I love Fuselage Mopars. Pretty much all of them, as a matter of fact. And while there are highs and lows in Fuselage-land (high: 1970 Three Hundred convertible; low: 1969 Plymouth Fury I), I can find some love for all of these fine 1969-73 Highland Park land yachts. I especially liked this black over silver 1969 Monaco when it appeared on eBay last year. Great car, great lines, and wow! What a color combination!
The über-swoopy 1969 full-size Chrysler Corporation products were quite a departure from the more squared-off yet equally attractive 1965-68 models. While you can see some of the 1965-68 GM full-size line in the Fuselages, I am of the opinion that they have a look all their own, and that look is fine indeed. Particularly on the two-door hardtops, four-door hardtops, and convertibles.
The top-drawer model over at the Dodge Boys’ home base was the Monaco–itself introduced in 1965 as a top-of-the-line hardtop coupe, meant to compete with other specialty coupes such as the Pontiac Grand Prix. But by 1969, a full-range of Monacos was available–even an attractive Di-Noc clad wagon. But the real looker was still the coupe.
One interesting fact about the 1969 Fuselage cars: About halfway into the model year, dealers apparently wanted some more chrome, so chrome caps were added above the bumper–a preview of the “loop” bumpers that would be ushered in for the 1970 model year, perhaps? Apparently it placated dealers, but the overall effect seems more J.C. Whitney-ish to me. Regardless, the tacked-on chrome still can’t change my love for this fine example. But wait! What’s that round thing in the grille?!
That, my friends, is the “Super Lite!” Mounted on the driver’s side of the grille, the quartz-iodide lamp provided near the same illumination as the high beams, but without blinding oncoming traffic. Co-developed between Sylvania and Chrysler Corporation, it was not exactly a rousing success. It remained available for MY 1970, then quietly disappeared from the option list.
And while the exteriors of the Fuselage Dodges was remarkably attractive, the interiors were pretty appealing in their own right. I love the late ’60s/early ’70s Mopar instrument panels! So well-organized, yet still good-looking. I love all the rocker switches, with the name for each switch printed on the woodgrain trim panel. Also, please note the alternator and temperature gauges–a Highland Park Unique Selling Point, in an era when many GM and Ford competitors had only a speedometer and a gas gauge. Cool!
And I have to put in a plug for that silver interior! I didn’t even know a silver interior choice was available on these cars, but it looks stunning with the black paint and black vinyl top. Other than this car and the Silver Luxury Group Continental Mark IVs, what other cars offered a silver interior?
And just look at that dash pad! Mint–just like the rest of this amazing car.
Considering the Monaco was the top of the line Dodge, that door panel looks a little plain–no carpet on the lower edge, and no full-length armrest? It does have power windows though–and look Zackman, the rear windows go down too! Excellent.
Once common, now a rarity, and completely unavailable on anything but full-size pickup trucks in 2014: The humble bench seat. I love bench seats for their stretch-out room. I can occasionally be found driving my Town Car with my right arm draped over the leather bench, driving with just my left hand. So comfy–driving your living room around, indeed!
I also love the delta-shaped taillights, a Dodge feature starting with the 1965 full-size models. Though increasingly less obvious over the years and restylings, they remained an identifying characteristic through 1971. In 1972, a full-width checkerboard taillight replaced it.
The 1969 Dodges are my favorite of the Fuselage Era Dodge Boys offerings. The 1970, while still a beauty, is just slightly less attractive than the ’69. Ironically, I prefer the loop-bumper 1970 Plymouths to the rather plain 1969 Furys I, II and III. Though I will make an exception for the ’69 Sport Fury and VIP versions!
So, what did it go for? I don’t know. I regularly sneak through eBay Motors, looking for cool stuff, but I usually save the pictures of the real wowsers and never follow up with what they sold for–if they sold at all. I hope whoever won this beautiful Monaco appreciates her. She’s a fine Fuselage!
A little big for me, but still a coupe. We need more coupes!
+1 Tom’s found a fuselage car I like
Aw, c’mon, Gem. 🙂
It is nice,definitely more attractive than a Lincoln or Cadillac.I also liked a fuselage Plymouth woody with hidden headlights
So much overhang, so little interior.
The size of that trunk(boot) would make it a great car for a gangster or serial killer
Really nice! A fuselage body doesn’t get any better looking than this, and I’ve been admiring them for 46 years.
That frontal styling started to show on Australian Chrysler’s in the mid 1970’s, but we never had anything this H U G E in Australia!
Want to make a bet?
Yep, we didn’t get the two door, but the 70-73 (IIRC) Dodge Phoenix was a full-sized Fuselage CKD’d in oz.
