(first posted 12/26/2012) Here’s a little secret; just promise to not tell anyone: Inspiration for writing a Curbside Classic can sometime be pretty elusive.
When you find a great car, the question to consider is, how do I present this? Sure, I could tie it to some goofy or bizarre story line–and every one that involves my family is quite accurate– but it may not be the right vehicle. Do I want to wax eloquent, or tear it to shreds?
Then there is this Satellite. At first, it truly excited me, but then I started to (over)analyze it. Taking a long drive after finding a car can do that.
Still, I kept thinking about this Satellite, and its qualities and demerits. To borrow from Sergio Leone, this nearly immaculate, baby-blue Satellite is at once good, bad, and ugly.
In keeping with the spirit of Sergio’s infamous flick, let’s take them in order.
The Good: There is actually quite a bit of good in this particular Satellite. In a bit of symmetry, JPCavanaugh once found a ’74 Satellite that was a real Thanksgiving turkey (here), and this Satellite was found on Thanksgiving Day. Ironic? Not really; this Satellite is more of a Christmas ham–doesn’t it almost appear to be smiling at you? Satellites of this vintage are no longer frequently found in the wild, and even reruns of Adam-12 don’t feature frequent sightings of their ’71 Satellite.
The road to finding this Satellite was a circuitous one. After I’d taken the family to the annual Thanksgiving Day parade in downtown St. Louis, which features such nifty creations as this souped-up shopping cart (the scaffolding in front of the old courthouse doesn’t help, I know)…
…and the “Grinch-illac”, we headed toward my in-laws house (you met my father-in-law here).
Road construction necessitated a detour, and thus did the car gods guide me to this 34,000-mile Satellite.
Plymouth restyled the Satellite for 1971, and the new two-door and four-door Satellites were rather dissimilar in appearance, and rode different wheelbases. Earlier this year, CC covered a 1971 Road Runner (based upon the two-door Satellite) here.
Sales of the 117-inch wheelbase, four-door Satellite, including both base and upscale Custom models, increased to 47,767 in 1972. Among the 1972 mid-size offerings from the Big Three, the Satellite Custom was both the lightest (at 3,318 pounds) and the least expensive (at $2,848). In contrast, Ford’s Gran Torino was almost 170 pounds heavier, and Chevrolet’s Chevelle $43 more expensive.
Exterior styling is a highly subjective matter, but to my eye the Satellite is the most attractive of the three. Its design may not be the most memorable ever, but it’s much more pleasing than…
Photo by Paul Niedermeyer
the bloated, restyled-for-1972 Torino. If wearing white makes one look slimmer, you certainly couldn’t prove it by this poor Ford.
The Satellite was also more visually pleasing than the bug-eyed Chevelle that was being hawked by Chevrolet dealers.
Unlike these days of 50-shades of-gray interiors, there was a time when blue interiors were quite prevalent. Despite my previous lack of fondness for them, this one really makes me nostalgic.
It appears that one could even trace the 318 cu in (5.2-liter) powered history of this particular Satellite. That’s always a good thing for those so inclined.
The Bad: Every rose has its thorns, and so does this ’72 Satellite.
Generally speaking, the biggest involved sales: Despite being highly competitive, the Chevelle outsold the Satellite by a factor of two; the Torino beat it by a factor of three, excluding wagon and two-door production.
It was a total sales rout. We’re not talking about a few-odd-thousand cars difference; in fact, not even large fraction of a difference. This was a difference whose magnitude translated to annihilation, and undoubtedly Chrysler found it demoralizing.
To put things into perspective, the Valiant-based ’72 Plymouth Scamp sold 49,470 units. When a two-door Valiant is outselling your bread-and-butter mid-size sedan, things are bad.
www.imcdb.org
One measure of a car model’s success, or lack thereof, is the percentage of units sold to fleets. After watching “Toby” Halicki’s movie The Junkman recently (as well as too many episodes of Adam-12 as a youngster), I suspect a high number of these Satellites were sold to fleets. Because fleet cars aren’t exactly known for being treated like precious objects, that does not bode well for their longevity.
Although I’ve opined that its styling was superior to that of the Torino or Chevelle, I suspect it also worked against the Satellite. The Torino was obviously a Ford, and the Chevelle obviously a Chevrolet. The Satellite was obviously…what? Except for the wheel covers on our example, it simply doesn’t shout “Plymouth” in any discernible way. Several of our highly knowledgeable editors and commentators have noted that in general, Chrysler Corporation’s styling lagged behind the competition. Might this be the case with today’s Satellite?
Even if this one doesn’t look like a Plymouth, the Satellite did finally evolve into the Plymouth look; of course, it might have been mere familiarity, as this creature lived on until 1978 as the Plymouth Fury.
When deciding whether to attend my twenty-year high school reunion a few years ago, I realized I had forgotten about several classmates–and my class numbered only forty-three. About ten days prior to spotting this ’72, I saw a ’71 Satellite sedan, in avocado green with the dog-dish hubcaps. My initial reaction was, “Damn, I forgot Plymouth made those.” Sadly, I was unable to stop for pictures.
These Satellites, like some classmates, just don’t seem to be very memorable. That’s too bad.
The Ugly: Over the years, Chrysler Corporation has entertained a reputation for building cars that are like scratch-off lottery tickets: Either you get a winner or a dud, with no real gray areas. While I do not know where this poor, wonderful Satellite rates, it certainly has some ugly traits about it.
First, look at this tail light very carefully. It has the same basic shape as the ’71 version, but look at the two vertical dividers on those of the 1972 Satellites. They comprise the entire difference between the two, and what holds them on? Big-headed screws! It really looks like Plymouth had a batch of leftover tail lights and didn’t know what to do with them. I can almost hear it: “Hey, Lonnie, put down your doobie and lookie here! If we take a few screws and this chunk of plastic, we can take these ’71 lights and turn them into something really snazzy for ’72. Who’s ever gonna notice?”
Couldn’t a highly creative engineer in Chrylser’s renowned engineering department have devised a more elegant way to attach two slats? This sure as hell wasn’t done by any stylist or engineer worth their salt. Even the piece on the left doesn’t look vertically aligned.
These slats really make the tail of this Plymouth look gap-toothed and ugly.
Another observation: This car isn’t so much ugly as awkward. That might be a bit of a stretch for some of you, but it screams at me. Look at the middle of the lower grilles and bumpers of the ’72 Satellite and the ’63 Ford Galaxie. Notice that curled-lip look? Can you name another car with a similar design trait? It might create an assertive appearance, but the similarity just screams at me.
