despite this example being very green for some tastes, of the 20 (yes, 20) colors offered on the Barracuda in 1970, an Ivy Green metallic example like this was the fourth most common shade you were going to see. Interestingly enough, only primary shades were more popular; Rallye Red, Blue Flame metallic, and Lemon Twist (extra cost, no less).
I do like the colour. The early ’70s was a good time for real choice in that respect.
I’ve never liked anything about the design of these cars; I just can’t find an attractive angle or aspect anywhere in or on ’em. But this one is certainly in lovely condition. Fun: the base engine wasn’t the 225, but the 198 Slant-Six. And people did buy them so –
powered– equipped.In 1970, the 225 was the base engine. In 1971 and 1972, there was a special low-end version of the Barracuda (and Challenger) called Barracuda/Challenger Coupe; they both had fixed rear side windows and almost no trim and dog dish hubcaps. These “Coupes” came standard with the 198. The standard 1971-1972 Barracuda came standard with the 225.
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/automotive-histories/automotive-history-oddity-1971-dodge-challenger-coupe-with-198-cubic-inch-slant-six/
Ah, thanks, Paul.
I’m with you. The front end overhang is ridiculous. The Duster was much better. Today’s version looks like a bloated supermodel, fat – fat – fat!
The 198 slant-six was another case of Chrysler’s usual bad timing. From 1960-69, the slant-six was available as either 170 or 225 sizes. Then, in 1970, the 170 was replaced by the larger 198.
The 198 only lasted for five years (1974), the same year the E-body was discontinued. With the increased emphasis on fuel economy, you’d have thought the 198 would have gotten a new lease on life. Hell, it seems like it would have been perfect for the economy-oriented 1976 Feather Duster and Dart Lite cars with their lightweight aluminum bracing, overdrive 4-speed, and low 2.76 rear axle ratio. It worked, too. They might have been slow, but were rated at the time by the EPA with 36/24 mpg, which seems pretty damn good for cars of that size. Imagine what they might have gotten with a 198.
OTOH, considering how badly performance was being strangled by the early seventies’ Rube Goldberg emission controls, well, maybe it’s not such a mystery that the 198 was cancelled, after all.
Also consider that each engine-trans-vehicle combination had to go through emissions type approval testing so cars could legally be built in that configuration. So with increasing vehicle weight and strangulation-type emission control strategies sapping engine power, perhaps the certification testing was considered an unwise expense given the projected—forgive me—take rate.
Good point on how emissions regulations put a real crimp on engine availability and a big reason the 198 was discontinued after a relatively short period when it might have been better to have kept it in production. Suddenly, it became quite a process to test ‘every’ drivetrain combination and it just wasn’t worth it, anymore.
Seems like this, more than anything else, severely reduced the number of engines that manufacturers made available. It would be much easier (and cheaper) for Chrysler (and everyone else, for that matter) to just have ‘one’ six cylinder engine (with no more than a couple of transmissions and rear axle ratios), instead of a myriad amount, particularly when the displacements of the two slant-six engines were so close. I’ve never seen anything about it, but I wonder if Chrysler intended to bump up the displacement of the 225, too.
No longer would it be possible to get virtually any combination a customer wanted since every possible combination had to be federally certified.
Ironically, this would come back to haunt Ford when the C-Max fuel mileage scandal broke. Seems that Ford had found a loophole in that the EPA rated mileage for a specific drivetrain combination could be used between different vehicles.
Thus, the reported mileage for the initial C-Max was only for the drivetrain as installed in another vehicle, which turned out to be higher than what the C-Max actually achieved. There was nothing illegal about it as Ford was technically following the rules, but it certainly was bad publicity for the company.
The 198 used the same tall block as the 225; they were essentially identical except for a shorter stroke. They did this because it was ultimately cheaper to build one block than two, especially since they knew the 198’s number were going to be modest. Its main purpose in life was to offer a low MSRP, and then charge more for the 225, which cost them nothing. The great majority of buyers did just that, unless they were determined to buy a 198.
