(first posted 10/8/2014) This past weekend, as most of you have read, was a rather fun-filled affair; not only did I get to meet a large handful of our readers and writers at our Heartland Meet-Up, I was given a renewed appreciation for CC’s sense of community. I left Auburn, Indiana feeling quite lucky and decided to take the long way home through Northeast Indiana. I somehow got a bit lost as I made my way through Decatur, and as fate would have it, it was not without reason. I was apparently too busy stopping every few miles (I kid you not) after getting off I-69 to snap pictures of cars I just don’t see in Bloomington, IN or Columbus, OH to stay on the right path. You see, the corollary to the area’s sense of lost prosperity is a huge number of antiques, automotive or otherwise, and this C-body is just one of several cars I managed to capture. As it turns out, however, my encounter with it was less than what was by then becoming routine.
The owner found me taking pictures and said hello seemingly out of nowhere, startling me in the process. I hurriedly and awkwardly stated the reasons for my interest in the car; I often expect people will be suspicious or even angry when they see me snapping pictures which in turn makes me nervous, and my delivery was far from graceful. But Eddie, the manager of the O’Reilly’s Auto Parts where this car was parked, was far from suspicious and totally got what CC is about. In fact, he immediately offered to let me–a complete stranger–take Big Brown here for a spin. Naturally and perhaps foolishly, I suppressed the fear that I might end up in fifty little pieces in a box somewhere, and took him up on the offer.
It was the right choice; among other final generation C-bodies which get dailied, this has to be one of the better examples from which one could get a first-hand impression. Mothballed in 1995, it was purchased last year from the woman in whose barn it was sitting.
I believe Eddie paid $1900 for it, and has since put 4,000 miles on it for a grand total of 128,000. It had been used extensively to tow, which Eddie says explains the road wheels (which he says wear 10mm wider tires and, in my opinion, are more attractive).
Initial impressions of the car (and that’s all I got, I had to continue on my way home and had already spent a good thirty minutes shooting other cars) were surprising. I’ll admit to limited experience with the landyacht–very limited. Other than my great uncle’s 1984 Town Car, my main exposure has been through rides in taxis and, unfortunately, a cop car or two; outside of that, GM’s H-bodies are the closest I’ve gotten. I’d argue that the front-drive GM full-sizers offered the smoothest and most isolated experience for the passenger. From my perspective as a driver, while the Chrysler felt very heavy, it was not as soft as I’d expected. Control efforts were also quite reasonable; I’ve felt lighter steering in boosted systems from Toyota’s 1980s sedans.
Body lean was evident, but no more than in, say, a Mercedes W123. Unlike those cars, all the roll stiffness seems to come from the front end; this car is a resolute understeerer and must have an enormous anti-roll bar, which is expected. Please understand that in my comparison to a Mercedes, I’m not calling this famously porky Chrysler nimble or balanced, I just expected a lot more isolation, creaking and numbness. If someone were so motivated, it seems this would be a good platform for modifications; all it really needs is more power and a firmer suspension to truly feel capable and those seem like attainable changes. This is a big, heavy car, but subjective impressions were of solidity and substance, not paunch and flex.
It would make sense, then, that Eddie gets offers from demo derby teams to purchase the car, which was still built with the famous K-member in 1976. Naturally, he tells them to take a hike; he loves his Mopars and that includes this car. His others are a ’72 Duster with a 360 under the hood which he keeps in the garage and a Dakota. As this Chrysler hasn’t escaped the tin worm, though, there’s no reason not to just drive it daily. I’d want Sure-Grip in the winter, and as this car was mostly loaded and once used to tow, I’m inclined to think the limited slip is included.
The air conditioning works, as do all assists bar the antenna and headlight covers, and all four window motors were replaced within the past year. They work with the quick, quiet action I expect in a land yacht and which I have always been denied in my older Hondas, which often have terribly slow windows. After adjusting the six-way seat and tilting, telescoping steering wheel, I was actually quite comfortable. Unlike in my beloved H-body Buicks, this Chrysler’s seat was firm enough to support my 170 pounds–perhaps the leather was just extra stiff after nearly forty years.
As for material quality, I’ll refrain from commenting decisively. Suffice it to say, it was on par with the first-generation minivans which, given what followed, seems good enough in retrospect. The seatbelts retracted a lot more smoothly than the ones in my Civic, which must be fed into their reels in front–they haven’t aged well and Honda refuses to help, despite a transferable lifetime warranty on those parts.
Riding in a true hardtop is a magnificent experience; while my favorite Chrysler C-bodies based on exterior styling have to be the six-window “town sedans” of 1965 and 1966, the ability to turn your head to an unobstructed side view is truly special. Hardtop design is a nuance lost on the majority of the public; industrial design would be taught to school children alongside art in an ideal world.
The interiors of these final C-bodies is more tinsel-y than what preceded them, but the overall look is rather truckish. I’m afraid I prefer the Fuselages here and speaking of those cars, we passed by a ’69 Newport on our drive. It was sitting behind a junkyard fence and while I’m sure it’d have been safe to grab pictures, I wasn’t going to take any risks. Eddie says he’ll send me some; we shall see. In any case, the famous full instrumentation worked, including this chronometer. Yes, Chrysler was very proud of this feature, because God knows you want to be aware of every second during a long drive or when running late. Sheesh–how terrible for a neurotic, impatient person like myself, especially in a car which you can’t aggressively weave in and out of slow-witted traffic.
Yes, I can be a very, very cocky driver and to me, the lighter the car, the better as far as that’s concerned. This car would feel a lot lighter with some modifications made to the engine; it accelerated without hesitation, but high compression pistons and a de-smogging would really wake up each of its 440 cubic inches–a step in the right direction for battling dense traffic. And really, wouldn’t a big Brougham which could stand up to a brash driver be badass? As it is, with 5,000 pounds to haul around and tall gearing, 205 horses @3600rpm and 320 lb-ft of torque at 2,000 rpm just aren’t enough; at least the air cleaner hints at the engine’s potential with its orange paint and “440 four barrel” sticker.