IIRC ’72 was the last year, with the Dodge Phoenix 400 (rebadged Plymouth Fury). Supposedly they were going to sell a final 400 sedans and 400 hardtops, but I don’t know whether they did. The market for American biggies was just about dead by then.
Great find – a real beauty – that coupe style has got to be rare. As a teenager in the 60s, I saw that front face more than a few times – on both local and State Police cruisers……with 440 Magnums under the hood…….
And located in my own back yard!
I love Fuselage Mopars as well. Thanks Tom.
Of all the fuselages, for me, in many ways, the 69’s were the best expression of the design. The bodysides/grills/taillamps all seemed to exhibit the marks of their divisions without being overly fussy, as happened in later years. (Although I’d never seen the extra chrome grill surround shown on this model–seems like it’s overkill.)
I love this coupe, but actually find the 4-door hardtop the most attractive. The coupe really seems to emphasis the tail’s length far more than the 4 door hardtop.
A family friend had one of these in that medium avocado green/dark avocado green roof that was popular at the time, and despite the description, it was an attractive color combo. Regardless of the color, you noticed how the real wheels seemed inset into the body. (This was corrected in 1970 or 1971 by widening the rear track.)
Inside there were a number of things that made it different. The impact of ford’s “front room” dash is in full effect here with every square inch of space clustered around the driver to leave the open knee room for the passenger(s). Because of the desire for smooth space, air conditioning vents were mounted in the lower part of the dash, not on top. And prior to ignition interlocks, the ignition key was mounted on the driver’s left side–a change of convention.
Don’t remember if it’s on this car, or was on the neighbors New Yorker, but the dash wasn’t backlit–it was floodlit , so at night the dash and gauges had a remarkably uniform glow.
This car had the optional vent windows, manually operated by cranks trimed in a combination of bright chrome (edges) and satin chrome pebble finish (big part of the crank), bisected by an x-design that that quartered the crank body. I don’t know if power vents were available that year on any Chrysler big bodies…even Imperials. And the same bright/pebble finish was used on the interior door latch releases.
This car also had the optional power door locks. The little square by the door’s lock button didn’t depress–it slid up and down, following the door panel’s contours.
Chrysler always considered itself “different”, and it’s detailing made these cars stand out from other manufacturers. This car was a great find!
When I was a kid growing up, the neighbor across the street was the service manager for a Chrysler-Plymouth dealer, and he got a new Fury every year. I remember, even at the age of 8, thinking how weird and old fashioned the car seemed, compared to our ’69 Galaxie. The first thing I noticed was the lack of headrests, and the presence of vent windows. Headrests were an option on early ’69 Mopars built before Jan 1. And that left hand ignition switch. I remembered Ford hadn’t done that since 1963, except for Fairlanes. The only way you could get a ’69 C-body without vent windows was by getting a 2-door hardtop with AC. All others had them. And power vents were definitely available, at least on Chryslers. Re the power locks, I thought the little chrome square simply signified the presence of the option, not acting as a switch. The locks themselves were operated by pulling and pushing the plunger AFIR.
You are right – the little square button said “electric door locks” and simply designated the presence of this option. Pulling up, or pushing down on the lock plunger on either front door locked or unlocked the doors. The identifying button though, was stationary.
Mr. Bill
I agree that the 69s really stand out. Your comment about the flood lighting of the dash reminds me of the 72 Newport owned by a friend’s family. I couldn’t believe it the first time I rode in the car at night. It seemed so cheap to me compared to the backlit instruments in every other car I had ever been in.
The flood lit dashboard always seemed cheap to me as well. And this from the company that brought us Astra Dome, perhaps the most beautiful instrument lighting system ever.
The ’69s run a close second for me; I prefer the ’70 and ’71 Furies and the ’70, ’71 and ’72 Dodges (with their loop bumpers, I consider them interchangeably). They look look quite as clean as the ’69s, but they’re dramatic and match the statement made by the rest of the car more effectively. My absolute favorite would have to be the 1970 Sport Fury four-door hard top–it’s got the gigantic muscle car look down perfectly and doesn’t suffer from any fussy rear end styling like some Fuselage varieties. The Chryslers are also good looking, but they aren’t quite as casual and youthful looking.
I like the 1970-71 Plymouth Fury too. Bonus point if we got the Sport Fury hidden headlights or the more rarer 1970½ Fury Gran Coupe who was the Fury I 2-door sedan with the hidden headlights of the Sport Fury then I mentionned elsewhere on Curbside Classic. Others models to mention are the Sport Fury GT and S-23 and at Chrysler, the 300 Hurst.