After a few years, this game became played out, due to the low output of the 198 with emission controls. I doubt that the 198 delivered any material increase in fuel economy, which is why they didn’t bother to bring it back after the energy crisis.
Since the 225 was always an extra cost option over the old 170, it might be easier to simply say the 198 was a cheaper engine to make than the 170, which ‘did’ use a different block from the 225. The 170 used a block known as ‘LG’, whereas both the 198 and 225 used the same ‘RG’ block.
I’m still of a mind that it would have been better if Chrysler had stuck with the 198, at least throughout the remainder of the A-body’s life. While it’s true that the fuel mileage difference between the 198 and 225 might not have been that great, the ‘perception’ of a smaller, more efficient slant-six might have been enough for sales numbers sufficient to justify its continued production.
It’s the sort of thing that Ricardo and Cafiero might not have agreed upon, but I would bet it would have appealed to a marketing showman like Iacocca.
My older brother liked these when new. seriously considered trading his 68 Coronet in on one. he didn’t. Was dating his future wife, and decided a Pontiac GT37 was a better deal it was, the same dealership our Father dealt with for years gave him a deal he decided not to refuse. Ron always liked the 70 Barracuda. I even offered to help him in finding one in the days before they became a hot item ion collector circles. He was intrigued, but decided not to move forward on the idea. He passed a few years ago. I miss him at times. He was quieter than me, but we agreed on just about everything.
This was a car I always loved from the outside but dis-loved (if that’s a word) from the inside in a way that I never seriously considered looking for one of these back when they were cheap. Even if I could acclimate to all of the nasty molded plastic, I could not live with the sensation of slamming the door every time I would get in to drive it.
I still remember the last one of these I saw out on the road that was a genuine CC quality – and that would have been back in the mid 90s when these were starting to become popular. It was an original orange convertible with lots of door dings, some quarter panel rust holes and duct tape on a few places on the elderly white convertible top. Thinking it over, I cannot recall if it was a Barracuda or a Challenger – they have always been completely interchangeable for me.
J P, I must agree with you completely. I had worked at a Dodge dealer when these cars were new. We even use to service the Mannix Dodge Dart movie car. I regress; The Barracuda and Challenger though visually great looking, were not any fun to own and drive. In the early 80’s, I purchased my 3rd wife a used 1970 Barracuda in blue. It had the “383 Four Barrel” equipped engine with the 727 Torqueflite and sure grip rear end with 3.23:1 gears. It devoured gasoline!
She wanted a Fastback Mustang, but nothing doing with a MOPAR husband. This Cuda got 7 miles to the gallon. I decided to do something about that!
What I really didn’t like about this car was the HARD plastic inside door panels and the dashboard, AND that HOLLOW ‘THUNK’ that we heard when closing those obnoxious ’thick’ doors.
She got to drive away and keep the Barracuda when she divorced me.
And when you slammed the door, did the steering column quiver like it did in the 71+ B body coupes? That always drove me nuts.
If ever there was a lovable loser, it was the Chrysler E-body, sort of like the Chicago Cubs of the automotive world (at least until the Cubs won the 2016 World Series).
Chrysler dumped tons of R&D money into the E-body with the hope that the sixties’ muscle/ponycar craze would continue into the seventies. For starters, it had to be wide enough to easily accomodate Chrysler’s biggest engines. So, it wasn’t anywhere near the same small car as the original Mustang. Insurance surcharges quickly put an end to nearly all big-block ponycars by the third year of production, anyway.
Then there was internal cannibalization from Chrysler’s own much-cheaper Duster. That put another serious crimp in sales.
Finally, there was the cars, themselves. They just weren’t very good, having had some quick engineering (those big, plastic, squeaky door panels), even worse Chrysler quality than previous cars. On top of that, the driving dynamics were horrid. They didn’t handle well, and the driving ergonomics were dismal. I had a friend with a 1970 Challenger R/T, and I vividly recall my back hurting like hell after no more than 30 minutes in one of those, low, poorly designed front bucket seats. Of course, you couldn’t see that well over the high dash and long hood, anyway.