At the National Car and Truck Museum in Auburn, a number of us were gawking at the arched exhaust manifolds in the 413 we saw stuffed into a ’62 Polara. This engine’s headers have a similar design, but the bay at least provides enough berth for them not to directly cook the (brand new) master cylinder, unlike the Dodge. I can attest to the firmness of the pedal as well, something else I expected to be softer.
Besides the car itself, it was fun to behold its variety of period trinkets. It’s seemingly been driven everywhere, and has spent extended periods in Texas, Mexico and Chicago. My favorite piece is the Aladdin Shriner logo on the decklid (in the fifth picture down from the top of the page), but these others are also in keeping with the car’s character. It’s far from a rolling casket, despite the stench of death surrounding the automaker who slapped it together. It makes sense that someone who loved life and who loved to drive would’ve purchased and cherished this New Yorker.
I understand most of you will continue to say that the big Fords and GM B/C bodies of the period were better, but this Chrysler nevertheless acquits itself very well. I’ve been in a number of sedans with overlight control inputs and wallowy ride motions, bad traits which failed to manifest themselves here. And given the horror stories I’ve heard apropos Highland Park’s abysmal quality in the day these were built, I saw no glaring faults, nor did I hear any squeaks or rattles. This, in a rather old car with high mileage by ’70s domestic standards. I’ll concede to some disappointment at the lack of isolation, but that’s a worthy tradeoff in light of other merits. I will always choose to drive a manic flyweight, but you might say I’m under the spell of Broughmance at the moment; I can’t help but be a bit promiscuous when it comes to cars.
Of all the CCs I’ve shot, this one may stick with me the most. I was most fortunate to have come across such an enthusiastic, friendly and generous owner. I’d have hung around longer if I had the time and energy, especially since I’m unlikely to come across someone so willing to share for quite a while. This write-up is therefore dedicated to Eddie, whom I hope is reading this and will contribute some pictures and commentary if he’s able. He truly is one of us.
Related reading:
Car Show Classic: 1974 Chrysler Newport – Sorry, Please Play Again
It’s a good thing I was sitting down while reading this!
You’ve also hit upon a key point. No, these biggies didn’t handle great, but they didn’t have the performance characteristics of the Queen Mary, either. It’s good to see you were able to expand your experiences.
Right!
The best thing about this article was the personal feeling and experience of Perry as he felt them. It wasn’t an article about the production numbers, the years produced, or the engineering. It was an article about what it was like to drive a forty year old car which is no longer produced today.
I had completely forgotten how disappointed I was with my dad’s and grandpa’s big Chryslers when it came to ride. I was a kid in the back seat, and I knew from riding around with friends in big GM and Ford products, that they rode like a whisper. Chryslers didn’t do that. Dad drove New Yorkers because the man he admired most, drove Chryslers. As a kid, I didn’t believe they delivered the isolated ride I felt in Oldsmobile, Buick, Mercury or Cadillac. Growing up in Chicago, these were the cars families strove towards. Ramblers, Fords and Chevrolets were what families with little kids drove, with dreams of luxury when Mom stopped having kids.
When I come here I like reading about the facts and the histories, but what I really like when I come here is the personal feelings generated by these curbside classics!
Uh Chrysler? A 1976 Oldsmobile Cutlass called – they want their grille back.
Thank you.
Uh Olds? The ’74 Imperial called… 😉
My understanding is that the quality problem with these was the inconsistency. If you got a good one, it was great, if you got a bad one it was terrible. I suspect that the last 40 years has weeded out most of the bad ones.
Glad to hear you had a fun trip home.
That’s exactly what a “quality problem” is in most, if not all cases, its not that everything comes out “bad”, its that you have no control over whether it comes out “bad” or “good”.
And whether the dealer was interested in correcting the problems. My parents had a 1988 Oldsmobile Delta 88 Royale sedan bought brand-new that had numerous, niggling quality problems. The dealer, however, was terrific in addressing their complaints. They had no problem buying another Oldsmobile when the time came for a new car, and they bought it from that dealer.
Got me on that one, but I was just going by the 1976 pictures. Besides, only the Olds really mattered in retrospect.
Still, I liked these big Chryslers – they did have style even if they were made out of papier mache’. You just can’t beat optional vent windows and that concave scallop on that back door glass!
Exactly right. These C bodies seemed to have a higher batting average than some models built in other plants. My barber and his wife had driven Buicks for eons but bought a NYB 4 door in 76. Metallic blue with white roof and blue leather, they loved it, kept it for years. Replaced it with a Fifth Ave that they didn’t like as well.
Did the 76 New Yorker 440 have the lean burn system? How many miles could these engines go before requiring a major rebuild (assuming good maintenance)? There’s a Black 76 NYB with a red velour interior for sale near me that I’m tempted too buy. ( Also a nice 76 Grand Marquis. Which would you get?)
I don’t think early build ’76s got Lean Burn. Maybe no ’76s did; not positive. I was told this one doesn’t have it and it’s usually written on the air cleaner housing.
Having driven neither…NYB all the way! Though the big 70’s Mercuries do have their own charms, I’d take one of these in black over red in a heartbeat.
It is simple to tell if it has lean burn because of the computer hanging on the side of the air cleaner with a multi wire plug and what looks like a vacuum advance canister with a vacuum line to it. It is not uncommon for this era 440 to burn the valves, I’ve done valve jobs on them as early as 60K when they were worked hard as when they are in motor homes or vehicles that were used for a lot of heavy towing.
