(first posted 10/16/2013) The 1963 Chrysler has always been an odd vehicle, one that seems to have fallen from the sky bearing little stylistic relationship to its predecessors. It disappeared very soon after its debut, and its replacement expressed yet another new design language that would carry Chrysler into the Iacocca era. Is there another car from the entire Virgil Exner styling period that more strongly harkens back to the Ghia-built show cars of the early 1950s and the 1955 Chrysler line they inspired?
Chrysler Corporation hired Virgil Exner in 1949, ostensibly to take over Chrysler’s Advanced Design Studio. In truth, Chrysler chairman K. T. Keller knew that the uninspired styling then emanating from Chrysler’s studios was killing the company as the postwar seller’s market began to ebb, thus necessitating a new styling direction.
Exner led off with a series of one-off show cars which explored some new styling ideas while showing the public that change was in the wind. We showcased some of them here, here, and here (among other places). By 1953, Exner had leapfrogged longtime styling chief Henry King to take over styling leadership for the entire company.
In very short order, Chrysler went from this . . . .
. . . . to this.
The Exner years at Chrysler were like much of Chrysler history: soaring highs and crashing lows. After the brilliant 1957 models set a new design direction for the entire industry over the next four years, the stuff coming out of Chrysler studios started taking a bizarre turn with the 1960 and ’61 models (like this one).
Actually, the entire 1960-61 period at Chrysler was a blur. Vehicle build quality had been disastrous. The top management that had taken over after K.T. Keller’s 1956 retirement seemed to act like schoolkids left unsupervised with no teachers in the building, only with well-stocked liquor cabinets and illegal supplier kickbacks. Throw in some ugly cars that weren’t selling well, and it was not hard to see that Chrysler Corporation was in a full-throttle mess.
As if all that wasn’t enough, we must not forget the oft-told story of how the short-tenured Chrysler president William Newberg overheard a discussion at a Detroit-area cocktail party, which led him to believe that General Motors was significantly downsizing its lineup. Management’s response was to panic and dictate a crash program for a new, smaller line of Plymouths and Dodges. We should add that Virgil Exner had suffered a serious heart attack in the period where styling was underway for the 1961 models and, to some degree, the Chrysler styling studios were operating on auto-pilot with limited oversight by Exner.
Despite all that has been written about this period, it is hard to find any significant treatment of the ’63 Chrysler. This unique car seems to have been largely ignored, both then and now, while everyone watched the high-stakes game being played with the higher volume or higher prestige car lines. This series of Chrysler is really quite interesting, and deserves a closer look.
As former Chrysler stylist John Samsen recalled on Allpar (here) some time in 1961, Exner gathered his designers and told them that in his view, the car of the future would have a short but high deck and open wheels. Exner’s 1961 Dodge Flite Wing would be the template for the new look, which seemed to go back to Exner’s designs from the early 1950s. In truth, given manufacturing lead times the proposals for the 1962 Plymouth and Dodge had to have been mostly done by the time the Flite Wing was completed in 1961. Regardless of which design came first, it is clear that the Flite Wing ‘s proportions are in many ways similar to today’s cars. However, shortly after the Flite Wing had been completed (and with product planning well underway) Exner was terminated. He was replaced by Elwood Engel, whom new management had poached from the Ford Motor Company, thus ending the tumultuous Exner era. Almost.
In the abstract, it is easy to distinguish the work of Virgil Exner from that of Elwood Engel. The differences are easily seen in the cars that were made during the transition between the two styling regimes. The 1962 lineup was all Exner; in fact, the ’62 cars were headed for showrooms by the time he was fired. With the 1963 models, however, Engel set to work, doing what little he could with the Plymouth and Dodge lines and a bit of cleanup on the all-new Valiant and Dart. Engel also took charge of Chrysler’s 1963 gas-turbine car program, producing a stunning car that would show the styling direction of Chrysler styling for the next decade and beyond. Engel also oversaw a second major restyling of the 1964 Plymouth and Dodge lineup, as well as a completely restyled 1964 Imperial–and oh yes, also dealing with the completely restyled 1963 Chryslers in the midst of this storm.
It is known that Exner had been planning new 1962 Chrysler and DeSoto lines. There are quite a few pictures of proposals for a new 1962 DeSoto that borrowed many cues from the Flite Wing (or vise-versa, given that these prototypes were done in late 1959 to early 1960). It is not hard to imagine that both the planned 1962 Chrysler and DeSoto were shelved for a year, given the “all hands on deck” crash program to revamp the suddenly-shrunken ’62 Plymouth and Dodge. And of course, the DeSoto expired by the beginning of 1961 anyway, leaving the Chrysler all alone on the larger platform.