Really, the only thing the cars had going for them (and why they command huge premiums today) was the styling and the biggest, most powerful engines. Of course, there’s a reason they’re so rare; they didn’t sell when new, so not many were built.
I’ve said before that, if it weren’t how well they looked (which, ironically, is just the usual copying of the first generation GM ponycars), there’s a very good chance the E-body would be listed as a Chrysler ‘Deadly Sin’. The money lost on those cars was when the real seventies downward spiral seemed to begin for the company, eventually nearly doing it in until Iacocca came along.
And as to the E-body Challenger outselling the Barracuda version, that’s an easy one. Simply put, the swoopy Duster was a much cheaper alternative to the Barracuda, than the more expensive, not as stylish Dart Swinger hardtop to the Challenger. Even after the Duster-based Demon joined the Dodge lineup in 1971, the Challenger was still more appealing in Dodge showrooms than the Barracuda was in Plymouth dealerships.
Posted this years ago on here, but for 1971 model year, Ma Mopar went all in for performance, while GM and Ford went for luxury and “unleaded fuel”.
Who nearly went belly-up?
Plymouth display for 1971 Auto Show was left over 1960’s, with go-go dancers and flower power decor. One year later, it was wood paneling and luxury this/that.
GM and Ford went for unleaded fuel in 1971? Interesting; got a link?
I always thought these were aimed at a very specific demographic: young fathers. They could maintain some sense of their youth while having enough room in the back seat (way more than a Mustang or Camaro!) for a couple of toddlers.
It’s kind of the same today, where the Challenger is based on the Charger sedan. I just don’t think there are so many young fathers today.
The myth is that Plymouth was a “muscle car brand” that “sold lots and lots of Road Runners and Cudas”. Reality is different. The unsold Superbirds sitting for 2 years, and the expensive tooling of E bodies, were a few of many things leading to the near collapse in 1979-80.
What really hurt muscle car sales was an ample used car market of 60’s coupes, with huge aftermarket of speed parts. Could buy a used ’67 mid size car and add lots of equipment for less than a new ’72.
Plymouth found success in the segment with the Roadrunner, and it selling nearly 100k units 1969 with only standard performance engines is nothing to dismiss, (that’s half the entire 1969 Plymouth B body production) but that was the extent of it, they didn’t gain or win sales expanding that performance to the ‘Cuda or Duster 340, they just over spread the ratio for performance availability in a given body thinner to the point of insignificant.
The problem with the E bodies is they spread their target market too thin, Plymouth found a hit with youth market in the RoadRunner, and the Duster proved to be the next, which were both fairly modest executions, compared to the virtually all new E body. The Barracuda was never a stellar seller in its A body years either, which also looked really nice 67-69, the writing was on the wall for the nameplate, buffing it up into a Camaro clone wasn’t going to magically fix things. Plymouth hit the winning formula with the Roadrunner and when the Duster came out it carried on the RR’s irreverent spirit but without being a mandatory muscle car with standard performance engines. Sales exploded, and ironically it was basically the same execution as previous early A body Barracudas!
To some degree the same cannibalization issue existed with the Challenger and Charger, the Charger was effectively in the ponycar market without actually being a ponycar, and found respectable success in its second gen iteration, so what was the point of the Challenger exactly? Or perhaps what was the point of the Charger after the Challenger was introduced? Charger sales took a steep dip in 1970 which happened to be the Challenger’s best selling year, but the Charger still had enough appeal to not get blown out of the water, resulting in disappointing sales for both lines. The Challenger should have probably been the third generation Charger for 1970.
Chrysler couldn’t catch a break with the Barracuda, either as an A-body or E-body. When it started out, it looked way too much like a Valiant with a big, fishbowl fastback tacked on (which is what it was). Ponycar customers looked the other way and bought completely rebodied Falcon Mustangs in the hundreds of thousands.