Of course I’m a Ford guy so of course people are going to say I’m biased when I say the GM by a mile. However the 460 will long outlast a 440 and that has been proven out time and time again. The big block Ford was installed in medium duty trucks with nothing special done to them and in those applications they will go 2-300K with proper care. The big block Chrysler on the other hand got new heads and a number of other things when they were installed in medium duty trucks and they still didn’t last that long.
All that said the condition and value of course make a huge difference as does which one gives you the biggest smile when you look at it and drive it. For me the cringe every time I turned the key and heared the poor tolerance gears in that starter whine would keep me from enjoying the Chrysler too much.
Thank you Eric for all the great information! The NYB is rust free but has 100,000 miles and likely will need a rebuild soon. The GM is literally a barn find time capsule with 60,000 miles but it has spent decades mostly not being driven.
I like this a lot more than the Lincoln and Cadillac opposition.Thanks for another great read Perry
I always loved these Chryslers, especially the ’78 two door coupe. A big and beautiful hard top, with no padded roof or window vents. I think they looked their best in this form. The four door hard top in the Salon option for ’78 is also really nice.
The two-doors didn’t have vent windows available, but in retrospect one of the best things about this generation is that you could order them on the four-doors, even if they were manually operated.
Absolutely, I agree that the unadorned two-doors look orders of magnitude better than those equipped with the padded roof/opera window.
+1 that’s why I like it more than the Cadillac & Lincoln.Those half vinyl padded roofs look like a bad hairpiece.
Agree. The “St. Regis” vinyl top never worked for me. The car you show is perfect.
Very nice find Perry! Don’t worry, the situation you described in taking pictures of cars and encountering their owners is exactly what happens to me when I’m photographing a car in an open public space. Sometimes I find myself sitting in my car, just mustering the courage to hop out and (quickly) snap up a few photos.
Anyway, as for this New Yorker, it’s a very nice example of a car that’s still being used. You can put me in camp Chrysler for non-downsized full-sizers of the 1970s. I recently took some pictures of a 1975 Newport Custom that’s for sale at a mechanic’s shop up the street from my house. I’m acquainted with the owner (who know’s me from taking pictures of other cars on his lot 🙂 ) and have test driven another one of his old cars before. You’re driving impressions have made me want to go up and take a test drive of the Newport someday.
By the way, what does “Kaua 1354” on the instrument panel mean?
It’s a CB call sign, the one the FCC assigned to you when you purchased your license, not the handle you made up for yourself, which was technically illegal if used without the official number (which nobody ever did after about 1976). Very early ones had 3 letters (always starting with “K”) and 3 numbers. The 4 and 4 combo indicates this was assigned after the big explosion, sometime after C.W. McCall’s “Convoy” hit the charts.
It’s a CB call sign, the one the FCC assigned to you when you purchased your license,
Ayup. Mine was KBDY-somethingsomethingsomethingsomething. Always “had my ears on” when I took the POS Zephyr beyond the city limits. Didn’t trust that thing for beans.
I see the Chrysler still has the trunk mount antenna. Was the CB still inside?
Styling ride. Those headlights look mean. Yes, Perry, you definitely need to own a car like this.
It projects a real air of authority, which is exactly the reason a bad-ass trailer park supervisor would drive one. BTW this is from an earlier season. For those unfamiliar with the show, I would hate to upset the cognoscenti with pics of it’s eventual fate.
“Officer Jim Lahey at your service” *glug glug*
What show is this? He looks like Hunter S. Thompson.
Trailer Park Boys
There could be a series of articles about the cars of the Trailer Park Boys.
This site has made a stab at cataloguing and describing the main cars of Sunnyvale Trailer Park:
http://www.carnewscafe.com/2013/04/02/the-cars-of-trailer-park-boys/
There’s a more thorough collection of photos at imcdb, but no explanatory text:
http://www.imcdb.org/movie_290988-Trailer-Park-Boys.html
And roger628 is correct that CC’ers probably don’t want to see what becomes of Park Supervisor Lahey’s ’76 New Yorker, which began the series in creampuff condition, but ended it as a mangled roofless wreck.
Not to mention the missing hood and passenger door.
I checked out the IMCDB page (never saw the show) and wow, it does end up in quite a sorry state. But the entry notes that the original “cream puff” ’76 was owned by a cast member, and before it started down the road to ruin, the crew found a stand-in ’77 NYB that was nowhere near as nice but the correct color to slowly destroy. So at least the ’76 still survives, though another had to give its life.
Great car! Reminds me of the section in Howard Mohr’s masterpiece “How to Talk Minnesotan,” where trying to maintain conversation about anything besides cars is futile, but even mentioning the word “drive” triggers a two-page monologue on the joys and pitfalls of the subject’s ’70 Newport Special.
What is that device that looks like a telescoping portable
radio antenna mounted just behind the passenger side rear wheelwell that is aiming toward the ground? Some sort of ‘curb feeler’ device?
Yes .
-Nate
Great write-up, thanks!
In general, I was just not really a big Chrysler fan, although there were exceptions, and a few that I really did love. This car, for me, was really about a few details that just really stood out, then and now: the character line along the bottom, that dipped down before it hits the fender skirt; the reverse curve of the trailing edge of the rear door glass; those awesome covered headlights; and those pillow top leather seats. However, I thought the vent windows just always dated the whole look, and as a kid, I just thought wow, Chrysler cars are just old looking. I much preferred the look without, especially on that coupe pictured above. Wow, that’s a stunning car.
At least the vent windows were optional on 4 doors for those who did not like the look. My 77 NYB was without.
Infinitely NO!! VENT windows are HIGHLY DESIRABLE… because they cut out much of the interior wind turbulence without them! I’m so tired of ‘modern’ cars that mess up my hair when I roll the windows down. Lazy people simply turn on the A/C. Pitiful.
