In 1965, the truly big Plymouth Fury returned after a three-year hiatus, which started in 1962 with the controversial downsizing. But the former “full size” wasn’t ditched; it was now renamed Belvedere and positioned as a mid-size car, although in reality it was a bit larger and roomier than Ford and GM’s mid-sized cars.
Motor Trend decided to test both, in versions representing the very different ends of the mid-full size spectrum. The big Sport Fury was packing the 365 hp 426 Wedge V8 and was loaded. The bottom-trim Belvedere I had the 145 hp 225 slant six. Both came with the optional Torqueflite automatics, but that and the optional heater and seat belts was about it for the Belvedere. A taxi cab, in other words, and a very popular one at that.
M/T flubbed it when it wrote how the new big ’65 Fury was created: “they stretched the Furys three inches to come up with a new series for 1965 that’s longer, wider and heavier and competes on an equal footing with full-sized Chevrolets and Fords”. That’s hardly correct, as the ’65 C-Body had zero relationship to the B-Body, and was a hybrid unibody with a front frame, and was essentially the same basic car as all the big Chryslers since 1960, except for styling. The smaller B-Body (Belvedere and Coronet) had a full unibody that was essentially a scaled-up Valiant.
The engine lineup in both was very similar, starting with the 225 slant six and ending with the 365 hp 426 wedge (the 426 hemi was not yet available to non-racers). The Belvedere did offer the smaller 273 V8 and a 2-barrel 361 instead of the 2-barrel 383 in the Fury.
Although Chrysler had softened their suspension settings in 1965 and made a few other minor changes, they were still a bit firmer than average and therefore handling was also somewhat above the norm.
The 225 slant six acquitted itself quite adequately, even if “it’s no ball of fire“. 0-60 came in 14.8 seconds, which is about what one would expect, or slightly better. The stripper Belvedere was still pretty light, with a curb weight of 3160 lbs. These Belvedere and Coronet sixes were very popular taxis, including Adams Cab in Towson, whose owner also owned the Sunoco station where I worked solo on Saturdays. I’d come in early and take one of the Coronets out for a spin, but when I discovered one of the ’67s had the new LA 318 V8, that became my early morning (illicit) drive of choice. It felt perkier than the “poly” 318 in our ’65 Coronet wagon. But yes, the sixes got the job done, and of course significantly more economically.
Despite being not broken-in, the slant six delivered 22 mpg, and later even 24, cruising at 65 mph. Town and freeway driving lowered it to some 15 mpg. At 65 mph the slant six was “loafing” at 2600 rpm with its 2.93 rear axle and hit 92 mph wide open. In Europe at the time, all of this would have been very decent. And M/T did say that it would be a pleasant and relaxing car to own and drive “a good choice for the family man traveling salesman who places economy above neck snapping performance“. But of course Americans were getting spoiled by this time, and sixes were falling out of favor in the larger cars.
Well, not for everyone. My best friend Jerry’s dad bought a nicely-trimmed ’65 Fury III sedan with the six, which seemed a bit odd to me. They lived on a pretty steep hill, and pulling out of the driveway, the slant six did have to groan a bit to get the big Fury going, especially with a bunch of us on board.
M/T notes that women wouldn’t be insisting on power steering or brakes on the Belvedere. That would depend on the women in question. The power steering did make a significant difference, especially parking at the A&P. The manual brakes were fine though; power drum brakes were inevitable over-boosted.
But yes, for a traveling salesman, the manual steering gave more feel on the road than Chrysler’s numb power assisted version.
Of course the 426 in the Sport Fury was a totally different animal. And a thirsty one; the best they could do trying hard was 14 mpg on premium. More typically, taking advantage of all that power, it was 8-9 mpg. But all that fuel was put to use: 0-60 in 8.2 sec., the 1/4 mile in 16.1 @86 mph, and a top speed of 120+ mph. M/T deemed its power steering as “excellent” and it reduced turns between locks to 3.5.
The new big Fury sold quite well, and propelled Plymouth’s market share from 6.6% in 1964 to 7.5% in 1965. That was still well down from the heady days of the ’50s, peaking in 1958, when double-digit market shares were still on tap. And that 7.5% in 1965 would be a high-water mark for Plymouth going forward. It was a slow but long decline to come.
Interesting test, I’d prefer the Belvedere but that’s just me.
And a bit weird that they point out the 426’s removable precision bearings of lead based babbitt on steel. I’d expect that to be a shocker in Model T quarterly, but pretty much everyone was using shell bearings in the late 1930’s, no?
Grandpa’s last car was a ’65 Belvedere II four door sedan with the 318 poly and Torqueflite. He lived in the mountains and it had plenty of power for the mission. The fact that it was essentially the ’64 Fury at a lower price is what sold him. The “improved” tapered roller bearing rear axle was the one problem with the car. 5/50 warranty came in handy for the several axle bearing swaps the dealer performed.
Thank you for this very informative review!