Then, for the second generation Barracuda, it looked much more distinctive and swoopy with it’s own sheetmetal. The problem during these booming musclecar years was (like with the Mustang) that the engine bay was too small to stuff in a big-block without sacrificing sorely needed power equipment. So, again, the Plymouth was a distant third to Ford and GM’s ponycars.
With the E-body, there was finally enough room for a big-block engine and accessories. Trouble was, to make the engine bay big enough, it had to be based on the B-body, which made it way too big for a ponycar. Coupled with insurance surcharges, it was too little, too late.
As if that wasn’t bad enough, the swoopy (and way cheaper) Duster arrived on the scene. Chrysler management must have been pulling their hair out since, while the Duster was effectively just a rehash of the A-body Barracuda formula, suddenly, it was selling in numbers exponentially higher than the Barracuda ever did. Worse, it was at the expense of the much more profitable E-body.
It didn’t help that, except for appearance (and that was only due to it looking like a 1st gen Camaro), the E-body was otherwise extremely craptacular in all other aspects.
I doubt the big engine fitment really made a difference on the Barracuda’s sales, what was the ratio of 6 cylinder and small block vs big block Camaros and Mustangs in 67-69? 396s and 390 weren’t what made those popular (and incidentally the 340 Formula S could hang with them, if not whip them)
If anything the reverse was true when it came to the E bodies; big wide heavy intermediate sized bodies and running gear to accommodate engines only a fraction of buyers would even pick, that just made the smaller engines most buyers wanted sluggish compared to them in the A bodies.
I really wonder if the Barracuda name itself was tainted to the public from the pummeling the Mustang gave it in the showrooms, who wants to be seen in a loser? On paper the A body version’s market performance can be explained away as them being dressed up Valiants lacking ponycar proportions, but not the E body. And the Duster was for all intents and purposes was a Barracuda with a different name, and was a huge success, what made it more appealing to its buyers than all iterations of the Barracuda? Imagine if AMC had continued using the Marlin name on the 68 Javelin!
While it’s true that only a small percentage of ponycars got a big-block V8, the same could be said of ‘any’ V8. The fact is that the majority of ponycars had a six-cylinder engine.
But that’s not really the point. More than anything else, it was the ‘perception’. Or, as Lee Iacocca famously put it, “you sell the sizzle, not the steak”. The hope was that a Hemi-Cuda would draw potential customers into the showroom where they’d identify with (and, hopefully, buy) a car just like one featured here. Who knows, maybe the owner of this one envisions himself tooling around with a Hemi under hood, even though it’s really only a 318.
The big-block ponycars are akin to what’s now known as a ‘halo’ vehicle, something along the lines of the old ‘race on Sunday, sell on Monday’ mantra that got Chrysler and Ford so deeply involved in NASCAR sponsorship. So, yeah, they might not have sold all that many, but being able to at least ‘offer’ the big engine option was important, and the reason Chrysler thought they had to use the big-block-friendly B-body as the basis for the E-body.
Unfortunately, as it turned out, not many were really interested in the E-body, whatever the engine, and the much more affordable (but less profitable) Duster ended up winning the sales race.
Yes, the Duster won, a car which the biggest engine ever offered was the LA 340(360 after 73), no Hemi or 440, and it blew every Dodge and Plymouth that did offer those big engines as halos out of the water in sales. Same with the Mustang for that matter, it was a clear hit before the GT350s were rolling out of Shelby’s hanger at LAX. Lido already successfully sold the sizzle with the original Mustang, getting Shelby involved was just adding steak sauce.
Halos were important to the segment of buyers who did seek out performance image, but they’d buy the 383 or 340 ‘Cuda rather than the Hemi or 440+6, or the Mustang buyer that’s would buy the 2bbl or base 4bbl 289 rather than the hipo Shelby they really wanted.
I think this is a handsome car. Kind of resembles a Challenger but not exactly. Much more attention to design detail than on the Duster. Looks a bit like a Javelin, but nicer to my eyes. Plus you could get a six or a good size eight cylinders under the hood.