And, two-doors?? I HATE all two-door cars. Expecting someone to try to sit in the rear seat of a two-door.. is like inviting someone over to your house… and expecting them to sit in a closet!
And the doors on a two-door are invariably three miles long and four tons in weight! Phooey!
Chrysler was the LAST of the four-door hardtops, and last with (optional-but-very-desirable) vent windows.
And, oh, LEATHER seats!!! Infinitely better than any crummy, ultra-yuck velour!
A very nice survivor here and yes , those old MoPars can be tweaked in the suspension to make them good aggressive drivers ~ I have several Friends who do this to multiple Land Yacht Barges , going for a ride in one is always an eye opener .
Kudos to Eddie .
-Nate
Great story. Thanks for taking me to that memory again.
I got the virtual twin brother of this for $500 back in ’87, in a ’75 Imperial LeBaron. Same color and pretty much the same options. Owner thought it was going to need a new motor. It had the notorious “Lean-Burn” system that fried 2 pistons with holes the size of dime. Brother and I did a “driveway rebuild” pulling the pan and knocking out the pistons and dropping in new ones. I put an earlier MoPAR electronic ignition on it but left the Lean Burn box attached to the air cleaner but disconnected.
Growing up, my grandfather bought a new even-year New Yorker and passed down his “old” one each time. I don’t remember his ’74. But, his ’76 was a dove gray ext/int 4-door. For ’78, he got a 2-door white ext, red leather interior. It had a white 1/4 padded roof. Man, I was smitten with that one. Wanted it so bad. But, my aunt got it. I keep thinking that I need to find/own one like that.
American cars were like Longfellow’s Girl with a Curl: “when she was good, she was very, very good, but when she was bad she was horrid.”
OTOH, “Honda refuses to help”
Same here. My Civic’s crackly struts (at low speed) got this factory response: sorry, no solutions. This for a technology they mastered back in the ’70s. Also, my sun-visor split in two after 50Kmi, a problem also with the previous generation Civic. Easily fixed it myself thanks to a YouTube post, but not encouraging.
You must be a GM plant, you know that there has never been an incident of anything ever breaking on a Honda…shame on you Roger Smith, go troll somewhere else….
To be fair, I’ve had no driveline problems with any Honda as yet, but my confidence in them, as with Toyota, has slipped since our ’80s models because of stupid stuff like this (as well as more interior NVH). I wonder if they hired too many American managers, or else Japan is in more trouble than I thought. Some sort of organizational rot is going on.
BTW, a baseball cap works better than any sun visor with those silly snap things the Japanese love. Just turn it like Charlie Brown, as needed.
Thanks, Perry, and Eddie too!
Your impressions of the C-body chassis jibe with mine. The front end is reasonably solid, while the rear is let down by its leaf springs, which get no help from a sway bar or trailing links in locating the axle. The steering is light, but as you point out, plenty of newer vehicles are overboosted as well. Brake and gas pedals are both firm and progressive; too many new cars have mushy throttles.
I recently saw a Top Gear episode where they road-tested a full-size Buick and a Lincoln from the mid-’70s. I’m sure they exaggerated the sloppiness but a comparable Mopar would run the course a bit faster, IM (flagrantly subjective) O.
I recently saw a Top Gear episode where they road-tested a full-size Buick and a Lincoln from the mid-’70s. I’m sure they exaggerated the sloppiness
Without seeing the article, but having experienced a mid 70s Ford LTD, when it was only a year old, I don’t think it’s possible to exaggerate the sloppiness. By the time my mom’s 72 Torino had about 20K on it it bobbed and weaved so much she had trouble keeping it on the road (Gabriel Red Ryders solved that). That LTD made the company Ambassador wagon feel like a BMW.
I’m quite jealous Perry! I’ve always wanted to drive a late-model NYB, and I think you managed to walk the line between paying homage to a rolling artifact while also noting its glaring deficiencies.
IIRC though, the 440 was rated at a bit more than 175bhp, I’m thinking 195-205 if memory serves me right. Still not nearly enough.
Some friends of mine had a very similar Grand Fury, same colors in and out. The traded a VW squareback for it mostly because the VW had been hit 3 times in 6 months and even more because of the extremely generous (for that time) rebate.
I grew up with a couple of old Plymouths and always felt Chrysler products were better than their competition if for no other reason than for their full/complete instrument panels. Unfortunately, this Plymouth was typical of the indifferent assembly quality at Chrysler…and all the BIG 3. The vinyl roof started curling up as soon as the car left the assembly plant and the tan interior featured trim pieces in 3 or 4 shades of tan. The car itself drove okay, but coming from small imported sedans I thought it was a bit light feeling. The brakes? Step on the pedal and the car stopped NOW. You almost felt like you could get that huge car to mash it’s front bumper on the pavement in a “panic” stop.
There is a 2 door Chrysler of this vintage near me…it’s a triple blue in a medium to light blue. It’s been on CL for nearly a month, I wonder if it will get a retirement like this one had for a few years or if a demo derby team will snatch it up eventually?
You know it’s your repsonsibility to keep it from the derby track, now that you’ve mentioned it! Love the 2-door versions of these and they’ve got to be exceedingly rare these days. I only ever recall seeing one.
Looked up the horsepower figures as I too thought 175 was low. My reference book says the New Yorker Brougham’s 440 made 215 horsepower. If you bought the Town and Country wagon that year your 440 made 260 horsepower
My Encyclopedia (and other sources) says 205. And nothing about a 260 hp version for the T&C. Where do you get that? I’m not aware that such a version was built in 1976. A 255 hp 440 was built for cop cars, and specifically not available on wagons, because of the true dual exhaust and cats.
I’ve amended the text.
I fully concur, based on this.
A bit off topic, but a 4-door dog-dish Valiant with an E58 would have been good fun.