I cannot decide if this is a coincidence, or if Plymouth simply reverted to an eight-years-old Ford design element. But wait–Plymouth even put their name on the end of the hood, just like Ford did.
Overall: I would drive this Satellite in a heartbeat. Other than a few minor scuffs on the corners, it is in very good shape, with a drive train that is nearly immune to abuse. Still, I have a nagging feeling of uncertainty about this car–but why? Apparently I am not alone, at least according the sales numbers. But is my apprehension about this Plymouth similar to what people tend to feel about things unfamiliar, like public speaking? Or is it based on something intangible that cannot be easily defined?
My guess is that both the uncertainty and lack of sales mostly boil down to an eight-letter word that begins with a P. And that is unfortunate.
That Satellite is a GEM. Back in the day, I wouldn’t be caught dead in a vanilla plain sedan like that. But now, the car is just great and in very nice condition. The interior is in fantastic condition.
The steering wheel, window cranks, and inside door handle and rests come from a Chrysler common parts bin. I’d rather have a Monaco, Fury or Polara from 71, but the Satellite would fit the bill for some great nostalgia.
I feel the same way about the 62 Bel Air sedan.
Nice writeup on this car. These never seemed mid-sized to me back in the day, probably because the styling always seemed bloated. I would never have chosen one of these then, and I certainly wouldn’t now, but seeing one in such good cosmetic shape is always welcome at any rate. I’d’ve lingered over this one for a long time if I’d seen it in the wild like you did.
Jim, I definitely lingered with this one. It even had an aftermarket 3rd brake light on the rear shelf.
You should have titled the article The Good, The Bad and The Mundane. If any word describes this car, its “mundane”. As in “white bread on four wheels” before the term was ever applied to the Camry. That’s probably what really killed the car – a complete and total lack of personality. While the Chevy still had the final incarnation of a very attractive body, and the Ford was just overwhelming in being fat and overblown, the Plymouth might as just as well had “Car” badged on the hood and trunk along with a UPC symbol.
And putting it up against the two-door hardtop in the showroom, was probably the final kiss of death. Its obvious that styling spent 98% of their time on the two door.
The assistant dean of students at my college had one of these. For a year. And was promptly traded in for a 240Z. The car bored him to death.
The total lack of structural integrity these cars displayed might have had something to do with their bad sales, too. They positively heaved and quaked over any kind of rough road.
I had one of these, and beat the piss out of it – even on rough dirt roads. The real big draw back was that you NEED to get front and rear sway bars. Like all B body Chryslers you will have fun stunt driving with the happy rear end, and it is light enough – with a small block 3,350 or so.
This is still better than what happened when the Satellite was merged into the Fury line in 75.
The 75 Fury front end is like a mash up of 1970 Monte Carlo and 1974/75 Gran Torino.
Don’t even get me started on the Stacked Quad Headlight versions.. Ugh!
The Chevelle would have been the best value of the three by far. Yes I have the luxury of retrospect to say it, but time proved it.
Simply was better built and held it’s value longer. Those Gran Torino’s turned into powder in 3-4 years in snow country, Chevelles fought the tinworm with more heart. And without the pre-smog era Mopar muscle drivetrain, there was no other reason to endure the B-Bodies abysmal build quality and stone-age chassis engineering techniques.
I’m not a gung-ho Chevy guy either. It’s just a fact born out by present day values. This was GM in it’s heyday and still did some things right.
And if the Chevelle buyer was either lucky or shrewd enough to get a a 2-door model, and kept it a long time, they actually gained value eventually. Mopar and Ford Mid-sizers of this era, not so much.
Not even this one, IMHO.
http://www.google.com/imgres?q=Clint+Eastwood+Gran+Torino&hl=en&sa=X&tbo=d&rls=com.microsoft:en-us&biw=1024&bih=586&tbm=isch&tbnid=WFjM5-HlzSC5eM:&imgrefurl=http://intheframefilmreviews.blogspot.com/2012/02/100-movies-no-42-gran-torino.html&docid=aoA4NfFnS2HpsM&imgurl=http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-D3cOO5VnOmE/T7u6tBmSfNI/AAAAAAAABbE/noUYGeqgQpI/s1600/Gran%252BTorino%252B1.jpg&w=1280&h=853&ei=5Q_bUMD4K4a6iwKq6oCACQ&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=703&vpy=85&dur=110&hovh=183&hovw=275&tx=124&ty=113&sig=113648881521712190557&page=1&tbnh=142&tbnw=215&start=0&ndsp=12&ved=1t:429,r:3,s:0,i:165
Also, I recall these mostly from my TV Land youth. They were relegated to more oddball type shows, like the Rockford Files and such. Either heavies or Jim’s friend Dennis the cop wheeling them.
Half the cop-type shows on then seemed to be Quinn-Martin productions and Ford had a lock on those.
I agree with Roger, the Chevelle was the best of the lot at the time. At least the cars drove well and went down the road with some confidence. They were a good value for their day and that’s probably why the roads in Canuckistan were rife with them.
IMO: those 4 door Chevelles were “butt ugly” cars.
I dunno. I watched a lot of cop shows back then, and the ’71-’72 Satellite was a big player. So was the ’71-’72 Matador. Being a weirdo 4 door sedan lover, I really liked both of those cars. My parents had a ’73 Satellite wagon for a short time, it was an electrical nightmare. But it looked so cool.
Chrysler thought it was being really clever by offering its four-door, mid-sized cars with completely different sheetmetal than its coupes. Perhaps that expensive gambit didn’t work very well because the Dodge Charger and Plymouth Satellite Sebring were quite muscular at a time when the market was tilting toward the brougham look.
A somewhat similar situation may have occurred with the sedans. They didn’t look nearly as luxurious as Ford’s new-for-1972, mid-sized Torino and Montego. Ironically, the 1971 Satellite offered a Brougham model but it sold so poorly that it appears to have been discontinued for 1972.
Note that the Dodge Coronet sedan sold better than its Satellite sister. Just as the Charger sold better than the Sebring and the Challenger more than the Barracuda. Even back in the early-70s Plymouth was in trouble.
As an aside, I’ve read that the Valiant/Dart was originally slated for a redesign in the early-70s but that was put on hold because its sales were surprisingly strong — indeed, they were one of Chrysler’s few success stories of that era. If the Valiant/Dart had been redesigned at that point I suspect that the updated body would have been a shrunken version of the Satellite/Coronet. There was certainly plenty of fat to lop off.