A prototype for the 1962 (later 1963) Imperial is at left, next to a nearly complete 1962 Dodge prototype. Note the unconnected front and rear fender blades on the Imperial, a common Exner theme at the time. Photo source: Allpar.com. A discussion forum at Forwardlook.net (citing Richard Langworth) dates these photos to February, 1960.

Undated proposals for the 1963 Chrysler. Note the 1963 Valiant and Dart proposals on the wall. The heavy ornamentation and odd headlight configuration would indicate that these proposals would have been done under Exner’s direction. This car appears to ride a wheelbase significantly longer than 122 inches.
It is clear from period photos that the Chrysler/DeSoto body was to be all-new. However, it also stands to reason that with only the relatively low-volume Chrysler alive at the end of 1961, a thorough re-skin of the 1960-62 body would have to do instead of the all-new car initially planned. The little side mystery is the planned 1962 Imperial. The studio photo (above, top) from February 1960 shows a very Exner-ish version. However, John Samsen, posting on Forwardlook.net (here), presents a drawing he authored in December 1960, for an Imperial that looks very much like the production ’63 Chrysler. Several models later, it is clear that the Imperial would remain without major change for 1962-63 (except for a de-finning), and that the “Plan B” Imperial would become the ’63 Chrysler.
It is not hard to imagine (although I have never seen it in print) that the ’63 Chrysler was also affected by Newberg’s downsizing edict. After all, the 1963 New Yorker lost four inches of wheelbase and would share a 122-inch wheelbase with the Chrysler Newport and Dodge Custom 880. The ’63 Chrysler, while not a small car, was certainly not of the imposing dimensions of the 126-inch wheelbase Buick Electra, the New Yorker’s primary competitor.
The other explanation is that the ’63 Chrysler, having no other line with which to share its body, was done completely on the cheap. This would explain the single short wheelbase, and the fact that the two-door hardtop shared its roof with the four-door cars, a decision that did not help the looks of the two-doors at all.
The company’s decision to continue the Dodge 880 (as an attempt to plug the gap left by DeSoto’s demise) on another version of the 1960-62 Chrysler body is mystifying as well. “Hey boss – here’s a great idea: Lets take two of our lowest volume cars and make them share the same 122-inch wheelbase, platform and inner structure. But for kicks, lets give one all-new styling, and then keep the other one looking like last year’s model.” The result was curious. New management probably didn’t like either of these cars very much, and likely did as little as possible to make it to the fall of 1964, when Elwood Engel’s all-new generation of big cars would arrive.
If Virgil Exner was the ’63 Chrysler’s Yin, Elwood Engel was its Yang. Engel was fresh off the triumphant and groundbreaking design for the 1961 Lincoln Continental that was everything Exner’s designs were not–clean, restrained and elegant. It is not hard to see the eventual ’63 Chrysler in several of the late Exner-era styling studies; however, neither is it hard to see the work of Elwood Engel in this car. Actually, the interplay between the two design philosophies is nothing short of fascinating. The voluptuous curves, full wheel cutouts and short, sloping deck are pure Exner. The trapezoidal grille and the hint of the wraparound fender blades above the headlights are straight from the Flite Wing. However, the solid front-to-back crease, with thin chrome molding highlighting the slab sides, and the restrained trim would indicate that Engel devoted some last-minute attention to the details. The wraparound windshield also makes plain that the ’63 Chrysler was a merely a heavy restyling of the 1960-62 structure and not the all-new car Exner had envisioned. The big bucks for an all-new car would instead be re-directed to the make-or-break 1965 C-body line.
Somehow, though, the best of both designers came through in what looks to me to be a modern version of Exner’s 1955 model concepts. Park a 1955 and 1963 Chrysler together, and you’ll see similar design themes where sculpted curves exist in tension with angular lines. It takes only a little imagination to envision the 1957 and 1960 versions that could have linked these designs together. The actual 1957 and ’60 designs, of course, could not have been more unrelated to the ’55s and ’63s, but it is an interesting concept to contemplate on a rainy fall day.
The result of this unintentional collaboration of two very different stylists is a unique and fascinating car. In truth, it probably pleased neither of its designers very much, which is likely why it was such an orphan, both then and now. However, I see the very best parts of both styling schools, each balancing out the excesses of the other. Gone were Exner’s excessive use of sculpting and ornamentation, but what’s left tempers Engel’s tendencies toward excessive angularity. Where most undoubtedly see a hash of disarray and compromise, I see a car with a unique appeal. Am I in a very small fan club? Likely.

