(first posted 4/10/2014) How Detroit was lost. Those four words could serve as a current subtitle to this review that appeared 38 years ago in the April 1976 issue of Road & Track. The Plymouth Volare was not the sort of car normally tested by Road & Track, a magazine that focused on sports cars and other vehicles built for performance rather than practicality and everyday transportation, but a Volare wagon nevertheless received strong praise in this review. The reviewers mostly praised traditional Detroit virtues that they expected from the new Plymouth Volare and Dodge Aspen twins, but which they would not live up to. It was part of a series of failures that would doom Chrysler Corporation before the end of the decade and drag down the reputation of the entire American automobile industry.
The expectations of Road & Track were clear from the beginning of the review, in which its editors stated, “While Road & Track may often take Detroit products to task for a variety of reasons, we also readily admit that for sure, reliable transportation, it is difficult to beat the products of Turin on the Rouge. Little in most American cars is likely to break simply through repeated use, and you have to severely abuse most Detroit iron before it even gets cranky.” They then related an anecdote about a professional race engine builder who drove a Chevrolet Monte Carlo and completely ignored any sort of maintenance for 30,000 miles until the oil idiot light became annoying. Inheriting the major mechanical systems of Dart and Valiant, the Volare promised cast-iron durability combined with reasonable size, a tall and airy roof and window design, and improved interior space and comfort. It should have been a winning formula.
Even when the test revealed design issues that put off the editors of Road & Track, they were willing to give the Volare the benefit of the doubt. They noted the redesign of the front suspension, which switched from longitudinal to transverse torsion bars and added more rubber mounts to give a softer and quieter ride, but at the expense of vague steering and uncertain cornering. They disliked the Volare’s ride-handling balance, citing Peugeot and Volvo as better at making that compromise, but they were willing to give some praise to its “big car ride,” which mainstream American car buyers preferred. They were even willing to set aside poor braking performance by the test car, declaring it to be a possible aberration given past performance by Chryslers and results obtained by testers at other magazines.
A strong tone of respect is evident in this review, which concludes with declaring a properly optioned Volare to be “an excellent transportation car” and “a solid set of wheels that, given proper maintenance, could return 100,000 miles of dependable, if not terribly exciting, driving.” As we know, the story of the Volare and Aspen instead would be one of premature rust, disappointing build quality, multiple recalls, and loss of a long-established market segment that had played a major role in sustaining Chrysler Corporation for over a decade. A decade later, automatic respect for the dependability of American automobiles would be an outdated notion, and GM, Ford and Chrysler are still struggling against public and press perception of their products as lagging behind foreign competition in quality and durability. Reading this review is a reminder of the past reputation of the Big Three and of how far they have fallen.
This test comes from a time when most (domestic) car buyers were still willingly accepting compromises. This of course, would change drastically when the 70’s turned into the 1980s. A cruising range of 213 miles for even then is pretty piss-poor and even with R & T’s staff NOT leadfooting it, it probably wouldn’t be that much more. OK for a Mustang, not OK for a family car made with some design of ‘eating up the miles.’ The 14 second 0-60 time is pretty bad too. The 318 in the Volare Wagon I’m sure had to contend with out 400-500 pounds more weight and mass to push around in than a Valiant.
I was a bit shocked by that 14.5 second 0-60 time and the 12.5 mpg fuel economy. The good old days… 😉
Yes, the ‘malaise era’ affected all American carmakers in equally-dismal manners.
“the ‘malaise era’ affected all American carmakers in equally-dismal manners.”
I would suggest that the ‘malaise era’ affected all carmakers – not just American ones.
The American cars reputation suffered the most, as people had high expectations for them and they had a huge market share at the start of the malaise era.
These were not quick as built. Nor did they warm up smoothly. A resistor in series with the choke heater (I forget what resistance I used) slowed the choke’s opening and changing the mixture needles in the Holley 2-bbl. would fix things nicely: smooth warm-up and 0-60 in the ten/eleven second range. Improved fuel economy, too. But if you lived in a California region with periodic smog inspection instead of when you sold the car, you would have to undo the modifications before your visit to get the car smogged. It was not something an average owner would do but it changed the nature of the powertrain.
Chrysler added a resistor to the choke heater circuit at some point, I remember seeing them in later years. And the newer versions warmed up better!
That 2:71 final drive ratio could help explain the wagon’s leisurely saunter to 60, but it doesn’t appear to have helped fuel economy at all.
These needed the 360-4v to wake up, and if you had one, you’d have great #s, far faster than any ’81-89 M-Body.