I even tried to imagine what if DeSoto was still around during the Fuselage era and I sketched a “phantom” 1970 DeSoto Adventurer then I posted on Deviantart. ^_^;;
I had a 1979 Fury Gran Coupe. What a wonderful cruiser that car was. The hidden headlights made the front look so much more elegant.
Very nice looking in that color combination! There used to be an identical yellow 1970 Fury sedan around north Seattle. Last seen around 1995. I remember the back left window was gone and taped over with duct tape, and it had a lot of character dents. . .it probably ended up going to the scrap heap after so many years of service. There was also a blue 1970 Monaco for sale out in front of the Lynwood K-Mart, and I remember it had the Super Lite option but a lot of rust in the back window ledge. . . both very attractive cars, nonetheless.
Another rare Fury variant, was one made by regional dealers who did their own package. Like the Snapper, thinking then having a counterpart of the Road Runner for the C-body would had helped the Fury.
It was mentionned there http://cbodydrydock.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?47846 and the only proof then the Snapper existed was this vintage newspaper ad.
http://newspapers.rawson.lib.mi.us/chronicle/CCC_1969%20%28E%29/issues/03-20-1969_10.pdf
Love the 70 Plymouth – for me, it’s the best Plymouth of the fuselage era. I’d go with either the 69s or 70s for Chrysler – although the best would be a 300 with a 69 grille and 70 taillights. Ditto 69 or 70 for Imperial. Dodge is the one I struggle with the most, but I again, I’d go with the 70 in the end.
The “J.C.Whitney” grille surrounds were a response to GM’s loop bumpers on the ’69 Chevys and Pontiacs. The 69 Plymouth and Dodge were originally to have loop bumpers like the Chrysler and Imperial, but the Chief Engineer over-ruled the designers. Of course, loop bumpers were gone from GM’s full size lineup two years later.
Overall, I agree with Tom’s excellent point that the fuselage design was more original than a copy of GM’s coke-bottle approach. I like to think this was the last time the big three really had a different approach to their full-size cars, with Chrysler going aerodynamic, GM moving to neo-classical, and Ford setting into boxy classicism.
You could be right about how these Mopar power locks work. But, I sure thought the little square was just a plaque that said “Power Locks.” I thought the actual operation was done by pulling or pushing the lock plunger, and that when you did this on either front door, all the locks in the car would follow along.
Since it was the son of the owner, he may have been playing a trick on me–pulling the button down while simultaneously hitting the lock plunger! Kids being kids and all…..
Didn’t Ford, at one point, use the plunger as power lock actuator, too? Or is my thinking still foggy?
You remember correctly. My father’s 72 Mark IV had oversized lock plungers on the doors that said “Power Lock” on the top. You locked and unlocked the doors by pushing or pulling on a lock plunger. “Just like a non-power lock car” is what I thought at the time, only it would unlock 2 doors instead of just one. I liked the armrest button everyone else used so much better.
You are correct. The plate’s only function was to announce the car had power locks. My folks had them in our ’70 Fury III, ’72 Coronet Crestwood and ’73 Fury III. Can’t remember if they were still using them on my dad’s ’76 Fury Salon.
I was a fuselage child.
Look at that dash!
” 69 Monacco Heavy, you are cleared for take-off…”
Add a bunch of chrome and that dash would be right at home in a ’59 Dodge. The other ’69 Fuselage cars interiors seemed to look much more contemporary.
Astonished to see no AC! Do you remember where this was from, Tom?
This thing just screams Saskatchewan farmer’s dream car.
It has a Manitoba license plate.
Pretty freaking cool. Did the eBay listing say what powered this fuselage bodied beast?
Most likely a 383 2bbl. I believe it was the standard engine for this car.
I’d drive that, but it wouldn’t fit in the garage!
I love it. It’s funny how uncommon these were. It seemed like Furies and Newports were fairly common, but big Dodges (particularly Monacos) were fairly rare. Especially highly trimmed cars like this one.
I always thought that interior color was more gold than silver. And you are right about those plain door panels, they really added to the cheap aura that these fuseys seemed to emit.
How have I never seen or noticed that chromed front end trim that’s on this car?
The big Dodges never really recovered from the 1962 downsizing fiasco. Even with the debut of the very attractive, C-body Dodge for 1965, I don’t believe that sales of the full-size Dodge ever broke the 200,000 barrier for the remainder of the 1960s. Even the full-size Chryslers outsold their Dodge cousins! Dodge was either last, or next-to-last (just ahead of Mercury) in full-size car sales.