My Dart Pursuit certainly was a lot of fun.
In ’91, I flirted with buying another old car as my daily driver to replace my damaged ’72 Pontiac Grandville. I looked hard at a ’77 NYB, but I dithered, and it sold. I ended up with my ’87 Mercury Grand Marquis.
It’s hard not to see the appeal of the NYB. A classic rendition of American luxury car design that had been around since the early 1960s.
These were seemingly everywhere in the Midwest in the late ’70s. They sold well, and obviously had even better market share in the Midwest than other parts of the country.
Perry’s comment on the truckishness of it is interesting. When cars this size literally sat on 8 of 10 driveways on my street, we thought this was what a normal car looked like. My 2002 Durango appealed to me as a thowback to these cars, and I can also feel the big American car channeling though my 2012 F-150.
And, it is nice to see a fair commentary on handling. From what you read, you’d think these cars were virtually out of control on the road, a perception not helped by modern minds driving high mileage and under maintained versions. It appears the subject car must be in pretty good shape. I drove a number of BIG cars in the 1980s and some were showing their age. My dad was a bit tight with his maintenance dollars, and his ’76 LTD probably needed shocks and tires at the time I was driving it against our very low mileage ’78 Caprice. The LTD was a sloppy handful compared to the more modern B body.
I recall Chrysler’s ’74 C body on which this car is based won a Consumer Reports test between Ford, Chevy, and Plymouth. The Plymouth won, partly on handling. First hand, my well maintained ’72 Pontiac was a very reasonable drive 90% of the time. Ford was likely the worst of the era, certainly not helped by a lack of maintenance, and equipped with the base suspension.
Not all cars from this time were pigs, they were just big, and built for towing and hauling lots of people and stuff, no different than a 2015 Tahoe.
I think this is a very fair, balanced review of the New Yorker, especially from someone who admittedly prefers to drive smaller cars.
> If someone were so motivated, it seems this would be a good platform for modifications; all it really needs is more power and a firmer suspension to truly feel capable and those seem like attainable changes.
Don’t forget that this car is probably riding on 38 year old suspension parts too. The balljoints may have been spared, but rubber bushings get old, hard and cracked even when they’re sitting.
One-stop source for firming-up Mopar C-body suspension:
http://www.firmfeel.com/c_body_mopar_parts.html
As for the power, I would prescribe higher compression, an RV cam, a windage tray and 2.5″ dual exhaust with equalizer tube to wake up that 440 on a reasonable budget. It will already have 452-casting heads with good flowing ports and hardened valve seats, and HP-style exhaust manifolds (which you mentioned) which flow somewhere between log manifolds and headers.
Very nice treatment. I see that you noticed the rigid structure of those Mopar 4 door hardtops. That was my favorite part about the 77 I owned. As for ride and handling, there was a tradeoff. With stock suspensions, the FoMoCo biggies rode best and handled worst, the Mopars were the opposite and the 71-76 GM big cars were in the middle on both. My 77 NYB was a factory HD suspension car, and with 70 series Goodrich T/A radials, was the best handling big car I have ever driven.
In these, Chrysler made the most appealing big cars since the mid 60s, and were rewarded in the showroom. These were everywhere in the midwest.
BTW that crystal pentastar hood ornament is a refugee from a newer car. These had a crest like on the c pillar.
I remember these as being very popular at the time. In my hometown of less than 8,000 people, there were two four-door hardtops in pale yellow with a light brown vinyl roof.
Chrysler’s problem was that, after the first fuel crunch, sales of the big Plymouths and Dodges never shared in the recovery of big-car sales. The full-size Chrysler Newport and New Yorker were actually quite popular from 1976 through 1978. The Dodge Royal Monaco and Plymouth Gran Fury, however, didn’t even crack the 70,000 barrier, and that included lots of fleet sales to police departments throughout the country. (The Pennsylvania State Police used Plymouth Gran Furys during these years).
Great article. Great car. The shot through the windshield makes me want to drive one now.
WANT WANT WANT!
The driver’s big car. Still a modicum of handling (compared to GM/Ford), full instrumentation, ROAD WHEELS (god I love Chrysler road wheels), big block power, and a “save the whales” sticker! It just needs a boat propeller attached to the trailer-hitch that turns in the wind and it would be perfect.
Probably a good part of how solid a ride this is: Eddie. He owns a parts store! The upper suspension bushings on these old Chryslers are the ones that go, and they are not that hard to get out of the car. Eddie probably has a press in the back of the store that will get the old ones pressed out and the new ones in; if not, he’s got enough customers who do, and can call in a favor or two.
From way back in the 70s, I can remember that the newly redesiged 1974 C-Body felt stiffer, less shaky than the fuselage body did. My direct comparison was among a 1974 Plymouth Fury III, a 1974 Dodge Monaco and a 1972 Dodge Monaco, all four-door pillared sedans of the highest trim level. None were as quiet or pillowy-riding as the competing GM models but they handled better, which may have been due to a conscious design decision by Chrysler.
Been there, done that, bought the T-shirt…
I bought one of these for $400 in 1996, it was traded in for a new Cadillac at Williamson Cadillac, probably one of the last RWD Fleetwoods, I imagine. She had brand new Michelin XW4 tires(as seen in My Cousin Vinny…), I essentially bought the tires and got the car, probably the best $400 I ever spent, I still miss her.
The 4 door New Yorker is nice, but the 2 door coupe……..ooooh baby! I always wanted one in all white with that unique vinyl roof treatment. Car is plusher than a Caddy and is a Real full sizer.So slick and low. I used to call this beauty “the electric razor” As Jack Jones sang in the commercial “what a beautiful New Yorker, it’s the talk of the town”. I’ ll take a loaded Electric Razor over a ’77 or 78 Lincoln or Caddy anyday. it may be of the brougham or malaise era, and drink gas like an alcoholic, but who cares?