0-60 8.5-8.9 seconds (?)
quarter was something like 16.3@85 or thereabouts; they had slow times but high trap speeds!
125 mph, faster than the 115-120 Dips/GFs.
The ohly Dip that came close was the ’84: It was a wide-ratio 318 with 8.4:1 compression and a Carter TQ. The ’85-89s were close-ratio 318s with Rochester carbs and 8.0:1 compression.
The ’84 ran 10.8, 18.2@78, 121 mph. The later ones were slower!
One of these made my coal mining flint hard West Virginia living Uncle and Aunt cry and I didn’t blame them one damned bit. First new car they ever bought after a marriage filled with jalopies and third-hand heaps. It was such a POS. It made such an impression on me that I’ve never, ever set foot on a mopar lot in my 25 years of car shopping.
YES I have created the photo montage compilation of the Plymouth Volare’ 2 Door Coupe which of course included the Barracuda, the Valiant including the Scamp and the Duster, the Volare’ and the Caravelle to show how this car’s legacy lived through the entire decade of the 1980s. Don’t forget that besides the Dodge and its Chrysler companions, this car was also built in Canada, Mexico under the Chrysler nameplate, Central and South American Countries as well. In addition, Australia also built the Valiant based models via Chrysler Australia at the same time as well and in Spain the earlier Valiant/Dart based models. Without further adieu, The following similar sized Plymouth Mid-Sized Cars which were made between 1967-80 and they are as follows: 1967 Plymouth Barracuda 2 Door Coupe (Top Row Left), 1968 Plymouth Barracuda 2 Door Fastback Coupe (Top Row Right), 1974 Plymouth Barracuda 2 Door Coupe (Second Row Left), 1969 Plymouth Valiant 2 Door Coupe (Second Row Right), 1974 Plymouth Valiant Scamp 2 Door Hardtop Coupe (Third Row Left), 1975 Plymouth Valiant Duster 2 Door Coupe (Third Row Right), 1976 Plymouth Volare’ 2 Door Coupe (Fourth Row Left), 1977 1/2 Plymouth (CANADA) Caravelle 2 Door Coupe (Fourth Row Right) & 1980 Plymouth (CANADA) Caravelle 2 Door Coupe (Bottom Row Center). The last generation of the RWD E-Bodied 1974 Plymouth Barracuda used the shortened chassis of the RWD B-Bodied larger Plymouth Satellite, but its physical size was still close to the Plymouth Valiant Duster 2 Door Coupe later the Plymouth Volare’ 2 Door Coupe of that era as well.
I had two wagons over the years (76 Aspen and 78 Volare) and loved their ride, large glass area, and voluminous cargo space. Didn’t like the reliability and rust issues.
Offering a wagon was the one thing they got right with these. The wagons were “right sized” for a lot of people, and they had an entire segment to themselves.
The F-Bodies were pretty well engineered cars, its just a shame they were such poorly built cars. They certainly looked good and drove nice, but if any one single car sank Chrysler, it was the Volare/Aspen.
While yeah the F bodies had poor quality, IMHO, I think it was the failure to sell full size Plymouth and Dodge C bodies in the same volume as the 60’s, was #1 issue that sank Mopar after 1974. They needed the profits, but GM and Ford big cars rebounded when gas crisis eased in spring ’74. Chrysler’s all new bread and butter biggies sat and sat and rotted. Hence why so many of them were wrecked in “Blues Bros”, cheap unwanted used cars.
If only the bulletproof-ness of the Slant 6 and A body had carried over…
true true very true, but in regards to the 74-78 C-Bodies VS the F-Bodies, it wasn’t the cars themselves that were bad, on the contrary they were pretty well-built cars for the era, they just showed up at the wrong time. Had Chrysler had a small car on deck in the mid-seventies to counter their poor big car sales, they wouldn’t have been hit financially as hard as they were since Chrysler, being a fraction of the size of GM and Ford, there is less room for error. Plus there was the whole failed sales bank marketing strategy and massive rebates.
It was a solid design that didn’t reach it’s potential as long as it wasn’t screwed together properly. That took until 1978 or so. But the damage had been done and even Chrysler knew it, renaming their successors as the “M-body even though they were essentially the same with the same subframe, floor pan, suspension, cowl, firewall and doors.
Stalling in traffic at brand new. I will never forget a family road trip ruined on the side of the road with a less than 4,000 mile Volare. it is no wonder our entire extended family went Honda/Toyota. This after generations of mopar love.