I think this design looks like a Plymouth. But much like the Barracuda, the Satellite was too plain in comparison to its equivalent Dodge.
Yes, there was a plan to redesign the Valiant/Dart for 1972. Chrysler dropped the program due to tight budgets after its big investment for the 1971 intermediates. I got an article of Collectible Automobile about the full-size Chrysler who mentionned then the C-body was also planned to get some reskin for ’71 but it was delayed for ’72. Maybe the 1971-81 Australian Valiant might be the intented restyled A-body for ’72.
Perhaps the shrunked fuselage design didn’t fit well the B-body and they could had chosen to reskin the 1968 bodyshell one more time instead.
You only have to look at the Australian Chrysler Valiant VH model to see what it probably would have looked like, similar to this but with a sleeker front and more curve to the line over the rear wheel.
Chrysler copied the loop bumper for the Valiants, I remember a few Plymouth Satelites in NZ way back, but LHD probably ex Deepfreeze base cars, late model US cars came in with US military and they often took running relics back with them.
Didn’t these have two different instrument panel “inserts”, one with the rectangular speedometer and another with round speedometer and other gauges? I think the sedans probably tended to have the rectangular panel vs round one on the coupes? Not sure why they would have gone through the expense of having two very different instrument panel inserts for the same model year car (unless the sales volumes were high enough to pay for the extra cost).
It is funny that in the 1960’s most cars had gone to the rectangular speedometer setup at least for American cars, whereas now I doubt you could find a single new model car that has anything other than the round “dial” type speedometer….it is almost as if today’s cars are trying to mimic the “sporty” European cars as much as they can…similarly the disappearnce of the column-mounted shift lever, which was on pretty much any American car (maybe not some sporty cars) in the 1960’s but has all but disappeared except on trucks….I think these cars similarly had some models with column mounted shifter for automatics and some with “slap-stick” console shifters between the seats (which is pretty much your only choice on American cars these days).
Do people really think that cars with round speedometers and shift levers between the seats are sportier than cars with rectangular speedometers and column shifters? I guess marketing plays a big part in this, but it seems a bit odd to me in retrospect. Shouldn’t the actual characteristics of the drivetrain (engine, transmission) be more important in this respect than how they are monitored or where their control lever is located in the car?
I guess you could do a similar analysis on the demise of the floor-mounted parking brake on almost all American cars (I think these all still had floor mounted parking actuators even on models with console mounted shift mechanisms).
a lot of cars did in the ’70s as well. I just did the sweep to round conversion on my ’77 Chevelle. did it make it sporty? no, but its nice to actually monitor engine vitals.
That was the only way you could get a real gauge package on a 73-77 Chevelle. The setup was basically the same as what came standard on the Monte Carlo, Malibu SS (1973) and Laguna Type S3.
I think that the pair of instrument clusters was actually a costcutting move so that Ma Mopar could use the same dash panel in a whole slew of cars, including the Charger, and still have some differentiation.
The strippo 74 Charger owned by a friend’s family used the base panel with the horizontal speedo. Only the better models got the round gauges.
Did you mean pedal-operated parking brakes? They were found on most ’70s American cars except the subcompacts such as Vega, Pinto and Mustang II – which had the pull-up lever between the front seats as did the Corvette and most foreign cars, particularly the economy jobs and sports cars. Exceptions were the pre-1976 Mavericks/Coments and Darts/Valiants/Dusters which had an under-dash T-handle parking brake, a relic of 50s and earlier cars.
I’m more interested in that ’72 Torino. You never, ever see non-Gran Torinos, which wore a different front end from the nicer models in ’72-’73.
I’m sure what few were built ended up in fleets, with or without Police and/or taxi packages. Six-cylinder ones for the power company or social workers, perhaps?
At any rate, used up and long gone. They were rare on the prairies. Only one I ever encountered was in a junkyard 20 years after the fact, in thise very color and yes, it had the six and no power steering or brakes. What an abominible conveyance (I hesitate to use the word “car”) it must have been.
My parents purchased a base model ’73 Torino. Even then, I never saw another one like it and thought it was some freak oddity Ford had made.
The ’72 and ’73 Torino with the six was not available with air conditioning. Why? Because it was such a dog, Ford (wisely) made the a/c option n/a on the six since the I6 Torino was already a heavy pig of a car that barely got by on a 2-bbl 302, much less a straight six.
I for one, would LOVE this ’72 Satellite. Much like the other comments made, in the day, I wouldn’t have been caught dead driving one.
That’s an awesome ad. Makes me want to go buy one right away. “Manual front disc brakes” and “synchronized three-speed manual transmission”. Eeek.
I drove taxis (Friday and Saturday nights only) back then and we had Dodge versions with the slant six, Police suspension and no power steering.
They would take any corner you were strong enough to try. I was never where I said I was (sitting in front of the clubs while in Old Louisville on the radio). Then it was foot hard on either pedal or somebody would steal the call.
When you brought it in they never checked the oil just dumped in a quart.
Great cars!
Interesting detail to note then in Venezuela, Ford continued to sold the Torino as a Fairlane. Here a picture taken from a vintage brochure of a 1972 Venezuelan Fairlane 500 wagon
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ifhp97/6834068675/sizes/l/in/photostream/
Dr. Lemming beat me to it, but the sales comparisons are skewed because the very similar Dodge Coronet was priced virtually the same as the Satellite, and sold better than it. You’d have to compare sales with the combined MoPars, which would result in a much more competitive position for the them.
Add in to that, Plymouths were sold out of Chrysler/Plymouth dealers. As the Chrysler was more profitable per unit, the dealer wouldn’t have the motivation to entice the Chevy/Ford/Plymouth customer thru its doors. Meanwhile, the local Dodge dealer was more than happy to go after that guy.
My original thought was comparing the “The Low Priced Three” – if that was even valid in 1972. However, this is a good point and I got curious. Thus, I’ve expanded it to include all mid-sized four-doors for MY72. It does give this a different flavor.
Dodge Coronet: 54,425
Plymouth Satellite: 47,767
Mopar Total: 102,192
Ford Torino: 135,786 (note, I’ve amended this post as I had the magnitudes reversed between Ford and Chevrolet, so it’s good this came up)
Mercury Montego: 49,495
Ford Motor Company Total: 185,281
Chevrolet Chevelle: 92,394
Buick Skylark: 65,055
Oldsmobile Cutlass: 53,848
Pontiac LeMans: 28,104
GM Total: 239,401
Again, this is four-doors only in all trim levels. Wagons and two-doors would only muddy the waters.