What a great find and a great opportunity to drive a classic! This car is similar to the one my Great Aunt in Memphis drove. Hers was a 1977, and it was also dark brown with a beige top (though IIRC hers was a slightly darker shade of brown), with dark brown leather interior instead of beige. Sadly she didn’t have the gorgeous road wheels, nor a CB. But, everything else was there…that dash, those details… it all brings back memories. I never had the chance to drive the car, but always enjoyed the ride as a passenger. My Pop did drive it and I know he liked it, and in general always said he thought the Chryslers handled pretty well for big cars. My Great Aunt’s particular example was pretty well built and trouble free (at least as a new car, she only kept it 2 years), and much better than some of the other Chryslers she had in the 1970s. I really like the looks of the “Imperial New Yorker,” and I think it is a fine example of the end-of-the-era American car design. Glad this one is being protected from being demo-derby fodder–it deserves it!
Of course one other difference was the hood ornament. My Great Aunt’s had the original one with the heraldry (so posh and “European”). This car needs to swap out the pentastar and go back to castles and lions!
A Chrysler stylist named Don Butler did the emblems on this car. I discovered this by accident. He was a relative of my mother and pointed them out when we drove our 77 to Detroit on a visit after he retired. I need to write something about him.
Very interesting! A close relative? I’d be interested in such a write-up.
That’s the ornament my 77 had too, this one must have lost it somewhere along the way.
Eddie swapped out the hood ornament on this car. I happen to like the Pentastar, though.
That Chicago Motor Club sticker takes me back, we had one on both of my parents cars a 1979 Chevy Caprice Classic 2 door and this cars younger sister a 1977 Dodge Royal Monaco Brougham 2 door with the measly 360 V8.
O’Reilly stores are all corporate owned. Just ask an employee (sigh).
Too bad all you guys weren’t around to buy these beasts when they were new 🙂 If so Chrysler’s fortunes might have turned out differently. Seriously, this is one great find; I’m glad that it hasn’t ended up in a demolition derby. I like the looks of the “true” fuselage Chryslers better but one of these is definitely on my Powerball list.
Those Kelsy-Hayes wheels would have been 1″ wider than the base wheels, not just a 3/8″ expansion, that metric stuff is for them funny little furrin cars. However wheel sizing is one area where no one but Michelin has ever metricized except for when stating the offset.
The standard steel wheels from my ’73 NYer parts car are 6.5″ wide. Assuming that was still the case in ’76, and those road wheels are probably 7″ wide, so an extra half-inch. That still doesn’t explain where “10mm wider” came from. When I read it, I figured it was just a bad metric conversion on someone’s part.
I’m with you Eric, wheel dimensions should be in inches, and “real” engine displacement is measured in cubic inches. 🙂
Well 1/2″ is about 13mm so that isn’t that far off, I did not know that the base wheels for these were 6.5″ the vast majority of the cars of this size in this era used 6″. These KH wheels all seem to be 15 x 7 no matter which bolt pattern is punched out of the center.
He’s a cool guy to let you drive it. To me the real way that modern cars drive better than the ones I learned to drive in (70’s & 80’s GM B/C bodies) is that the steering, braking, damping, tire grip is better. Things haven’t changed quite as much as folks think. The basics of a well driving automobile have been there for a while. These whales were not model T Fords.
You don’t need a GTI or M3 to make good time through the mountains. The ultimate limits are lower of course in the older cars, but a safe and sane driver shouldn’t be anywhere near them.
Another term I’ve not heard of I ran across today: damping. What’s that?
First it was ‘rubbing’ (that goes on in NYC traffic) and now it’s ‘damping’.
I’m not too picky about ’60s and ’70s land barges; I like most of them I see on here. And I like this ’76 Chrysler NYB, too. Add me to the list of others who are glad this Mopar product will be spared from the demolition derby scrap heap.
What a noxious way to treat an old car that’s survived 4 decades . . . wreck it in a stupid demo derby. (Add angry-faced emoticon here).
That is awesome that you got to drive it and that he was so friendly and accommodating. Just remember, if you’re taking pictures of an old van and the owner asks you to “help load this couch” into it, just say no unless you want to be putting Precious in the basket for the foreseeable future….
The story took on a whole new dimension for me after actually meeting you last weekend, I can see your point of view so much better along with the way you express yourself, I actually laughed out loud several times “hearing” your voice while reading the article. Glad you had a very interesting trip back home and actually made it…
Ditto.
Are you about a size 14?
OMG–love it
That’s awesome! Just keep rubbing the lotion on the skin.
Never allow a photographer to get into your van !
So, what started this fear for the lovely countryside ? Deliverance ?
It rubs the leather cleaner on the bench seat or else it gets the hose again!
He’s making a Brougham suit out of real Broughams!
Perry drives a Brougham and enjoys it? Wow.
Next up, Klockau goes Honda! 😉
Well, Bennett did so there IS precedent!
I went back to my Germanic roots. Oh, the signs o wonder.
I always liked these big Chryslers. They were basically de-contented ’74-’75 Imperials but sold considerably better – same ritzy looks but a lower price equaled success. There were a lot of these around in southern Ontario in the late ’70s. This is a really nice example.
Good experiences make great stories especially when well told as this one was.
Trailer Park Supervisor Jim Lahey approves!
Hate the color but love the car!
It’s interesting how a photo can stir a memory that time has all but erased.
In the late seventies/early eighties I was a lifeguard at the town’s public lake.
A rather attractive mom would would come to the lake everyday with her kids, getting a lot of notice from the male lifeguards.
She drove a black New Yorker – just like this one.