Reading how badly the US car industry was doing in terms of quality by the 70’s, I’ve always been curious about the reaction of the press. They seem to have always mantained that very idea this article shows, of US cars being by default “solid” and inherently reliable.
When did this started to change, if ever?
Was there a different attitude between different magazines?
I have read the articles from Popular Mechanics for the launch of both the Citation and the J-cars, and they praise them a lot. They sound just like they repeated and believed everything that GM said about their new cars. Was it a cultural thing, were they paid to be so gentle about the cars, or was it an effect of driving purposedly well-built demo cars?
I think it really started in seriousness a couple of years after the very bad launch of the GM X cars in 1980. The problem became increasingly impossible to ignore.
But keep in mind that the automotive press has a long history of being overly positive, a combination of the perks that the writers got, the advertising that the magazines got, etc.. It still happens today to some extent.
Some writers had been bemoaning quality issues going way back, and there was a growing awareness in the public about decreasing quality, especially in the late 60s and early 70s.
But there have been major quality lapses going back much further; the ’49 Fords had a bad start; the ’57 Chrysler and Fords were notorious. I’d say there was considerable awareness about the issue in general about inconsistent quality in the late 50s. It’s one of the reasons the ’55-’57 Chevys were so popular as used cars during the ’57-’59 era, because so many new cars had such mediocre quality during that time.
It was an issue that ebbed and flowed, but it became a flood during the 70s. And by the 80s, the Japanese were fully taking advantage of it.
It seems that, during the 1970s, most of Detroit largely gave up on quality control.
There had been problems before, as Paul has noted, but there had also been a concerted effort to address them when they reared their ugly head. Ford worked hard to improve the numerous teething problems with the 1949 Ford. The 1952-54 Fords were thus a huge improvement.
Chrysler improved its rattle and rust-prone 1957 Forward Look cars each year after their debut. The corporation’s adoption of unit-body construction across the board in 1960 (except for the Imperial) addressed the rust, leakage and structural weakness problems.
By the late 1970s, however, it seemed as though Detroit had given up on quality control. An increasingly militant UAW and more government regulations gave the automakers a convenient excuse. The standard line was, “We can’t do anything because of those awful union members, and we have to spend our resources meeting these government regulations.”
At any rate, if you’re selling millions of cars each year without much apparent effort, what’s the incentive to change? Sales of domestic cars had recovered from the Arab Oil Embargo by late 1975, and were actually quite good through the spring of 1979.
Of course, that quickly changed once the Japanese really began eating their lunch. Management and the UAW started to get religion on quality. Eventually Detroit adapted to government regulations, too. It has been a long and often rocky road, but now even the worst car is better built than the best cars from 30 years ago.
I like how the R&T folks wagged their fingers at readers for not giving Chryslers a chance, clearly (in their view) due to factors other than the cars themselves.
In truth, it was the cars. There were widespread quality issues in American cars back then, but Chrysler was in a league of its own, and arguably had been since the late 50s. This would be why I can count exactly one Chrysler product bought by my extended family from my birth to about 1978, and that guy was generally considered an idiot.
Good ones were very good, but the number of bad ones was well over what everyone else was making. I vividly recall being excited about the Volare, especially the wagon. They did sell well at first (especially for Chryslers) but then EVERYONE I knew who bought one during the first 2 or 3 years had trouble with it. I later came to read about what a horribly dysfunctional place Chrysler had become by the 70s. Nobody at GM over the last 30 years can hold a candle to Lynn Townsend for doing damage to a company.
IMHO, the main issue back then was that Detroit couldn’t build “a high quality small car”, like the Japanese. The X and J cars were supposed to “push back the invasion”, but we know the story.
Big V8 cars for years lasted as long as buyers expected, but were gas hogs. Ended up having quality issues when makers added ‘more efficient’ drivetrains, like GM’s THM200 trans.
European cars of the ‘Malaise Era’ were no arbiters of quality, just ‘driving fun’. VW Rabbits were not that durable and started a lot of the ‘horror stories’ still told.
Glad you brought up the VW “quality”. The early Golf effectively killed VW in Australia for some years- the interiors were rotting away within a year.
Of course, even the Japanese were not as good as many would like to remember either, they were just better than the competition, and they tended to fix faults quicker.
As a follow up to the 2 Door Coupe versions, here are now the 4 Door Sedan versions for the 1976 Plymouth Valiant 4 Door Sedan (Top Row Left), 1976 Plymouth Volare’ 4 Door Sedan (Top Row Right), 1977 1/2 Plymouth (CANADA) Caravelle Salon 4 Door Sedan (Middle Row Left), 1980 Plymouth (CANADA) Caravelle 4 Door Sedan (Middle Row Right) & 1982 Plymouth Gran Fury 4 Door Sedan (Bottom Row Center). The RWD F and M Bodies had the most longest productions which began in Fall of 1975 for the 1976 Plymouth Volare’ and all the way through the Summer of 1989 for the 1989 Plymouth Gran Fury.