Boiling this down, Mopar still got beat by just under 2:1 by Ford and a bit more than that by GM.
One final piece of trivia: In researching all this, http://www.allpar.com stated there was a single ’71 Satellite wagon manufactured with a 383 and a 4 speed manual transmission. That would be a fun ride.
It could be interesting to see how the AMC Matador sedan fared in 1972.
54,813 of all body styles. My source has it broken down by engines; even then, that breakdown is rounded off, for instance, all six cylinder Matador’s combined was 14,000.
Pretty consistent with the Big Three’s market shares back then.
It gets hard to slice and dice, but my point was that Dodge was one of the low-priced “four”; without looking it up, I seem to remember them Coronet and Satellite being virtually identical in trim levels and price.
No whether that should include Mercury and the B-O-P B-Bodies is a question. They did offer low-end trim levels, but the overwhelming bulk of their sales were higher-trim models.
But realistically, the mid-size market had become very compressed by then. So including all of them makes plenty of sense. GM didn’t exactly care which one you bought…
Base price for a Coronet Custom was $150 more than that of the Satellite Custom, at $2,998. That’s on par with a mid-grade Montego and $68 less than a Cutlass sedan.
From what I can find, there was just the two levels of Coronet and Satellite; the only difference is likely a matter of which rear bumper and grille got slapped on the body at the factory.
The GM numbers are interesting, because they offered two separate 4 door models – a sedan and a 4 door hardtop. I always considered the sedan as plug-ugly, but the hardtop quite attractive. My point is that it took two separate models to get to these numbers.
“Despite being highly competitive, the Torino outsold the Satellite by a factor of two; the Chevelle beat it by a factor of three, excluding wagon and two-door production…It was a total sales rout. We’re not talking about a few-odd-thousand cars difference; in fact, not even a large fraction of a difference. This was a difference whose magnitude translated to annihilation, and undoubtedly Chrysler found it demoralizing.”
Without looking up any numbers, it’s my impression that the 1965-70 B-bodies sold competitively (they may have never matched the raw numbers of their GM and Ford competition, but in the context of Chrysler’s overall size, they were strong sellers, probably the top platform in combined Plymouth/Dodge sales in most of those years), but this momentum was completely lost when the 1971 restyle appeared. Either the styling just didn’t click with the public, or a reputation for poor quality was starting to get to them, or both. The same thing also more-or-less happened with the post-1969 full-size Plymouths and Dodges. Suddenly the only cars offered by either brand that were doing decent business were the Valiant/Dart family of compacts.
Syke wrote:
“Its obvious that styling spent 98% of their time on the two door.”
Dr. Lemming wrote:
“Chrysler thought it was being really clever by offering its four-door, mid-sized cars with completely different sheetmetal than its coupes. Perhaps that expensive gambit didn’t work very well because the Dodge Charger and Plymouth Satellite Sebring were quite muscular at a time when the market was tilting toward the brougham look.”
I think the above comments are right on regarding the styling. These cars, the two-doors in particular, seem to have been designed for a muscle car world (I have been known to describe the styling of the early ’70s E-bodies and B-body two doors as “the Hot Wheels Come To Life school of styling”), but by the time they were introduced, that era was rapidly coming to a close.
In this period, Chrysler seemed to be quite taken with building different body styles of the same basic design, or the same basic design sold by multiple brands, on different wheelbases and with different sheet metal, in circumstances where that wouldn’t normally be expected. With the notable exception of the Duster, the end results rarely seemed to be different enough or sell well enough to justify the extra expense that must have been involved.
A car only Governor Jerry Brown could love. His 74 Plymouth Satellite is now a museum piece:
http://www.calautomuseum.org/html/currentexhibits.html
“If wearing white makes one look slimmer, you certainly couldn’t prove it by this poor Ford.”
Boy, that poor Torino has gotten it’s licks! That is the cheapest model they sold, odd looking in some regards, and very rare in the Torino portfolio that year. White does NOT make a car (or anything else) look smaller. Decorators paint rooms white to look LARGER. Ask your mom/wife/sister about “the little black dress” and why that looks flattering.
Tim B is correct. The line in the article “If wearing white makes one look slimmer,” jumped out at me, too. Whether on a car or a human, it’s black that’s slimming; and white that’s bloating.
“She drove a Plymouth Satellite. Faster than the speed of light.”
Reminds me more of an Australian XA Falcon from the rear, than a Chrysler. I like the look of it a lot more that the Chevy and the Ford but that’d probably unfamiliarity talking as I only really know these as cops cars from American TV! You guys are lucky you never got the mid ’70s Australian chryslers as they were quite ungainly-looking (excluding the Aussie Charger).
There was nothing ungainly about seventies Aussie Chrysler Valiants. They had a lovely, windcheating shape to them. And you’re wrong to suggest that America was lucky it never received them. The Hemi six engine and updated body was just what America needed to replace the elderly Slant Six of the Plymouth Valiant.
Didn’t the Brady Bunch have a wagon version of this?
Yeah, “BB” got the mid size since it could fit in the studio! But imagine all 9 of them crammed in for real, and Alice was in the back row when they went camping!
I’d like to reference another Clint Eastwood classic-paint it metallic brown and slap on some dog dish poverty caps and you’d have a ‘Dirty Harry’ special (hand-held cannon optional….)
I remember my dad was shopping for a Dodge Dart in 1972 and the dealer offered him a Coronet (Satellite twin) for $50 more. Price per pound clearly favored the bigger car but dad went with the Dart, which I think gave him 9-10 years of reliable transportation. 1973 brought OPEC and gas shortages so I think Dad made a good choice.
I love your lottery ticket reference- one of the best ways of describing Chrysler quality then and now. Suffice to say that any survivors would be winners. I’ve always won big at the mopar pools myself, but plenty of friends and family have joined gamblers annon after just one.