Chrysler Corporation produced very odd sales results among Dodge and Plymouth during the 1960s. Even though Dodge was supposed to be the slightly upscale “Pontiac fighter,” it was weakest in the more expensive segments of the market. The big Dodge was easily trounced by the Plymouth Fury. Meanwhile, the Coronet and Dart handily outsold their Plymouth counterparts. The Valiant would not beat the Dart in sales until the Duster debuted for 1970.
The Plymouth Fury sold well, even though it shared a showroom with the full-size Chrysler, which, in Newport trim, wasn’t that much more expensive and carried the more prestigious Chrysler name. Very strange…
The 69-71 Plymouths and Dodges had a different exterior body than the Chrysler & Imperial. There was a kick-up ahead of the C-Pillar where the senior cars were straight, and the integration of the quarter panels and the C-Pillar was smoother.
If you stare at those Chrysler quarters long enough, the reverse hook and long descending quarter panel are an odd echo of Exner’s “chicken wing” fins on his stillborn ’62s.
I see this body and I immediately think Newport, so common were they back when.
Always a Fuselage fan!!!
The mom of my best friend in grammar school drove a ’69 Chrysler Newport 4door. That thing could hold 6 kids in the back seat with room to spare!!
I came across a web page devoted to the fuselage as follows:
http://www.fuselage.de
This is truly a retro head trip!!
Ah ha! This is a Canadian car, no wonder it doesn’t have AC! I just noticed the Manitoba plate, should have seen it earlier. Little known Canuk car fact-This car shares it’s interior sew pattern with the Fury III. The US Monaco is quite different.
Here’s the Fury III interior. This image shows the optional 50-50 seat, but it’s the same otherwise.
No wonder you guys think it’s too plain-It’s a Plymouth interior!
Well that explains that! Did not realize it was a Canadian car with Plymouth interior. Thanks for the info Roger.
But the speedo markings seem to be in miles rather than kms. Or perhaps Canada had not switched to metrification then?
1969 was definitely prior to Canada switching to metric. The transition happened in the mid-late 70’s. Speed limit signs were changed and speedometers in new cars were mandated to be metric starting in 1977.
The Canadian Monaco interior from the brochure.
Contrast this with the US car.
I have to admit, as a fan of these fuselage cars, that choosing between a Dodge or Plymouth would be very difficult. As I have said on here before, when I was in high school one of our driver’s ed cars was a 69 Fury III sedan (white with a blue interior) and I really wanted to get behind the wheel of that car. Yet I always wound up driving the other driver’s ed car…a Ford Galaxie 500. Since my folks owned Fords and the newest Plymouth in my extended family was a maiden aunt’s 64 Savoy 2 door sedan, it would be nearly 4 more years before I drove a new Plymouth.
About this car: window switch location? My Integra had the power door lock switches in about the same location. It only happened once, but my knee hit the “master” lock switch once while delivering pizzas and I got locked out in front of the customer’s house….without the pizza.
No comments on the ignition switch location?
When telling all my Chevy loving friends why Dodges and Plymouths were better cars I always pointed out the fact that you got more than just a speedometer and fuel gauge in the dashboard. I guess Chrysler switched to “idiot lights” in the late 70s?
It didn’t help sales of the “Super Light” that it was considered to be (whether it actually was) illegal in many states. I’ve only ever seen 1 car that had this extra light.
When Detroit “discovered” that vinyl could be tinted nearly any color, interiors in the 60s got quite “exciting”. Available colors were blue (light and dark), red, white, black, parchment, gold, green (light and dark), ox blood/maroon, grey/silver and even 2 tones. The higher the trim line, the better the selection.
What I’ve always found odd is why Ma Mopar offered the Super Lite only on the big Dodges. Typically a new feature like that would show up initially on higher end models.
Klockau, are you trying to push my buttons here? I just said so long to the yacht for the winter, and you tempt me with a cabin cruiser.
I can do without the tacked-on chrome, but whatever – this is a handsome car. I think the pre-’72 Dodges are the best looking fusey two-doors. Make mine a dark orange ’70 with a 383 Magnum, thanks.
There’s another fusey in the pipeline. Whether or not it is like this one remains to be seen.
“[C]ompletely unavailable on anything but full-size pickup trucks in 2014”
Ack-shu-al-ly, bench seats are still available on 2015 Tahoes/Suburbans/Yukons, but only as a $250 option on the lowest trim levels, and it’s mostly there to advertise 9-passenger seating (so good luck finding one in real life). And no, it’s not a “real” bench, it’s two bucket seats with a middle seat/flip-down console, which IMO is better than a true bench anyway. The 95% of the time when you’re not carrying 3 abreast, you’ll appreciate having an armrest and/or storage compartment. The last “real” one-piece bench seat, I think, was the ’06 Toyota Tundra, and even that had a ittle fold-out armrest. The last bench seat to be completely one piece, no accoutrements, was in the 2004 F-150 Heritage Edition.