Car magazines are shills for the car markers, pure and simple, and it’s nothing new. The “press” is wined and dined, put in five star resorts, entertained and fed copiously. Often the venue is some exotic place like South Africa, where the “journalists” are flown, all expenses paid. Stellar reviews follow if the “journalist” wants the next invite.
Toyota and Honda are, however, notoriously cheap on their new model intros. No paid airfares, no hospitality suite and a shared Motel 6 room. The reviews of their cars reflect this, too.
[Citation needed]
OK then:
Canucknucklehead, the American car magazines loved the first Honda Civic, and went bananas over the first Accord (in a good way). Both cars received uniformly glowing reviews, despite any stinting by Honda on food, drink and accommodations at new model introductions.
The cheering over cars that turned out to be problematic – the Aspen/Volare and GM’s X-cars being the most notorious examples – had more to do with a desire to see the home team win one as much as anything else. Plus, in the case of the GM X-cars, the company provided carefully massaged test cars to the magazines. The buff books weren’t buying their cars off the lot.
By the early 1980s, the gloves were coming off. Read Car and Driver’s largely scathing review of the first North American Ford Escort. Also note that, by 1983, Car and Driver contributor Brock Yates had written The Decline and Fall of the American Auto Industry, which lambasted the domestics for everything from stodgy styling to lousy quality to mediocre performance. He held up the Honda Accord as a paragon of what Detroit should be producing, while criticizing GM’s J-cars for virtually everything.
I had two co-workers that both bought Volare wagons new in 1977.
One was a slant six standard transmission bare bones model that lived up to the hype of Volares being troublesome. I think anything that could, did go wrong with that Volare.
He traded it a year after ownership.
My other co-worker bought a new Volare wagon that was loaded (for a Volare) with 318-automatic, air conditioning,etc.
He drove it well over 120,000 miles with only routine maintenance.
Only Minnesota winters and the effects of salt took it off the road.
Now my other two co-workers that had bought a new Vega in 1972 , and the other co-worker that bought a new Citation in 1981 were not studies in contrast….
They were both dead even in terms of owner disgust.
HOLY “CC” EFFECT BATMAN! I saw one of these parked in White Hall, Illinois today while I was working!
Before the Malaise Era had sapped just about all measurable goodness out of American cars, they were indeed better.
They were faster, more reliable, roomier, built better and actually more technically advanced with their V8 engines and automatic transmissions than their European and Japanese counterparts, with few exceptions. And those, like the ADO16, had their own issues with reliability, at least on our shores.
Even the early Corollas on which Toyota built their reputation were nasty, crude devices. Among Japanese models, only the Datsun 510 was a real car.
The Europeans started to overtake the Americans with their fuel injection systems meeting emissions and restoring performance, while the Honda Accord began the Japanese invasion by getting just about everything right. By then even the Europeans couldn’t ignore them.
By the early 1980’s. American cars were seen as indifferently designed and built, a reputation as difficult to shake now as their old one was to lose.
“They were faster, more reliable, roomier, built better and actually more technically advanced with their V8 engines and automatic transmissions than their European and Japanese counterparts, with few exceptions.”
Yes, like the 1968-77 BMW six-cylinder sedans (overhead cam inline six, fully independent suspension, top speed of 130 mph or more). Even the Cadillacs of that era would struggle to keep up with a BMW 2800 or Bavaria, and that’s on a straight road with no curves.
That seems accurate. I remember reading reviews of 472/500-cid. Caddies from ’68-76 where their top ends were not bad but not as fast as the Europeans. Most Caddies then were geared tall for lazy acceleration but were able to get to 115-120 mph and decent highway mileage. So ratios like 2.41, 2.73, etc.
Funny, no air on the test car.
Was other American cars of that time period THAT much worse than the Volare/Aspen?
I recall six cylinder Fords with crumbling valve guide seals burning oil big time, gutless 305 Chevvies, AMC models still with vaccum powered windshield wiper motors, Novas rusting out around the front & back windows, Fords with automatic transmissions so “loose” u could goose ’em repeatedly at stop lights with no movement, 4 & 6 GM cars that lost 5 mph on the highway when the A/C compressors engaged,dashboards ok ALL models that cracked when two years old, GM metallic/clear coat paint jobs cracking & peeling barely out of warranty……
Did the 1970’s suck THAT much more for Mopar than GM or FoMoCo??