My guess as to the Satellite’s failure is as mentioned due to the Dodge Coronet being nearly the same in price. This was initially because in smaller communities, you either had a Dodge dealer or a Chrysler-Plymouth dealer. My guess the primary market for these were die-hard mopar devotees who lived in mid-sized or larger towns that had both and had been ‘intimately violated in the lower digestive tract’ by the Dodge dealer (as happened and still does frequently). Thus, said Moparite would then go to the much friendlier Chrysler-Plymouth dealer to purchase the same item with a different badge. This was always the experience of people in my family- there was always one Mopar dealer in a town that was a total crook- not just a rip off merchant, but criminal to a degree that would make Don Corleone blush. Inevitably, after the tenth trip for warranty work, they would take it to the competing ‘blue sign’ CP dealer and be treated very nicely- like a human, and the ‘unfixable’ problem would be fixed once and for all- maybe even for free out of warranty as a goodwill gesture to an owner who purchased the car elsewhere. Hence, the next Mopar would be a Plymouth. Needless to say, this is a zero-sum-gain, as for every town with a crooked Dodge dealer and a saintly CP dealer, there was another town with the reverse situation.
I have a soft spot for these, since our last one or two days of high school Driver’s Training used a Satellite in exactly that shade of blue. This was around September or October 1972, and I think it must have been a brand-new 1973 as I recall it had larger bumper guards to comply with the 1973 bumper regs here in the US. Certainly not an exciting car, but nicer to drive for this 15-1/2 year-old than the full size Ford that preceded it. The Ford was really plain, probably not an LTD, maybe not even a Galaxie …. did they still sell Custom 500’s in ’71 or ’72?
Here in California these Mopars were ubiquitous as cop cars, so they seemed somewhat cool with blackwall tires and dog dish hubcaps – what teenage boy doesn’t think cop cars are cool ( as in the Blues Brothers: “cop motor, cop tires …” ). Though maybe today’s teens don’t think that Crown Vics are cool …
I’ve mulled over this article for a while, and the only thing I can say to these: Cop Car.
‘Nuff said.
I’ll take the Chevelle – PLEASE – in “Heavy Chevy” sports coupe trim, of course!
Make that a ’71 Chevelle in Heavy Chevy trim…I like the single divider grill treatment better.
Or better yet I’ll just take the ’70 Monte in these shots, thanks.
Good commentary about a car that I always thought of as a realllllly plain Jane. True the drivetrains were indestructable but I’d caution about ANY ’71-’74 car if the intent is to keep it stone stock…especially any ’73-’74 of anything…because as emissions regulations tightened, you never knew what you might find under the hood. Smog pump? Miles of vacuum hoses? Jury-rigged carb? The automakers were trying anything to meet the standards prior to 1975 and the arrival of catalytic converters…which actually made things simpler in the engine compartment until the regs were tightened again.
The problem with these was that they seemed so cheap. The Ford Gran Torino was impressively luxurious and the Malibu still had that old-school GM “Body By Fisher” solid feel. These Mopars felt cheaply constructed, and not at all luxurious. The fuselage C body also suffered from this issue, but perhaps not as badly as did these cars.
Look at that inner door panel. This was the top line model, mind you. Nothing whatsoever luxurious about this. Look at the Chevelle door panel. No comparison.
These developed a reputation for being driven by lower-income people or by old-timers who had been buying Plymouths since the 1930s. My mother was in the market for a car of this class in 1972 and did not consider one of these (even the 2 door) for a nanosecond.
The look also was quite faddish and quickly went out of style as everyone started going brougham-y. I will admit that these never even appealed to me all that much when the older B bodies were plentiful, and with A bodies everywhere. But now, there is something that I like about them. They have a uniquely early-1970s look to them. They make me think of Space Food Sticks.
“They make me think of Space Food Sticks.”
That’s a blast from the past! I believe only me, my buddy and you remember those. Real bad excuses for Tootsie Rolls and trying to make a buck off the Apollo space program.
I think they morphed into Cowtails at your local convenience store!
In a Motor Trend comparison test, they pretty much called the ’72 Chevelle “outdated”. At the time it was, but now it is part of the ‘Classic 64-72’ line.
The Mopar B body sedans were el cheapo fleet cars and mostly seen on TV, not the real world. If not for the Cordoba, Mopar may have gone bankrupt sooner.
Everyone forgets that before the 1979-80 near-death experience, Chrysler had another major brush with insolvency in 1970. The economy took a moderate downturn that year, and Chrysler was like a very shallow lake that got real ugly real fast at the slightest storm. The 1969 C body line was a sales disappointment almost right away. I have no doubt that they were shaving money out of product like crazy during 1970 as these cars were being finished up, and there had not been a lot of fat content designed in to start with, at least not anywhere you could see.
You are right about the Cordoba, but I would also add that it was only the low-margin and ancient A body that kept the lights on until the ‘Doba showed up.
The first time I drove was in a Dodge Coronet Wagon 1974. I Had no idea why, but I remember being so glad it was not the Plymouth version. Why Did they have such a dead image?
Only family member that had anything similar was my late Uncle who bought a ’78 Plymouth Gran Fury wagon. Three days after he took delivery of it, he realized that he’d made a horrible mistake as this wagon was junky from day 1. He brought it back to the Quincy, Illinois dealer to get his ’74 Ford Country Squire back, but said dealer had sold his ’74 wagon hours after he’d traded it. He kept it for seven years (and many warranty and post-warranty trips later) and traded it for an ’85 Olds Delta 88 Brougham (trimmed like the ’84 Olds 98 RWD Regency).
I drove the ’78 wagon from Eastern to Western (K.C.) Missouri . . . the notorious ‘dead’ Old Mopar novacaine steerting seemed much worse in this car; he’d upgraded to aftermarket radials (the car new came with belted Goodyears) – the car would wander all over the place (this was around 1981). Accelaration was pretty good with it’s 360 four-barrel, but the build quality was horrible with uneven gaps everywhere and that typical mid-size ’70’s Mopar can-of-corn feel; the metallic hollow “slunk” the doors made when you shut them and the rattly feel of quarter panels flexing with a series of repetitive bumps. The drivetrain in that car held up well for the seven years that my Uncle had it, but everything else shit the bed in short order. Why he didn’t trade it sooner, I don’t know, but he’d curse and cuss about that car constantly. It silver with woodgrain and a burgundy interior. Wire wheel covers. It looked like a float in a Portuguese Festa!