OK OK, but I tend to lump those in as “trucks” too. 😉
I had a feeling that was the case–I just like to parade my useless knowledge at the slightest opportunity. 😛
Count me in as a Fuselage Chrysler lover! It does seem like the C-body Dodges are a lot less common than similar year Chryslers and Plymouths. It’s hard for me to pick my favorite year, as it differs for each brand. ’69 was good across the board, but my I like the ’70 and ’71 Plymouths the best. 1973 was just a disaster for all the big Fuselages, as the blockier front-end styling made them look about a ton heavier.
Very nice! The ’69 Monaco/Polara is one of my favorite fusey-era C-bodies. One reason is that the body has a hint of Coke-bottle shape to it, while most fuseys are more plain in the side profile.
I also prefer the ’69 Dodge front end to the ’70 loop bumper restyle, though I prefer the 1970 Plymouth Fury loop bumper to the ’69 Fury front end. Even the regular ’70 Fury without hidden headlights looks good to me.
I don’t remember seeing one of these with the chrome cap on the front. I’ll have to keep my eye out for one at car shows.
Agree with you on the Dodge front ends, but disagree on the Plymouth – I consider the 69 Plymouth as the best of the breed. I would argue that from 1969-73, both Plymouth and Dodge got incrementally uglier in the front each year of the fuselage, with a fairly substantial leap in 1972. The Chrysler and Imperial were the only ones that kept the front ends attractive to the end of the breed.
I find the ’72 Fury and ’72-73 Monaco front ends are particularly bizarre. Styled after the 1970 Dodge Coronet and the 1st gen Olds Toronado?
Ha! And the 72 Polara seems to have been inspired by Droopy Dog. 🙂
Seewhattamean?
Our next-door neighbors were Mopar loyalists, and they bought a 1972 Dodge Polara four-door sedan in gold with a black vinyl roof. Even then I thought was the homeliest new car I’d ever seen!
At least their next car was the one of first 1977 Chrysler LeBarons in town. It was a full-brougham sedan in metallic navy blue with a light gray vinyl roof.
And the ’73 Polara seems to have been inspired by the ’70 big Chevy’s 😀 .
I quite like the ’72-’73 Monaco design. Odd, yes, but in an attractive way. But then again I’m a sucker for hidden headlamps.
I always thought the 1973 Dodge Polara’s headlight , bumper and turn signal design resembled a 1971 Oldsmobile Delta 88 without the split grille (and the addition of Mopar bumper guards).
Me too. It was really quite clever.
The pinnacle of police squad cars in the US had to be the ’69 California Highway Patrol Dodge. “The 1969 Polara was the fastest police car ever tested by the CHP, until beaten by the Camaro in the 1990s, 25 years later”. The fuselage body had to be at least a little more aerodynamic than the boxy ’68, adding something to the top speed.
http://www.allpar.com/squads/history.html
Scroll about 1/3 down the page for the ’69.
I like it, but that “super light”completely ruins the appearence of what otherwise would be a nice looking front end clip. Get rid of it, and I`ll buy it. Nice color combo, probably somewhat unusual. I`m shocked that this car appears not to have air conditioning.
The fuselage Chryslers are currently number two on my Powerball list. I actually prefer the looks of the four door hardtops on these even though I would typically rather have a two door model. Ideally my fuselage would be fully loaded, including the 440 V8; few things are better for the open road than the effortless torque of a big inch V8.
Thanks for this article Tom; here I was thinking I was in a tiny minority loving these modernist kitsch cars.
You are not alone. The Fuselage Truth is out there!
Amen
Shh! The (white)walls have ears!
These cars were fairly rare even when new. My grandmother’s neighbors had a Polara hardtop sedan in avocado green with a dark green vinyl roof. They used it to pull their travel trailer, and kept it until the early 1980s, by which point it was ready for the scrap heap.
Was the extra chrome on the front standard? I thought it was rushed into production as a mid-year option in response to complaints that the front looked too plain. Similar complaints were voiced about that year’s Fury.
As NorthShoreRltr noted, the rear wheels on this car are tucked in too far. At one of the Chryslers at Carlisle shows I watched one of these drive down a hill, and the tucked-in rear wheels were very noticeable.
The 1969 fuselage cars are fascinating, both as cars and for what they represent. These were supposed to signal that Chrysler had fully recovered from the disastrous years of the early 1960s. I read an interview with Lynn Townsend in a major monthly magazine (it may have been Esquire) at that time where he stated that his goal with the 1969 full-size cars was to get the Plymouth Fury much closer to the sales level of the full-size Chevrolets and Fords.