You bring a good point, Mark, as for example, I remember Ford Fairmonts being quite troublesome too. I think in a way the Aspen/Volare twins got singled out. Now, I’m not saying they were any paragons of virtue, but I compare their singling out to that of the Pontiac Aztek which, albeit an ugly vehicle was no worse look
swise, in my opinion, than the Honda Element to bring up a contemporary example, or the Nissan Juke which came after. Those vehicles were in no way viewed as harshly as the Pontiac.
Other than the well know ballast resistor failure, the Volare I drove in high school gave me no trouble. It was a four door hand me down from my grandfather. It sure seemed faster thatn 14.5 sec to 60, but the 12.5 mpg is dead on. My brother also drove it and would get high with his friends, then tried to cover the stench of spilled bong water with “Carpet Fresh”. The car then reeked of bong water and carpet fresh for months. I loved that car.
We had a ’80 Plymouth Volare as a pool car at work. We could fit five with minimal discomfort. However, the engine would overheat, the A/C was always busted, and it handled like a tug boat. It sat in the parking lot most of the time because no one wanted to drive it!!! My boss was assigned a Chrysler LeBaron which was based on the Volare chassis. It was a little better. However, there was a gap between the right front door frame and the windshield post. The car would make a whistling sound at speed. Based on this experience, I never considered a MOPAR product when shopping for a car…..
My aunt had a 1966 Chevy Bel Air 2-door sedan with a 230 six and Powerglide. She gave it to one of my cousins and bought a brand-new 1975 Chevelle with a 250 six and Turbo Hydra-matic, which instantly became known as the “Gutless Wonder.” This coming from someone who felt that old 230 was adequate.
About the only major improvement that came about in the 1970’s was breakerless electronic ignitions that did away with points and condensers. Everything else was dedicated to meeting regulations and eking some sort of fuel economy out of the strangled engines. As you see with the 318 in the Volare, going smaller didn’t help much. How much worse would fuel economy have been with the 360?
That made my aunt’s six-cylinder Chevelle a rare bird indeed. The overwhelming majority of them, equipped or stripped, came with a 350.
I msy be among the few who actually LIKED my Aspen/Volare. It was a first-year model V8 car, a 1976 Dodge Aspen which I got secondhand in 1978, apparently with the assembly and quality-control ills already exorcized. As a California car it had no rust issues (the Valiant and Dart DID rust, even in California, at the top of the front fenders at a water-trap behind the wheelhouse). It had the warmup driveability issues mentioned, solved by modifying the intake air heater and electric assist choke to both stay “on” longer. Advancing basic spark timing got zero-60 down between 11 and 12 seconds, about all that could be expected from the small 2-barrel carburetor on the 318.
Don’t tell tne California Air Resources Board.
The heavy understeer was cured with the rear sway bar from the 1978 F-body police package, ordered from the Chrysler psrts book. Firm shocks provided ride control; the stock springs and torsion bars were good for the ride.
The Aspen had good interior room for its size and era, more spacious and with a better searing posture than the larger Dodge Coronet/Monaco and Plymouth Fury,
then in the midsize body.
I drove it for 140,000 miles with very little repair work needed and still in its original white paint and blue vinyl roof (it was garaged almost all of tne time I had it). What finally replaced it after twenty years was a Ford Taurus, not because the Aspen needed replacing due to any particular woes, but because the Taurus simply performed and handled better. The Aspen is still seen, and still unappreciated, at car shows.
I purchased a two year old ’77 Volare with the “Road Runner” package, 360 v8 engine , bucket seats, A/C, Goodyear “poly steel” radial tires, 3.23 rear axle ratio.
With the timing advanced, added Edelbrock Street master intake manifold and thermal quad carburetor it was quite quick for the time. Also most reliable.
I sold it to my father, who then sold it to my brother. It was “family owned” for 12 years.
My best friend was highly upset when “that puke red Volare” consistantly shut down his macho ’77 Firebird Trans Am! Small block Mopars were (and still are) under-rated.
“a solid set of wheels that, given proper maintenance, could return 100,000 miles of dependable, if not terribly exciting, driving.”
That summed up the promise of these cars nicely. Given that an A Body was barely broken in by 100,000 miles, it’s easy to see how R&T would expect the Volare to be similar.
The blue Volare posted by Robert earlier shows that these cars could be fairly durable once the problems caused by the abysmal initial build quality, new emissions controls, and incomplete design were sorted out.