As I beg my mother to find pictures of my Great Grandmother’s 76 New Yorker 2 door, This’ll have to do for memories right now. Everything Perry hit on takes me right back to being a 3 year old in 1985. My Great Grandmother Clara replaced her ’71 Imperial with a ’76 New Yorker, Dark Green with a White Vinyl top, Green Leather and a Sunroof.
Even as a child it never seemed as isolated or as peppy as my Uncle’s ’71 Ninety Eight. But it was a beguiling beast all its own, and like Perry said, didn’t feel as flimsy or flaccid as some of the other Big Broughams that were around in my early youth. Also, in comparison, it didn’t feel as flaccid as the 1987 Fifth Avenue that went on to replace it after it started having stalling issues. Which is a good question of when was the “lean burn” carb fazed in? Although I doubt my Grandmother would have gotten 11+ years of service out of hers if hers was a “Lean Burn” 440….
I believe Allpar says it was 1977. When was it fazed out?
I NEVER saw these in upstate New York, nor in Granville, OH in 1992ish when I moved to the midwest. It’s nice Clara was able to keep hers around for so long.
A 76 anything is pretty much not going to seem as peppy as a comparable 71 thanks to the changes made to meet emissions standards. As far as the Lean Burn, it was quite common to yank if off and retrofit a traditional distributor which is the hart of the system and the cause of the stalling and hesitating. Chrysler even sold a kit to do the conversion.
Love it. Love the car, love the story, love that you got to drive it! What a fantastic experience, and shows that sometimes folks can be quite friendly when they arrive unexpectedly to find someone photographing their pride and joy. And it’s great to hear about the driving experience from someone used to something totally different..the driving characteristics do sound more positive than most would imagine!
I do really like these late 70’s mopar full-sizers, especially the Gran Fury and the Imperial/NYB. Opposite ends of the lineup, I suppose. On this car, the lower character line, the road wheels, the hidden lamps, and that classic waterfall grille all speak to me. Plus, how can you not like one of the last true 4-door hardtops to ever be sold in this country? I think all others had departed by ’78, the last year for these. I unexpectedly was passed by a triple white NYB in front of my house a few months ago, and while it was gone before I could get a photo, the sight of that car crusing into the distance stayed with me.
My best friend in HS had one of these cars (This would be back in 87/88). His was a 77, with the 400 (NOT a 440, although the air cleaner looked exactly like the ones in the picture. He had bought his 440 cleaner at a swap meet) Anyway his NYer was super comfortable, quiet, felt like it had 10 times the power that my 4-cylinder Sunbird had. The black leather seats were deep, comfortable and just awesome to ride on, they would have been perfect as “car seat garage couches”. THe seats in his NYer weren’t the button-tufted ones like in the feature car here, but smooth. The car spent it’s entire life in Wisconsin, so by the time I saw it, it was kind of rusty (door bottoms, trunk floor, bottoms of rear quarters) but the car still felt solid, it never creaked or groaned again like my rusty Sunbird did. Every year our HS did an end-of-year trip to “Six Flags Great America” (Roller coaster amusement park in a Chicago suburb) and all the guys with cars wanted to drive on this trip, to show off and whatnot (The rich kids with IROCs and Mustangs all tried to see who got there the fastest) My buddy got to chauffeur 5 girls though, ’cause who wants to ride in an uncomfortable T-top thing blaring Warrant and/or Poison songs, watching for cops when they could ride in comfort in a true luxury car. Good times. Anyway the car ended up being scrapped by my friend’s step-dad as soon as my friend went off to Marines Basic Training. Had I known that was gonna happen, I would have tried to buy it instead. I was sad to see it go.
I think the button tufted leather turning stiff is what made the seats feel supportive in the car I drove–or they were actually firm, which was a surprise.
Eddie and I enjoyed a listen to his Deep Purple 8-track while we were driving about.
These cars had low key elegance and road presence, that I admired. I’d always stop what I was doing to check them out. Though I did find the previous generation fuselage version, was more pure in it’s style. But it was the Town and Country wagon, I really had a thing for. Elegant luxury, without the ostentatiousness of the big Cadillacs.
I love the T&C wagons – the ultimate final C-body!
That is one fine wagon!
His daily driver? Nice. There is a fellow on my C body forum who just drove his 78 NYB on a 3100 mile round trip from Maryland to Wisconsin and back. That is called going in style.
That’s got ‘roadtripper’ written all over it. I like the look with the headlites exposed. And those roadwheels do give this thing some moxie. Yea, theyre total knockoffs of what came on GM fullsize pickups at the time…but they are pretty nice!
They are not “knock offs” of what came on GM trucks they are the same wheel, they were made by Kelsy Hayes at the end, Motor Wheel at the beginning and were available in the aftermarket too at one time. KH sold them to anyone that wanted to buy them so you see them on GM, International and Chrysler products. The only difference is the bolt pattern and the size of the center hole they punched out. I’ve got 12 of those wheels, 4 ea on both of my Scouts and on my Travelall.
Well that’s a new one to me. Always liked them, both on Chevy trucks and on these Chryslers, but it never crossed my mind that they were identical except for the center cap logos.
Well the reality is that even back then there weren’t that many suppliers for some parts and they didn’t always have exclusivity agreements. Motor Wheel Corporation was one of those companies that would sell to anyone that would buy, whether for OE use or aftermarket. I tried to find the ad for these wheels but came across this great ad for another of their wheels that were sold to more than one MFG. They were a subsidiary of Goodyear for awhile since they couldn’t allow Firestone to be the only tire maker that also sold made wheels. Eventually they sold the company to KH. They also made many of the other GM OE styled steel wheels, including the Buick wheels.