The artist took some liberties with the car’s dimensions. Is this what this car could have looked like on a longer 126 inch wheelbase?
Perhaps my appreciation for this car stems from my spending quite a bit of time in and around a ’63 Chrysler in my youth. In my high-school circle of friends were a sister and brother who drove a hand-me-down ’63 Newport. Their car may have been the most attractive of all of the ’63 Chryslers–a Newport four-door hardtop, painted in Holiday Turquoise (just like the Indy Pace Car convertible that year). The four-door hardtop was an unusually low-production body style, but the pillarless design, mated to the Newport’s restrained trim, seems to do full justice to this car. In contrast, the bolder (clunkier?) trim on this New Yorker, with the overly thick painted frames around the sedan’s upper door glass is reminiscent of that imaginary Aunt Gertrude who made up for her dowdy wardrobe with liberal applications of lipstick and jewelry.
Inside, however, we are greeted by what is (in my estimation) one of the greatest dashboards in a large car of the era. The wide, sweeping panel with numerous round instruments is both businesslike and sporting. The outside of these cars took a long time to grow on me, but after my first ride in the front seat of that turquoise Newport of long ago, I was smitten. Of course, the Torqueflite transmission’s heavy chrome push buttons at the driver’s left only served to sealed the deal for me.
The 1963 Chrysler is a unique car, yet also a somewhat strange one. Never really accepted by lovers of the Forward Look nor by devotees of Engel’s classic mid-1960s style, it has sat largely unappreciated and forgotten even by Mopar acolytes. However, for those of us who think about such things, this may be the most successful blending of the very best of both the Virgil Exner and Elwood Engel styling eras at Chrysler.
Oh, I like these, particularly the ’64s. I test-drove one in the mid-late ’90s, a ’64 NYer 4-door with an indifferent gunmetal respray and a blue interior. Power windows on it. The 413 ran like a Swiss watch—stare hard at the accelerator and you’re soon exceeding the speed limit—and the (pre-1980) Torqueflite was as damn-near-perfect as they are. It was on one of those old-cars-only used car lots in Denver, the kind that price their cars ridiculously high and hope for some sucker to come along. Might’ve been Oldies but Goodies, but I can’t swear to it. If the price had been less and the paint had been more, I’d’ve seriously considered snapping it up.
Jim, of course you like that dashboard, it looks like it belongs in a Studebaker. 🙂
Seriously though, I’ve wondered where that dash design came from. The ’60-’62 & the ’65-’66 dashes all seem to part of the same family, while ’63-’64 just come out of nowhere and disappear without a trace.
Now that you mention it, that dash is almost a mashup of the 55-56 Chrysler and DeSoto dashes.
You can tell it came from the same people who did the 1962 Plymouth dash, just not with the instruments in a separate pod.
And 1955-56 Chryslers did have a one swoop across dashboard design with round instruments, but curvy not flat.
And 1955 Plymouths had all separate round gauges like the 1963 Chrysler.
Conclusion: definitely an Exner era dash, just not the flamboyant kind.
I had a ’63 Newport sedan with the 361 2 barrel and a three speed manual. I got the car for $200 back in the late ’70s. The car had 85,000 miles on it and ran like a charm. The only options the car had were power steering and brakes. I drove it for five years, and by then the car had 170K miles on it. It was a very simple and extremely reliable car only needing routine maintenance.
My mom replaced her trouble (Electrical) plagued ’60 New Yorker with a turquoise ’63, and it’s looks must have traumatized her because she claimed to not remember it at all for years. I remembered the tail lights well, and eventually I found a pic of the rear end of the car that I took at age 7 or so that jolted mom’s memory of it. “OMG, it was so ugly!”. It was quick though, my dad always got the biggest engine available. My dad entertained me with a huge burnout soon after we got it while waiting for mom at the doctor’s office, and that was one of my fondest memories of him. My dad was the one who picked the cars out back then and he bought it without looking at it apparently, as he told her on day one, “Don’t worry, you won’t have it too long!” It didn’t stick around long at all, maybe a year or so, replaced by a vastly superior, if even worse colored baby blue ’64 Cadillac Sedan De Ville, loaded to the max. My parents just didn’t keep cars very long and the Caddy went away in ’66, to be replaced with an Olds of some kind. It was at least a decent color, a nice darker blue that my sister got on her first two cars too. Then came my dad’s ’69 Lincoln MKIII, which he hated so much he traded my uncle straight up for his last car, a ’69 Caddy in the always bad Avacado green. It stuck around until early ’73, when dad passed out and crashed it, knocking power out to the entire south end of Toledo. Mom had a series of Cutlasses in the early to middle 70’s and then her last car, a ’77 Impala which stuck around until ’82, when she quit driving, almost. A couple of short trips in my ’79 Trans Am scared any desire to drive anymore out of her..