I wonder if some of these cars treated their second and third owners better than they did their original owners?
As with many other articles of this time the curb weight and 0-60 times are off from reality. R&T’s article on the 1977 Bonneville was also suspect. Typical Volare wagons base curb weight has them in the 3600-3800 LB range depending on engine and trim/options and any 318 2BBL car I have driven did the 0-60 dash in 11-12 seconds with a broken in engine that ran properly. The slow time and dreadful mileage are indicative of either an engine not in proper tune or with virtually no miles! Same goes for the 1977 301 Bonneville. Even with only 135 HP they were quicker than the quoted 14.8 seconds and did better than 13.5 MPG!
Yes, it must have been in Chrysler’s, Pontiac’s and Road and Track’s best interest to make the cars look heavier and slower than they really were. 🙂
Weight: R&T actually weighed the cars that they tested. The listed curb weights of cars is very misleading, because it’s based on a “stripper” car, and without gas in the tank and possibly other fluids.
My Encyclopedia of American Cars lists the 1975 Volare Premier wagon at 3628 lbs. But that’s for a six cylinder with three speed manual. Add the V8 and Torqueflite, and you’ve got a couple hundred additional pounds right there, never mind gas, and all the other little options that add up. 3960 lbs sounds just about right for it.
One needs to add at least 200-300 lbs to all the listed “curb weights”, if not more, depending on engine and options. Ever picked up one of those massive Chrysler AC pumps they used back then? Must be 80 lbs alone.
Performance? Well, there was always a range among the various magazines that tested any given car. Depended on the weather, and other factors. But this was a car supplied to R&T by Chrysler’s PR office, so we have to assume it was tuned to factory specs. But YMMV. And I suppose a bit of ignition advance might have made a fair bit of difference. Retarded ignition was a key factor during the early Malaise Era, as it kept NOx emissions down.
Regarding fuel mileage: that’s so dependent on driving style, it’s hardly worth debating. But you do seem a bit defensive about these cars. The reality is that they generally weren’t very quick or economical, but to each their own memories of it.
Actually was never a huge fan of these cars but having actually lived through these times, having owned and driven loads of these types of cars, I find it really suspect that a mid size small V8 station wagon weights more than my 1990 Cadillac full size Fleetwood Brougham same for the 77 Bonneville and could only muster 13.5 MPG. Yes mileage and performance was never really good during these times but it wasn’t as bad as some state or as Road and Track indicates with there obvious foreign bias.
And you are aware that a slant six is nearly just as heavy as a 318 V8 right? I have seen both weighted in sedan form and the difference is slight!
Quote: My Encyclopedia of American Cars lists the 1975 Volare Premier wagon at 3628 lbs. But that’s for a six cylinder with three speed manual. Add the V8 and Torqueflite, and you’ve got a couple hundred additional pounds right there, never mind gas, and all the other little options that add up. 3960 lbs sounds just about right for it.
Except that Road and Tracks test curbweight is 4370 not 3960 and the biggest reason I do not believe them. I think they weighted the car with one driver and a passenger plus all the test equipment and a full tank of gas! For comparison I drove my 1990 V8 Fleetwood Brougham into the scrap yard with 3/4 tank of gas with scrap metal in the trunk and it came in at 4410 LBS, 4320 unloaded with me and my 150 LB friend. A Volare wagon can’t possibly weight the same but what do I know.
If a fully equipped V8 Volare’ Wagon along with a full tank of gas and a Driver and Passenger made this car tipped the scales at 4370 pounds, then its much heavier than the pre-downsized and much larger 1976 Chevrolet Impala and Caprice 4 Door Sedan which weigh a little more than 4300 pounds or even a fully equipped 1976 Chevelle Wagon with 350 V8 engine at around 4200 pounds.
What American car was quick & economical in the late 1970’s?
It depends on what constitutes “quick and economical.” It’s my understanding that a Ford Fairmont with the 302 V-8 was reasonably quick for the time, although it may not have been too economical. It helped that the Fairmont was a light car, considering its passenger capacity and overall size. But note that “quick” in the case of the Fairmont certainly did not mean “muscle car quick.”
IIRC, the Ford Fairmont didn’t arrive until 1978, two years after the Volare/Aspen. IDK about your area of the country, but in New Orleans a 302 V8 Fairmonts were Few & Far between. True, the slighted lighter Fairmonts …might…have been marginally quicker.
In 1976, Ford had the 302 V8 in their Granada, Chevy had a 305 in the Nova, Mopar had the 318 in the Volare.