My only experiences with these was through my parents. Back in the early-middle 70’s both mom and dad sold real estate. And the company they worked for gave them a car allowance. The only stipulation was that the car had to be a wagon and gold in color on top of that. Like I’ve posted before my parents were all Mopar. So mom bought a Satellite wagon and dad traded a Fury GT in on a Dodge Monaco wagon. I don’t recall the motor sizes but I’d bet both were 360s. Now I do recall that this particular company had about a dozen agents selling for them and I think most if not all of them also drove Mopars. Maybe GM and Ford didn’t sell gold wagons? IDK. I do remember dad saying that his was the most expensive because he sold the most houses. Dad had had enough of the selling end and started his own construction business around 76 so away went the gold boat and a small fleet of Dodge D-series trucks took it’s place. Along with a 75 Coronet coupe. IIRC dad got a sweet deal on that car which was the only reason it took up space in the drive. Mom later went to work for another company and traded the Satellite in on a New Yorker. Complete with lean burn 440. The Coronet ended up being the family car as all of us kids started hitting driving age back than. I can remember a best friends mom had a 75 vintage Cordoba complete with the T-top roof and 400 under the hood. And the local cops had recieved a Coronet coupe for speed enforcement from some government grant. I don’t recall the motor. What did these 3 cars have to do with the story? Having sat in the front seat of all of them, all I remember is the same interior appointments. Even the one with fine Corinthian leather. Oh and I do remember a neighbor down the street had a Satellite coupe with the Road Runner decals on it. I always thought that car was joke because another buddy had an original 1st gen RR and he would always stop in front of the house and pop the clutch trying to get the guy all riled up. Funny thing is I dont remember anybody owning a sedan and I don’t remember any of them being the biggest POS’s built as one would believe from reading some of the statements posted on the interweb.
Lotsa negatives on this one so far…i owned a 72 satellite just like it, but in medium green metallic, dog dishes, rubber floor mats and 318 auto, with ps and power discs….for a cheap beater in the early ’80s, this one has a soft spot for me…way less poofy than my dads ’75 luxo torino elite, very much more direct in all aspects, and never let me down…still remember fondly the way the colum shifter felt and sounded, and to this day, i still miss solid feeling metal parts interacting in a functional way, not finely engineered, but robust functional…that car was the best 50 bux i spent…
This was the car that worked longer than you wanted to drive it. Then No one else wanted to give you 500$ for itm so you keep driving it. Somehow 40 years later its still going strong.
That car is sitting where I bought my 1978 Lincoln Mark V.
MotoExotica… an ebay seller of classic cars.
OK. Back in the day, I much preferred the 2-door Charger and RoadRunner/GTX. Over time I’ve come to like the 4-door bodystyle, also. I was a fan of the “fuselage” bodystyle when it debuted, and I like it on these cars, too. Being a long-time Mopar guy, I feel the author and some commenters are being overly harsh. I find this Satellite Custom far better looking than any similar vintage 4-door Chevelle or Torino. If quality issues were really as bad as some reviewers make it out to be, my parents and I and many others would never have stuck with Chrysler. I think the truth is, if the Big 3 had done a better job of taking care of their customers by giving them a quality product, Honda and Toyota would never have achieved the market share they’ve had for many years. All I’m saying is I think things were somewhat hit and miss at all the US automakers back in the day. We did hear the horror stories of people who may have gotten a Monday or Friday built car that was a piece of crap from all the automakers.
Now for my full disclosure, revealing my bias. Besides owning and driving a 1969 Charger for a brief period in the mid-’70’s, I went on to own (4) 1973 Dodge Charger Rallye models; 3 with the 340/auto and one with a 400/pistol-grip 4-speed. Also acquired and drove a very well-kept 1972 Charger S.E. Brougham with the 318/auto. My first 1973 Charger Rallye, purchased in December of 1976, the one I kept the longest and put the most miles on, was an outstanding highway cruiser and road-trip car. I liked it so much I had plans never to sell it, yet eventually traded it in on a clean, like-new used 1979 Plymouth (Mitsubishi) Saporro in the early 1980’s. The Saporro had a 5-speed coupled to the 2.6L and was fun to drive and easier on the fuel consumption.
Well i love any classic car i actually have a 1972 plymouth satellite custom and she’s a beauty and running too it does’nt matter the value or looks i jux enjoy the history behind
The grille looks the way it does (the “curled lip”) because it’s based on the 1970 Satellite/GTX/Road Runner grille, which had the same design. The bodies are radically different, but Chrysler wanted to keep at least one design echo between the model years ’70/’71.
I think many are being unnecessarily harsh on the Satellite.
Its a good-looking early 1970s sedan that does elicit many Mopar musclecar-era styling cues. Obviously the Road Runner connection is there and if you squint hard enough you can see a Barracuda since they were loosely based on the B-Bodys. I prefer the cleaner looking 71 grille over the lacey design of the 72 and splitting the taillights on the 72 with a little screw-on bar is nothing any different than GM or Ford would have done for a quick model year identifier.
Mopar interiors were what they were; my Dad had a gold 71 Satellite sedan that lasted will into the mid-1980s with over 150K on it and the 318 was still running when it was hauled off to the scrapyard when there was more rust than paint but I remember the interior was still in pretty good shape despite me and my 2 brothers climbing all over the seats, so while it wasn’t a sexy interior (its a family sedan for petes sake) it certainly was durable.
/6s, 318s, 383, 440s and TorqueFlites. Enough said about powertrains.
I do agree that when it came to final assembly, with a Mopar, you either got a good one or not. I guess if you got a car that was built on a Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday you were in good shape.
So tell me again whats not to love about that Satellite? I picked up a 71 sedan as a rememberance to my father and I love it; I think it has lots of personality and character
This is a good looking car; had I been shopping for a mid-sizer in ’72, this would have been on my short list as it was hands down the best looking of the offerings from the Big 3.
Yes, I was being a bit harsh on some elements of the car, although the tail light slats were what pulled the harsh trigger.
For a while I even entertained the idea of investigating this car a little deeper for myself but circumstances didn’t allow. You are correct on the power trains, as there was nothing to worry about there.
Your ’71 looks great; a friend of my mother’s had one back in the day and I thought it was a great looking car in its dark to medium blue.
thanks Jason, I appreciate the compliment! Certainly a 71 Satellite sedan isn’t on many people’s lists as a desirable classic, except maybe for someone looking for a rare B-Body police car; even among Mopar lovers its a forgotten car. They are not even viable parts donors for Road Runners and GTXs since very few body parts interchange with the coupes, but it holds a tremendous amount of sentimental value for me.
Great write up on a great forgotten car!