I’ve had a strange fascination for ’63 & ’64 Chryslers since I was a kid back in the ’70s. Something about the styling was oddly appealing to my young eyes. Wouldn’t kick one out of my driveway.
While Cadillac and a few more companies tried to keep remnants of the “Tailfin Era”, the 63 Chrysler New Yorker was always to me…The Anti-Tailfin car.
With it’s short bobtailed trunk design…it showed the 60’s was truly an evolutionary time in automotive designs.
Chrysler got rid of those long arse protrusions and never looked back.
Not a bad thing, but Cadillac seemed to never let go.
Took till “65”.
Grace and elegance.
I heard that the 1955 Chrysler cars that Exner designed bears little of the K.T. Keller designs as with Engle Elwood’s designs that are from Virgil Exner’s, do anyone agree with that?
I’ve been admiring a white with red and grey interior 1964 Chrysler Windsor 2 door hardtop with a 361 V8 at the Natick, Ma Auto Clinic for less than $15000 along with a spare parts car at no additional cost, too.
My favorite model among Mopars of that vintage since new, if I could budget maintaining I would buy it ASAP.
Excellent essay and comments!
Thanks,
Dick Freeman
For most of my life the front of a ’61 Plymouth has always looked bizarre, but seeing a similar face on every Lexus for the last five years makes it seem almost clairvoyant now.
The last-minute downsizing of the ’62 Dodges and Plymouths usually get blamed for their slow sales, but I find even the original long versions in drawings and photos to be unattractive and no in-keeping with trends set by GM and Ford. The other big problem with the ’62’s styling was that they looked like the smaller, cheaper Valiant and Lancer that had went on sale a year or two prior. It’s widely agreed upon that if you’re going to introduce a new styling language, start with your top-of-the-line image cars and then let it filter downward. Mopar did the opposite with the ’62 Dodges and Plymouths. Chrysler repeated this mistake with the 1989 Chrysler/Maserati TC, which may have looked good had it appeared in 1986 (as was originally intended); but by 1989 everyone thought it looked like a two-year-old LeBaron that sold for half the price of the TC.
The ’63 New Yorker looked better than any Mopars from the previous two years, but still rather frumpy to my eyes, for the reasons others have noted – windows that were too small, thick window frames, body contours and windshield that still have some residual ’50s-ness, and an uninspired interior, Mechanically these were solid cars but I can’t get excited about them. Just two years later these would look so much better.
The 1964 Imperial wasn’t completely restyled as stated in the text; it was another facelift of the 1957 body. Heavily facelifted, but some aspects of its design like the fishbowl windshield, door handles, and rear door openings that get wider rather than narrower at the bottom betrayed its dated design.
The 1963 Mopars in general remind my of GM’s 1960 offerings – they don’t quite look like a Bill Mitchell-era design (although certain touches do), yet everything that was modified from the ’59s was done to get away from the Harley Earl look, from the simpler grilles up front to the less prominent fins in back. (exception was those new jet-plane chrome decorations on the Impala rear door area; not sure what that was about).
IMO the ’63 Newport is one of the best looking and most original full-size cars of the ’60s, and a final triumph for Exner. Dad and I walked into Dulaney Chrysler-Plymouth, behind and next to Hutzler Bros. fine store on York Rd,, in the October of 1962 and I was immediately bowled over by a light beige 4 dr hardtop Newport in the showroom. After the muddled, warmed-over, and plucked ’62s, it was clean, sculptured, and a real knock out in my eyes. I loved the dash as well, an important factor in my book. The NYer’s floss took away from the pure design. Sadly Dad passed on the Chrysler and bought a ’63 Ford that year. The ’64 was a fiddled-with comedown, but the ’63 is an unappreciated masterpiece.
I’ll add that I wish the ’62 DeSoto shown above had made it to production, I love it!
All the Mopars of that era are so much more interesting today than the conservative designs of GM and Ford, but in the case of some aspects of Mopar’s ’61s, perhaps a bit too much so!
My C Body Mopar forum
Forward Look, 1955-61
Slab Side, pre 69 which means 1965-68
Fuselage, 1969-73
Formal, 1974-78
the 62-64 are pretty much orphans with people unsure where they belong