In retrospect, these cars mark the beginning of the end for Lynn Townsend. After Chrysler claimed a very healthy 18.9 percent of the market for 1968, and wowed everyone with the stunning Dodge Charger and very clever Plymouth Road Runner, everyone initially expected that these cars would continue Townsend’s string of triumphs. Unfortunately, there were complaints about lousy build quality, unattractive trim and the previously mentioned narrow rear track. I’ve read that, by February 1969, Chrysler had over 480,000 cars stored in the sales bank, and the dealers were complaining about customer response to the new C-bodies.
These cars also ran into the same trouble that Chrysler’s 1971 intermediates would face. Namely, they debuted with a very swoopy body style just as the market was showing its preference for more “formal” styling. The next generation of Chrysler’s full-size cars were back to aping GM (particularly the Dodge and the Plymouth), with even more dismal sales results.
Excellent points. I have read that even though sales remained high in 1968, the market was deteriorating that year and Chrysler’s zone reps were having to work harder and harder to keep sales numbers up to dealers. There was lots of channel stuffing, and I think that high market share was partly due to Chrysler keeping high pressure on dealers to take and sell cars while the competition was slowing output a bit in the face of a softening new car market.
Chrysler seems to have hit a high point in its general health in 1965-66, but struggled to keep volume ever increasing the way Townsend wanted it thereafter. You can tell that Chrysler cut a lot of cost out of the interiors of these – the door panels in particular bear this out.
It did not help these cars that they had a subjective feel to them that made them feel substantially cheaper and more poorly made compared with what was coming out of Ford and GM. Chrysler built a lot of bad ones for 1969, but even the good ones had a cheap and chintzy feel to them. The GM and Ford cars felt so much more substantial. As a kid, I did not like these at all, and I don’t think I was alone.
These cars did seem “cheap” compared to their GM and Ford competition. I remember that, for a fair number of people I knew during this time, a fuselage Mopar was their last Mopar. Most of them moved over to GM – particularly Buick or Oldsmobile.
The cheapness really shows in that interior, which looks like an Impala, not even a Caprice. A coworker had a fuselage Imperial, and the plain interior compared to a Cadillac was even more obvious. That said, I personally like the fuselage cars, but I’m a Brougham hater. A friend’s Newport, while not even close to a Buick in luxury, was an honest, huge American cruiser, with almost limousine-like rear seat room.
I was a big fan of the MoPar fuselages when they came out. They looked like a major advance on the rather blocky 1968 full size Chrysler products. In those years it seemed like Chrysler’s major redesigns would be at their best in the year of introduction, with subsequent years “updated” by hanging junk and doodads on the original, clean design.
As much as I liked the full-size fuselages, I have owned only one, and that because it was cheap: a 1972 Dodge Polara, an ex-police car. It started and ran well once I replaced the choke pulloff vacuum diaphragm, and if I kept my foot in two-barrel territory, it was reasonable on fuel for such a large car (it felt like it had more room in the rear than my Dad’s 1971 Cadillac). It went like stink when pushed, as one would expect, averaging nearly 90mph one day from San Francisco to Davis, CA…including the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, which with its then-55mph speed limit was taken at only 65 because of the high probability of encountering a big Dodge of “official” status. Probably I didn’t get reported by other motorists because they assumed I was an official something-or-other. Not many civilians had 1972 Dodge Polaras with no trim on the side.
The 1972 Polara was, typical of later-year Chrysler designs of each generation, junked up. It didn’t even have an unadulterated loop bumper, as had been on the 1970 and 1971, contributing a jutting-jaw look to the front. Instead, what it had was rather ugly: one headlight on each side was within the loop, while the other was in a widened “surround.” A half-hearted skeg crease cluttered the side…and it swept up and vanished before reaching the rear wheel cutout.
If I were to have bought an ex-police car by choice at the time, it would have been a 1969 Dodge Polara, legendary as the fastest patrol car operated by the California Highway Patrol until its 5.0L Ford Mustang. But my 1972 Polara was among those with power steering; the 1969s were all manual; the CHP didn’t go to power steering until 1973. Later, as a sort of tribute, I did buy a retired patrol car from the CHP…the 1978 Dodge Monaco, the last with the 440 engine. And it was a fuselage-body, too, the small version introduced in 1971, even with its squared-off front clip…the last Chrysler fuselage, as the full-size fuselages ended in 1973 and the Plymouth Duster/Dodge Demon in 1976.