I don’t recall the V8 powered competition being any quicker or any more economical than the V8 Volare?
1976 was a loonnggggggggg time ago! And not just in calender years!
You must have the same collection of magazines that I have. 100-200 copies consisting of Road and Track and Motor Trend consisting from 1971-1981. I bought them from a woman on Craigslist who’s father recently passed. I find this era of automotive history interesting.The Americans were trying to comply to near impossible legislation, the rise of the Japanese cars and the eventual decline of French and Italian cars from the U.S.
It was indeed a perilous, uncertain time for American automobile makers.
Parents had a 77 or 78 fully loaded California 4 door sedan. With the 225 slant 6. I never drove it, and I don’t recall hearing any comments about it. It must have been a gutless wonder. I thought it was a decent looking car for the times. Did often drive the 75 1/2 ton cargo van, 225 six auto with ps and am radio. It ran pretty strong when new, although I had a VW bus around that time so anything else felt like a rocket ship, but after it got around 30,000 miles it really lost a lot of power. A buddy had a 77 cargo van with a 318, but it ran about the same as the six did when new, but his van still ran strong as the miles piled up. I think the emission standards for trucks were a little less severe, and they ran better.
My dad bought a new ’77 318 Volare wagon and my uncle owned a ’78 Aspen and Volare. They loved those cars. No problem’s other than several recall’s on my dad’s ’77 but nothing terrible. I have owned nothing but Mopar’s and will continue to do so until I die.
These were not bad cars once sorted out, and the wagons were very desirable as used cars c. 1980 – 1982. At least among the people I knew in Brooklyn back then, everybody wanted a small wagon for a family car – and there weren’t that many options. Besides the Aspen/Volare wagons, the choices were a Chevy Malibu or a Ford Fairmont. Probably better choices than a Volare wagon, but not by much. One family I knew had a Hornet Sportabout, which was cramped inside and considered dorky at the time. My family were the outliers: we were ahead of the curve in buying Japanese, but we were suckered into a Mazda RX-4 wagon. Honda and Toyota weren’t really an option yet, their 1970s wagons were too small and too expensive as used cars in the early 1980s.
These ‘M’ bodies were decent cars. And rugged. My mom traded her POS ’77 Mercury Cougar Villager wagon on a lovely fully loaded emerald green ’79 Chrysler LeBaron T&C wagon. Five of my my buddies and I took it on our epic post-HS graduation road trip to Colorado. Between averaging around 100 mph on the interstate and off-roading up Rocky Mountain fire roads to find remote campsites, on one of which we tore off the exhaust pipe aft of the cat, that T&C acquitted itself with aplomb. And all in supreme comfort. She kept that T&C another three years or so (exhaust system having been repaired at our expense, natch) of good service.
Wow, just 225 miles of “cruising range” (after adding the 1-gallon reserve) – that’s 33 miles less than a Chevy Bolt, and 90 less than a Tesla Model Y…
Perhaps so, but the Volare can be refilled in minutes virtually anywhere, any time. I’d take one over a Tesla any day of the week.
Better for road trips, for sure. But the rest of the time, that “virtually anywhere” doesn’t include your driveway or garage. I’d rather start every day with a full 315 mile range, even if there were only 10 miles left when I got home the night before. Home charging will be the EV’s killer app.
Okay we’re all car enthusiasts here and the Tesla is a motor vehicle through and through; no need to cement hate for it.
Sometimes this “I’d take [insert POS] over a [insert modern car] gets a little exaggerated and unnecessarily neophobic.
After transferring from California to Great Lakes for advanced electrical school with my (then) pregnant wife & our first born, we decided we had to trade our rotary engined Mazda pickup for a “family” car. Being a junior Sailor with 1 child & 1 on the way, of the vehicles in our price range, we ended up trying to make a deal trading in our beloved sport truck on a plain Jane 1978 Aspen wagon. Refrigerator white with a slant six and a 3 (!) speed manual transmission, the deal faltered when the Dodge dealer told us he had to take our truck down the road to the Mazda dealer to figure out its value. When he came back with a low ball figure, we (wisely) decided to back away from the deal & go down the street to see what the Mazda dealer had since we weren’t aware there was a Mazda dealer in the area. When we walked into the showroom, there was a white 1978 RX 4 wagon sitting there in all of its glory. The dealer (who also sold Buicks) was more than happy to make a deal for the strange foreign car that most of his clients thought was too small. After one of the quickest car buying transactions I’ve ever experienced, the wagon was ours. Of course the fuel economy wasn’t as good as a comparably sized Toyota or Datsun wagon but that power! Since we’d had a great experience with our sport truck, we expected (& received) a great experience with the RX 4. It had a 5 speed and plenty of room for the gear our growing family carted around. Before wad had left the left coast, my father-in-law had (in 1976) bought a nice Nova 4 door with a six-banger that was a very good car for him & lasted a long time, so not all American cars of that era were quality challenged.