Those silver steel wheels with trim rings always looked very classy.
Rode in a Challenger back in the day, and while I would cut a lot of slack for interiors (ergonomics, styling, etc), it was the most awful ride-along experience ever. The seats were low, with little support, and the way the interior closed in on the occupant, including a dashboard that was very “in your face”, was cringe-inducing. The thick dimensions of the doors, along with the clunky sound that slamming them made (which even outdid GM) was bottom-of-the-barrel. But they looked nice on the outside.
I’m one of the folks who was won over by the charms of the new Challenger, though this was still when they were behind the Mustang and Camaro in sales. I picked up a leftover 2010 Challenger R/T 6-speed manual in March 2011 as a 30th birthday present to myself. I got the leftover because they stopped offering Hemi Orange for 2011. I’d driven all three modern pony cars, but preferred the Challenger as it felt more like a Chevelle-sized muscle car of yore than the neither fish-nor-fowl Mustang and Camaro. I’d mostly had Japanese sports cars up to this point, and the other two felt like a cross between the two, while the Challenger felt more like classic muscle, in a good way. I still had a turbocharged Miata and a 1981 RX-7 at the time, so I preferred more of a classic, larger car experience. I wasn’t disappointed; it’s by far the best road trip car I’ve ever driven; a true Grand Touring car for the masses.
I’ve considered trading mine on a last-year Challenger Scat Pack Widebody (Hellcats are no longer available with a manual transmission) but now that I work from home, I barely put 4,000 miles a year on mine. With only 85,000 miles on mine, I find it hard to justify a new car. On the other hand, it’s getting very late in the ICE era; there’s not much time left to get a performance car with a combustion engine. Then again, I could just keep it and buy a current Miata, since I had to give up my (very illegal in CA) turbo Miata when I moved out here.
I’d have to agree that folks nowadays like – expect – their cars to be taller. As the driver of a relatively short/low car, I will say that it requires extra vigilance so as not to get hit by people who simply are not looking “down” from their high perches but it also tends to freak passengers out who are used to stepping up instead of sitting down.
I do love the green Barracuda. Not so sure about the interior though which looks to me to be too green and too plastic.
I like the green very much .
In the late 1970’s an old high school chum was mad for E bodies and bought a ?’72’? Challenger and over a series of years built it into a pretty good Hot Rod .
IIRC he used a Dodge truck 413 engine in it .
I too hated those fat doors, why were such things ever put on any vehicle ? .
-Nate
An unmolested Barracuda truly is a unicorn in today’s world, and this is a beauty. I’ve already written about my disdain for the quality control and half baked engineering on it’s Challenger brother.
But can we refrain from having JPC mention the sound and feel of slamming the doors closed? I had finally got that sound out of my head over the past two years, and here it is back again. Perhaps there should be a “trigger warning” on JPC’s comments..
Lovely to look at vehicles. So glad that it’s owned by someone else.
Wow!! Seems to be the “quintessential barely used” car of many people’s dreams.
Very nice to look at.
As the proud owner of a 1971 340 ’71 Challenger convertible that my mom helped me buy from a close friend back in 1983, all I can is the negative comment’s here are bull. My buddy swore he would never sell the Challenger but when GM redid the Camaro, he had to have one. A new new loaded Z28 was his and a vastly superior Challenger was mine. Less than a month later my friend begged for the Challenger back. He offered to payoff the Camaro and give me that car and the money I originally paid for the Dodge. I laughed at him and to this day, he is still trying to get the Challenger from me. His old Camaro, likely recycled into a Toyota now. He hated that Camaro. I have driven them all including much time behind the wheel of a low mileage ’69 Mach l and I would shoot myself before I would give up a Barracuda or Challenger for a Mustang, Camaro, Firebird, Cougar, or any overrated Ford/GM product.
I actually spotted a Barracuda in a parking lot near a modern Challenger a few years back, but it was only an outtake.
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/cc-outtake/cc-outtake-classic-vs-modern-barracuda-and-challenger/