I spotted another one Fuselage oddity from overseas. Besides the Plymouth Fury sold as Dodge Phoenix in Australia. The Dodge Monaco/Polara was also sold as the Chrysler 383 in South Africa. http://www.maamc.co.za/1973_Chrysler_383.html
I heard there was some 1974 South African Fuselage Chrysler 383 made, probably from leftover parts of the 1973 model.
Yeah, the Lynn Townsend era of ‘just copying GM’s cars from two years ago will be good enough’ was quickly drawing to a close. Thanks to the shock of exponential increases in the price of oil, the auto industry was getting ready to go through a major downsizing binge and Chrysler simply wasn’t going to be able to change quickly enough. While the purse strings were tight, even worse was that hoary old specter of the 1962 downsizing debacle hanging over the company. Chrysler nearly went under the last time they tried downsizing and they weren’t about to go through that, again. Unfortunately, this time, it would have been the right thing to do.
It was into this world that the Fuselage Era was born. It would be the last hurrah from Chrysler for the next decade (particularly the convertibles and four-doors) until the Iacocca years would see a complete transformation of the company.
What a remarkably preserved car! Very uncommonly seen today–I can only recall seeing two fuselage Chryslers in the past several years. And true time capsule condition! The black over silver is very cool too.
As to what else came with a silver interior…the only other one I can think of is an ’80 Corvette a friend’s father had restored. Black over silver leather. I didn’t see the car in its “before” state so I suppose he could have changed the color himself, but it all certainly seemed to match.
I just looked up the color and trim book on the Hamtramck Registry website. Chrysler called this interior gold. I think the photos posted on the Bay might make these seats look a little less gold and a little more silver than they really are. Whatever, I always thought this was a really unique and attractive interior color when these were out.
http://www.hamtramck-historical.com/dealerships/1969ColorAndTrim-05.shtml
I don’t know if it is in the book (maybe a spring special option or something) but the previous owner of the car referred to the interior as pewter. He was involved with the various C-body sites 5-10 years ago, and sent me some parts for my ’65 300.
The various trims and tweaks on the fuselage cars definitely made or broke them. I’ve long thought that the ’69 Monaco was among the best of the ’69 editions, probably alongside the Imperial. An example of how that changed, the ’70 Imperial lost its fender skirts for a year, suffered a few other tweaks, and was the least attractive of the fuselage Imperials – and sales plummeted for the ’70 Imperial. The best selling fuselage Monaco was the ’72, which picked up a controversial, but unique, concealed headlight front end treatment.
Like others have said, the added chrome fender caps and hood lip are a bit much. The ’69 fuselage cars were accused of looking and feeling too cheap, and I’m not surprised to hear that a mid year attempt was made to jazz them up.
It’s really a shame that the these Monaco coupes are so rare. A total of 3522 were built. A loaded (but for AC) Canadian edition with desirable colors and in top condition like this is really a one-of-a-kind car. I’m glad Tom found it and shared it, there is not much risk of a repeat on this one.
This reminds me of something I’ve noticed of late: What on earth has become of cornering lights? Cadillac introduced them in 1962, and they gradually spread down into mid-priced, mid-sized cars (our 1993 Mercury Sable had them as standard equipment), and they were of real benefit in making turns on dark streets. I see that these Dodges had them as optional equipment.
So what’s happened to them? I don’t see anything being made anymore that has them, not even Cadillacs. What gives?
If everyone expects a car to have a gazillion airbags, internet connectivity, climate control, panel gaps that would shame an early 1990s Benz and the ability to go 0-60 mph in less than 10 seconds while still getting at least 25 mpg, something has to give….
They’re not entirely gone: some cars (I know BMWs do this) use a fog light as a cornering light: when you put on the turn signal, the same-side fog light illuminates.
The coverage isn’t as good as a proper cornering light, but it helps. And it’s probably the only way a front fog light can be put to good use. (Am I the only one who thinks they’re a total waste of money?)
The really funny part is when people turn their fog lights on in the daytime. “Look at me! My car has fog lights! Aren’t I fancy?”
I’ve had only one car with cornering lights and strangely enough it was a top of the line 1996 Nissan Altima GLE with leather, auto A/C, every option in the book – and they were standard on that model. Later Nissan de-contented the Altima and one feature that disappeared was these lights. Maxima also had them at this time but they were gone when I bought a new one in 99. I loved those cornering lights! The way they illuminated a driveway as you turned in was wonderful. It is a feature I would like to see return.
That’s the second Super Lite I’ve ever seen- Back in my high school years (1976-79), a Monaco that was parked along a side street in Broomfield, Colorado mounted one as well.
My school bus drove past the car every day, and having read about the Super Lite in one of my Dad’s archived enthusiast magazines, I always made note of it.