Happened to come across this post and just had to comment. I too own a recently purchased ( 2 years now ) 72 plymouth satellite custom that I also bought in remembrance of my dad. The more I drive it, the more I love it! I’m getting ready to put some major front end work into it so as to insure safe driving for kids to ride in it. I also want to drive to the Carolinas and Indiana to visit friends and relatives. I look forward to driving it every opportunity I get. Nice to see someone else that has one as i hardly see anything about this car on the internet. Wonder how many are still out there on the road. I seem to prefer the look of the sedan over the coup. I suppose that could be a bias on my part being that that’s the one I own, but the grill is reminiscent of a cuda and I like the fuselage styling of the 4 door.This might sound strange but I like the idea of everyone having their own door( I know….I know). I hate having to get out , or having to slide forward to let someone out of the back. I should be lucky if that’s my biggest problem right!
You haters with your cute & clever comments don’t phase me a bit. Although I like all 3 sedans, the Plymouth Satellite is my favorite, PERIOD, and I’d love to get one right now if I could. In fact, I do have a Plymouth right now, a ’90 Acclaim. Yes, I know you’re gonna say it’s a Dodge Spirit with a Plymouth badge but I love the fact that it’s a long lost brand, the styling is unusual by today’s standards, and its li’l gas-saving 2.5 purrs like a kitten. Just gave her a new coat of paint and I wouldn’t trade her for the world.
what was this 72 Satellite like to ride in? compared to the then new redesigned Torino Im sure not as smooth and maybe noisier. How did it compare to the Chevelle? these cars often were tagged in road tests as not as smooth or as quiet as GM or Ford products. was the Satellite significantly noisier than the competition or just a little bit? or maybe hit or miss, some were smooth and quiet riding?
Mopars of this era always let a lot of road noise into the car. This was a unibody (Torino and Chevelle were both BOF) so noise would transmit itself in through the leaf springs and in through the body structure. Chrysler did a really shitty job of insulation and sound deadening then. Friends had a low-trim 74 Charger that was of this generation, and the body structure felt like a tin can. The trunk was lined with nothing but a thin vinyl mat, and it was just not a quiet car.
As much as I love Mopars and as much as I admire the mechanical pieces of the B body of this era, the bodies were just terrible. The doors sounded like crap when you slammed them, and would cause the steering column to judder a little bit. The door panels were thin cardboard covered with vinyl and there seemed to be no significant body insulation anywhere. Everything you touched felt thin and cheap, and it was evident that the company really had the cost-cutting scissors everywhere in the interiors of these cars.
In contrast, the 72 Torino’s body gave the (false) impression of being a real tank. The doors sounded great when you closed them, and the interior materials seemed very nice. Ford was the king of sound insulation back then, and the cars felt very high quality to anyone riding in it. The GM A bodies were probably a little louder than the Fords, but they had a very solid feeling body, at least through the 1972 models. Time would eventually prove the Torinos to be Class-A rusters. The GM A bodies aged pretty well (in the 1968-72 generation, anyway) and while not as structurally rigid as the Mopar B, felt more solid as far as the stuff you touched.
i know, thats a shame because i really liked the Satellite/Coronet of this era. Consumer reports and Popular Science in the early 70’s tests always found these cars to be the noisiest amongst competitors. I remember the 73 Dodge Coronet Custom had the highest noise level of the test group despite the torsion quiet ride system being advertised that year, and the 72 Satellite wagon was known for its noisiness and vibration.
but around 76 or so all of a sudden these cars for some reason were riding much quieter. I remember reading a Consumer Reports review of the 76 Coronet and i remember noticing that the sound levels were much much lower that previously. In fact the car was rated as quiet riding as its competitors. very unusual indeed
i remember a neighbor gave me a ride home from school in their 73 Satellite. although the ride wasn’t particularly harsh or noisy, i noticed it didn’t seem to take bumps like our Buick Century, there was a strange whirring sound coming from under the floor, and it just didn’t have the big car feel that our Century had. it had that cheap feeling that was hard to describe. our Century felt like it was weighted to the ground like a paperweight; the Satellite just didn’t feel that way. it did feel like a 3800 lb car but not like the Century
these smaller fuselages were all new in 71. the Satellites/Coronets that came before 71 were even noisier than the ones from 71 on. I always liked the 73 Coronet Custom with all the options and wire wheel covers. and i liked the loop bumpers. but i don’t like the 74 Coronet grille, looked like its back in the 60’s
I always liked the body style of these cars. yet there is something foreboding about the grille and tail lights. I don’t know what it is, just something that makes one feel uneasy about it. whereas the 78 Fury Salon pictured above seems to avoid the foreboding look with the rectangular headlights and glossy trim. hard to describe. i have images of this car sitting in a garage and starting up with no one starting it or suddenly catching fire or filling up a house with carbon monoxide fumes. just something a bit on the creepy side about it. i think they needed more options but in 72 they were pretty slim. a Satellite Custom barely offered more than the lower models. and some people drove these cars with dog dish steering wheels or hubcaps, making it seem so tacky
IMO that beige colored Sat with the black vinyl roof parked face out of the garage is quite handsome and stylish, at least for ’72. I think Chrysler Corp really improved the styling in ’71 to make it more competitive with GM at that time. looks much more exciting than the ’70 Sat. I like the blunt front end. The mid sized Mopars combined a modish look with an unmistakable Mopar look. Seems that starting in ’75 when the Sat because a “small Fury” the cars started to look less and less like Mopars especially with the rectangular headlamps. however workmanship and interior quality seemed to have improved. I think the cars started riding quieter too.
I agree with the tacky looking interiors and poor workmanship of the early 70’s tho. I agree its not the most exciting car but I don’t understand why people would not want to be caught dead in one” back then. nothing embarrassing about it, better than the Sats prior to ’71 and than the AMC Matadors. those REALLY looked stodgy and “out of it”
If you want to ever do a story on a Korean car, may I suggest referencing the movie, The Good, The Bad and the The Weird.
Interesting point about fleet sales, this was the peak era for Mopar-heavy police fleets. I also wonder what the wagon take rate was compared to the industry average considering that the Dart/Valiant had a cult following and no wagon.
Why ugly? I find that model handsome enough!
Esp when compared to the Ford and Chevy direct competition.
Excellent writeup, as always Jason! Whether Satellite, Chevelle or Torino, these were ubiquitous everyday cars for regular middle class folks we boomers grew up with. Maybe this one had the good fortune of being owned by some older person who mostly drove it to the store and church on Sundays. Whatever its story, great to see one these old barges in such great shape being driven and used as mother Mopar intended.