I was apparently too busy stopping every few miles (I kid you not) after getting off I-69 to snap pictures of cars I just don’t see in Bloomington, IN or Columbus, OH
Amen to seeing automotive weirdness in the area. I mosied over to the Studebaker museum today, and on the way back toward Niles to catch US12, I passed a particularly sketchy looking used car lot…with a seemingly clean late 70s/early 80s El Camino in the front row. It did cross my mind to stop for some pix, but I still had a three hour drive ahead of me, and I didn’t feel like fighting off a vampire salesman.
Did see this in the museum parking lot tho.
To really get the experience of these fullsizers you have to do a panic stop. The ABS revolution has made us forget the white knuckle experience of the nose diving precipitously, the rear wheels locking and the land yacht often slewing sideways. Good times!
Hi Perry, this is Eddie. First of all I like the site, you did an incredible job photograph my car. The reason you didn’t end up in fifty pieces was because the trunk was already full. Lol
It was a pleasure to meet you. It was really cool. You have my email and I will send you pictures of the red car Saturday. If you ever come back to Decatur, look me up. I will take you for a ride in the Duster but you are not driving. I shift at 5,000rpm
Yay–I see you’re one of us now! One of us! One of us! One of us!
It was a very nice treat, driving the NYB, and if for some reason I find myself in Decatur…
There was a popular humor book in the ’80s called Real Men Don’t Eat Quiche, which purported to define masculinity and prescribe (tongue-in-cheek) ways to live it. I’m going by three-decade-old memories here, but I recall a section on what a Real Man drives. It went something like this:
“Contrary to popular belief, a Real Man does NOT drive a Corvette. A Real Man doesn’t spend $30,000 on a plastic car with no trunk. So what DO Real Men drive? Chryslers. Huge, hulking Chryslers with enormous trunks.”
Today’s NYB subject car would definitely meet with that author’s approval.
Ha. I remember this now. It was particularly funny because when that book was popular, I was driving a 77 New Yorker.
I had a Chrysler with a LeanBurn system. It had a basic problem that was simple, but not very techno, to correct. At least on mine. After running rough for years, fouling plugs before they had 10,000 miles on them and getting horrible gas mileage, I discovered two things – 1. The choke was set way too heavy – so heavy, in fact, that we found the easiest way to correct it was to remove its mounting from the engine, turn the spring – that was mounted in a square hole a whole 1/4 of a turn and remount it into the square plug and back on to the engine. 2. After trying to adjust for the heavy choke for so long, the computer had finally thrown up its hands and given up. We had the computer replaced under the warranty. After doing those two things, the car had more power, ran smooth and quiet and got fantastic gas mileage. It was like a whole new car and I ended up loving the thing.
Chrysler’s always did handle better than GM and Ford’s of the era..Torsion bars !! You could in 5 minutes raise or better for handling lower the front end for better handling ! Yes in 5 minutes and it sticks to corners afterwards when you lower it ensure the front is lowered to the top or just below the top of the tire..
Remember these cars had a 5 digit odometer,after 99,999 they roll back to 0 !
People drove a lot back then..My Dad is 80 and he was a Chrysler dealer mechanic and people drove a lot,was a Ford mechanic in the early 60’s when he started out…
Chrysler in the 1960’s started the 5 year 50,000 mile warranty and the majority had 50,000 miles in 3-4 years !! This B.S notion of a 1968 car having 30,000 miles is garbage,done to get more money ect..
The 66-71 440’s really moved,solid 13 second 1/4 mile cars…and mid 4 – low 5 second range 0-60..I still own my 68 300 with a 440 TNT,3.23 gears and it moves ! Best was 13.3 @104 with street tires 235/60/14 ( magnum 500’s) Remember modern street tires hook up better than any old drag radial of that era..I couldn’t floor it off the line,walk it out but with tire spin/squeal with momentum (hard to explain) if you just floor it,it sits and spins,dont floor it enough it wil run 14-15’s..My 69 383 High Performance Newport ran 13.78 @102 remember 3 different 383’s were made a 383 2bbl,383 4bbl and 383 4bbl high performance (not just a 5 hp difference than the 383 4bbl) the 383 hp moves very closely to the non high performance 440 350 hp single exhaust 440..
The 68 Chrysler 300 weights 3920 pounds ! My 69 Charger RT is only 130 pounds lighter !
I own a few old Mopar’s now,and over the years owned many and not 1 ever rattled or squeaked,if they did a clip was lose and easily fixed..
Remember old recorded times were done with skiny tires and tracks were not as sticky as they are today,not prepped,dusty side road tests and a Imperial 0-60 was done in the rain,spinning all over !!!!
All these comments prove how much we are interested in this gorgeous tank. I spotted one, but was unable to photograph it, as I waited three-hundred feet away from a 1976 or 1975 New Yorker in Jasmine Yellow (or ilk) in New Platz, NY on 10/3/20. Oh, how I wanted to take a photo! I note that the featured car at one time was owned by a member of The Grotto. Taking over the place of the Imperial, all seems the same but all is not. The 1974 and 1975 Imperials had three universal joints in the driveline, but the New Yorker had two. The fake wood inlay on the bright metal trim above the doors was not given over to the ’76 New Yorker. No major loss, obviously.
I never gave any thought to it, but it is curiously rare for automotive clocks (either analog or digital) to have seconds indicators – no car I have owned had one. Are there any other modern cars that do? When did Chrysler phase it out?
1975, I drove a new 1975 Imperial from Richmond VA to Fort Lauderdale. Similar to a 1976 New Yorker. Cruised at 100 mph on the Florida Turnpike without effort. Arrived Fort Lauderdale so relaxed went dancing.
Drove new Continental Marks, Eldorado’s, even a RR Cornish long distance. Most comfortable long distance road car was that 1975 Imperial.
For ’76, with Imperial styling moved down a peg, the New Yorker was advertised as “all new” and “Lincoln/Caddy luxury for less”. Sold to many loyal Mopar fans.