Fine example, although I would have preferred a more-door model. Thanks for clarifying that ‘extra chrome above the grill thing’ I always wondered about that, seeing some with, some without.
I bleed Ford blue but that doesn’t mean I don’t like other cars. I just so happen to like the big C body Mopars from 1965-1973. As to which line it varies from year to year although the 72-73 Furies are dead last. The 69 Polara and Monaco are very nice looking cars and also very hard to find in half way decent condition. So I settled for a 73 Polara Custom 4dr. hardtop since it does have the silhouette I like even though the front is a little too bold. Given that it is a rare Spring Special it does have a “unique” interior. Driving it on the freeway is like a shark swimming among the little fishes.
Glad to see I’m not alone in my Fuselage love 🙂 ! Alas, I’ve only had two ever, a ’73 Polara wagon (which broke in two at the cowl 🙁 ) and a ’73 Monaco wagon. Both were bought cheap in my high school years way back when
Looks like you might be able to get more people into the trunk than the interior. A friend of mine used to own a 1976 Lincoln Continental Mark V. It was of course a huge car, but I couldn’t believe how little room there was inside. It was downright cramped. The trunk was huge, but a lot of space was wasted under the hood. About 2′ of empty space if I remember correctly. It was triple white, and a real beauty. Last of the full sized Marks.
Actually I would say it is the other way around with Fusies. There is a lot of leg room, front and back in the car. The issue with the trunk is that the base is the fuel tank and consequently it is shallow. Contrast this with my 67 Park Lane, fuel tank forward as Ford did, the trunk is very deep.
Very nice! I remember the Super Light back in the day, not many were sold with that option.
I found the hubcap for one of these years ago and I still have it. It is amazingly heavy!
Wow, I’m not well-versed in the lesser-known Fusies, so a ’69 Monaco is a totally foreign car to me, but I’m really digging this one! It’s got just the right amount of “mean” with a hint of “classy”; always a great combination. This look from the factory is making me think of what all the lame “Pro-Touring” resto-mods aspire to be, but can never quite achieve. I love the wheels, color, the taillights and the interesting interior colors. Lose that dealer add-on chrome ticky-tacky and it’d be 100% perfect.
From the comments and some pics, I gather that the inside was actually pretty chintzy… but the condition and options seen here seem to mask that fact well enough. 1969 was a terrible year for dashboard enthusiasts, and this isn’t the most exciting design, however I like that it’s mostly simple with all of the detailing focused towards the driver. The horn ring dresses up the wheel nicely – it’d probably look way cheapo without it, and the silver/gold color is interesting and appealing enough to draw your attention away from the flaws.
Really cool… I’m sure it’s not the norm for these cars, but it should have been.
While the appointments look like nothing special they seem to hold up fine. What doesn’t hold up fine in these cars are the headliner and the textured plastic used for the sail panels, along the outside edge of the headliner, and the pillar between the two doors. The textured pieces just fall right off leaving the smooth base layer.
I bet Jimmy Hoffa is buried in one of these cars. You could stuff his body in the trunk and still have room for a full sized spare and a bag of golf clubs or a week’s worth of groceries. And Jimmy was pretty good sized hisself.
And why does everybody keep looking for Jimmy in the Lower 48? I bet his buddies took him north into Canada and parked him and the car in the woods somewhere.
I just don’t get these cars.
Always loved all of these guys, even the station wagons. With their concave backlites, integrated air deflectors and bumper steps they were pretty much my favorite wagons of the day no matter which make. GM had their clamshells but Mopars had dual air conditioning with an exclusive unit in the rear if so ordered. I saw what apparently started out as a Town & Country with a 300 front clip grafted on and painted a cool dark burgundy coming out of the Mopar Nationals in Columbus OH a couple of years ago. Wasn’t sure about that one as it first approached from behind but as it went by it was ‘Oh Yeah, love that one too’. Another fave were the Fury Gran Coupes and Gran Sedans with the matching Paisley tops and interiors. Imperials also had an available paisley top in burgundy but the pattern proved to be a bit fragile in the sun and most were replaced at the dealers before ever leaving the lot. I wonder if I’m the only one who has noticed that Chrysler often jazzed up their cheapest cars with wild paint colors, like the hemi orange Valiant in the movie ‘Duel’. My Dad had a company provided ’70 Fury I four door sedan painted a crazy metallic electric blue (I loved it, Mom hated it) which I have not found in any advertising materials or paint chip sets and it was certainly not uncommon. I remember seeing a number of Fury Is just like his but no other models above that trim level that color.
Fuseys look MUCH better without the droopy rear fender. And those wheels are pretty spiffy. Nice find!