Owning a Dart Sport a the time, I was not in the Volaspen market, but I took one for a test drive just to see what they were all about. I found it hesitant to accelerate, and somewhat soft in handling and steering. As mentioned above, they were good looking cars, but their build quality was off-putting. I didn’t visit the Chryco stables for a car until the mid 1980s, stopping elsewhere in between.
I can still remember how excited my family was because we bought raffle tickets at the local franchise of a statewide grocery store that was raffleing off a 1976 Plymouth Volare! Prosperity eluded us longer than most and the thought of the possibility of a new car was exilerating. We didn’t win it but the dream still resonates today.
The malaise era. They don’t build em like they use to.
Thank God!!!
In defense of the Aspen, I bought a new 1978 Dodge Aspen station wagon loaded with everything except (unfortunately) the A91 Deluxe Sound insulation Package. It was the year, and the only year of the “Super-Six.” It was a slug that was reliable. We used it for 185,000 miles when we sold it to a young man because we were taking delivery of our 1986 GMC Safari 8-passenger. One quirk was that the “Super Six” used a different spark plug than the other slant sixes. So, when the time came for the first tune-up, the mechanic put in what he thought were the proper spark plugs. Mileage dropped from 18 MPG to 13 MPG! I looked at my owner’s manual, bought the right spark plugs, and the engine perked up (still a slug) and also reverted to better fuel economy. i was always pleased with the vehicle. Indeed, by the 1978 models, the rust problem had been resolved. We enjoyed the vehicle as we toted our children on trips and I used it daily in my sales work.
I have to admit I kind of get a kick out of posting again to something I posted twice to six years ago.
Chrysler did indeed begin improving the Aspen/Volare almost immediately, as subsequent models were increasingly debugged. By the time the first LeBaron/Diplomats hit the streets, a lot of the original problems had been worked out.
We had a 1980 LeBaron Town & Country with the slant six and the build quality was vastly improved from even a couple of years before. Yeah the front end was still a little vague but linear, as in the car went where it was pointed.
The size was so perfect many police forces went with them despite being significantly smaller than Caprices and Crown Vics.
Interesting that a platform can nearly bury a company and then contribute to its rescue with a little refinement.
In typical US method, they bring out a car before it was ready. Chevy had the Vega and Citation. They had to know that the durability was not there. They made improvements as they went along that should have been done before they were introduced. Chrysler was notorious for this. Ford did it as well. My mother once got a first year Ford Fairmont as a rental. She hit the brakes on wet leaves and the rear end swung out and the car spun 180 degree. She got out and refused to drive it again. In 2006, Ford brought out the “500” and used the 3 liter engine of the Fusion. It had dismal acceleration. The next year they added the 3.5 liter engine and made a decent car. But the public ignored it. They reskinned the outside for 2008, changes the name to Taurus, and the buyers came back. Some did anyway. Why do these US manufacturers continue to bring out cars before they are ready?? $$$$. The 1976 Honda Accord was a far superior vehicle to anything the domestics produced that year.
I come from a long line of family Chrysler product owners. The ownership of the most horrible car ever manufactured (’77 Dodge Aspen) sent me down the road of “never a Chrysler product again” and I have stuck by that ever since. Mostly Toyotas and Hondas since.
Toyota made a whole advertising campaign about people like you.
Rental car agencies had brand new Aspen and Volare station wagons in their fleets in 1978…. I know because I took a California to New York City road trip in a new 1978 Plymouth Volare wagon that was refrigerator white (no fake wood side panels) with a bordello red interior.
It got it up to 100 miles an hour one night on a lonely stretch of highway in Jackson, Missouri, and the cops shot across the median going the opposite direction to chase me down for speeding, and then arrested me because they thought I had drugs in my stuff in the back, ( I was moving from LA to NYC) but they let me go when they found out it was vitamins and not quaaludes. It was really a comfy ride, but when I got to New Orleans, someone tried to steal a large boom box cassette player that I left on the front seat by smashing the front windshield out and stealing it. That was the last time I ever saw it, and then the rental car company gave me a ’78 Emerald Green Oldsmobile Delta 88 as a replacement. To this day, I remember the feeling of ” crushed velour” seats on my skin in The Olds.