If you were talking mid-sized 4 door sedans in 1971 I would disagree with the writer and say that this Plymouth is better looking than the Ford/Mercury twins or the Chevy. In 1972? Unless you were buying THE bare-bones/taxi spec car, the Ford AND Mercury killed this segment.
As a fan of the Plymouth brand I think a huge part of the problem for these early 70s Satellites is that they never really looked expensive. I mean, look at that white Torino pictured here. John Q. Public didn’t usually buy a car like this, they added the necessary options and got a much nicer GRAN TORINO. The Plymouth, on the other hand, never seemed able to shake it’s taxi cab looks no matter how you optioned it.
BTW, I am crazy about these cars with their loop bumpers, the later models look to much like Chevy knockoffs. But, I am not sure if I would buy one as a test drive back in the late 70s left me unimpressed. I hated the too light steering feel and the borderline touchy brakes.
Give me an honest yet cheap Plymouth any day, though, over a cheap Ford or Chevy.
nlpnt:
The take rate on the 72 Satellite wagon was truly dismal. Ford sold nearly FIVE times as many wagons and Chevy nearly FOUR times as many. Plymouth struggled to get any model of the wagon over 5,000 units.
I suspect that I know someone that would be quite interested in buying this car.
Have you not yet figured out that this article was first posted in 2012?
I did, yes.
I can read just as well (perhaps better?) than most other people, Paul.
BUT:
A quirky car guy can dream, can’t he?
I’ve owned many of the 70’s examples of the “big three” vehicles. They all had their strong and weak points.
I leaned towards Mopar in the 70’s simply because they were a great used value, especially in my overwhelmingly GM town. Nobody wanted them and I didn’t drink the GM “kool-aid” so to speak, so I was happy to oblige the reduced cost. All of them were good, reliable vehicles for the 70’s era although you could see the pavement when you opened the trunk on a couple of them!
I would have no problem back then or now owning or driving this Satellite.
What options are on this car?
318/360 V8 engine, Torqueflite automatic, power steering, power disc brakes, working factory air conditioning, AM-FM radio?
I happen to know, from personal experience, that a thick, underside undercoating, “dynamat” style sound deadening material placed between the carpeting and unibody floor & on the trunk floor/sides will quiet down this car (and all Mopars of this era) past Chevy noise levels and almost to Ford level of quietness.
Meh. It’s ok but doesn’t really excite me. But I really like that green ’78 Fury with the Cordoba-like front clip and stacked head lights.
I had a ’71 Satellite as a company car. The brakes on that car were so awful as to be dangerous. Back brakes locked first and at speed, the thing was only interested in heading for the weeds.
Same color as the car Jerry Brown used during his first term as Governor of California:
And then there’s this gem…though it’s in a different color scheme (starts about 2:00 in):
Jason Shafer Here’s are picture of the blue interior of my 79
Century Turbo Coupe.
I’m fairly certain that this exact Satellite was the car my parents had when I was a teenager. We bought it from a dealership in Sullivan, MO and lived in Union, MO at the time. (1993). I offered to buy the car for $500 off my parents when I went away to college. They sold it to someone else for $300 because they felt i would do better with a more fuel efficient car. I was sooo upset – that car was CHERRY.
I wish i could find this car again. I’d buy it in a heartbeat.
Can’t agree with this article very much. Those Chrysler products back in the day looked pretty modern and slick. The comments about the front and rear end don’t make sense. KIA sell boat loads with similar low tail lights and centered front grill squeeze. This Chrysler gets top marks fr styling and value back then. Sorry there’s no Lee Iacocca or original Chrysler anymore.
The Satellite and Coronet were some of team Engel’s best work. Look at the movement on the body sides of Jenn B’s car a few comments above. The Satellite in particular had a nice balanced design, whereas I think the Coronet could have benefitted from rear wheel skirts and more vertical surfacing on the front fascia. The Satellite’s front bumper center rise ties back to the memorable ’57/58 theme and I think it works just fine on this car.
Comments about the later versions of these B-bodies being quieter suggests that the earlier cars could have been made quieter had the team made this a priority. They appear to have misread the market’s shift towards ever more luxury. And speaking of luxury I wish there would have been an Imperial version. Made in its own plant and with quality control being of the highest order… including Mondays and Fridays. The bucket seat/console package and some sort of advancement to the rear suspension could have made it an American alternative to Mercedes.
I am *very* glad that used car lot is thousands of miles from me ! .
My mate Bass Ass Billy Bob (he beat up Marine Corps Drill instructors until they booted him out) bought one of these in…..1976 for a song, maybe $150 ? it was white and he said it had a 360 V8, it went like stink and whatever police department had sold in on obviously took *extremely* good care of it as he beat the snot out of it and it never whimpered .
Only the AC was kaput and back then we didn’t care being young & skinny .
I hated anything MoPar with a loop bumper back then but IMO, the were damn good cars .
IIRC the C.H.P. ran these too, I’m sure the low price nailed the contract bid .
This one looks like it’s $5,995., unless it’s rusty or has other defects I feel this is a bargain for a fun hobby car that can be driven anywhere and won’t break the bank fixing the AC either .
-Nate
Did anyone have a clue how to make an intermediate sedan look good? The coupes looked like princes, but the sedans looked like toads. The Torino coupe is a bloated catfish with bulging fenders and a chin-height rear bumper. Long hood. Sheesh – it looked out of proportion. The Chevelle looked better, but honestly, that C pillar doesn’t even try to fit on that sedan. Did stylists hate straight lines back then? Did everything have to have bulging rear fender swoops?
Then there’s this car. The fusilage look was passable on a 5000 pound full sizer, but on an intermediate that attempted to ape the coupe? YUK.
Looking back into the Old Car Brochures website and you look up the Valiant sedans – and all you end up getting are COUPES. There might be a small shot of the four door sedan sitting back in the shuffle, but OBVIOUSLY, the Big Three thought that their simple boxy sedans were embarrassments. The focus is almost entirely on coupes.
So Detroit made attractive coupes, and then tossed the keys to the B Team to draw up a Quazimodo for the four door sedan versions. Honestly, I can’t see why Detroit was so caught unaware of the forthcoming formal sedan look within a generation. All those schmoes seemed to want to style were little Mustangs.
Best looking six seater small sedan in 1972?
IMHO the ’71 Satellite 2-door is a stunning car…the wrap around front chrome bumper and fuselage styling just does it for me like very few cars can. Lots of gorgeous Mopars from this era, but tell me I can pick one vintage Mopar to daily drive, this would be it.