Grandparents Brand New 67 Chrysler 300

[hergfest]

My Dad found this pic today of their brand new 67 Chrysler 300 4-door hardtop. They picked it up at the Jefferson Plant then did Canada, the East Coast, then back to Seattle. This picture is in Philadelphia and the car was about a week old. I still have the window sticker for this car but I'm sure its long since crushed.

 

[commando1]

I want everyone to notice the stance.
This was new!
End of all arguments. Tha *** sagged from the factory.

 

[polara71]

Full of luggage

 

[LocuMob]

I want everyone to notice the stance.
This was new!
End of all arguments. Tha *** sagged from the factory.

Full of luggage

Gotta agree with Dave, I know how my car sits with crap in the back.

 

[Binx]

GREAT picture!! Looks like it was a disc brake car!!

 

[CBODY67]

Full of luggage

Luggage and shadows.

 

[polara71]

As I look at it on the larger screen it looks higher in the rear than I thought . The skirts also help the illusion of sitting low .

 

[saforwardlook]

I want everyone to notice the stance.
This was new!
End of all arguments. Tha *** sagged from the factory.

I started working for Chrysler in Highland Park, MI in 1969, and all I can say is that I have personally thought that Chryslers in general did sag in the back a little compared to the front when brand new, and I never liked them that way - they always needed a little rake (slight though) to look correct in my eyes. So although this photo of the 67 doesn't necessarily prove anything, I do generally agree with Stan. I have always wondered why and have questioned whether being slightly lower in the back would slightly minimize rear "wheel hop" even when new during panic stops. It was a problem that was well known in engineering back then.

This video shows a new 1971 Chrysler New Yorker 2 door test car undergoing magazine testing, and the low rear end look is also present throughout, and the panic stop wheel hop is highlighted as perhaps the cars greatest weakness.

 

[75LandYacht]

Wonder where THAT car is today? Hmm

 

[commando1]

I clearly remember that all it took to make the rear sag was a full tank of gas and your usual assortment of **** you learn to carry in the trunk up north in the winter.

 

[live4theking]

Cool picture.

 

[tallhair]

I clearly remember that all it took to make the rear sag was a full tank of gas and your usual assortment of **** you learn to carry in the trunk up north in the winter.

Stqn, can I see a pic showing a difference of your memory of the normal look of them in the day vs whatever caused the comment so I can see a difference?

That's how I remember them looking and I think it's mainly a body line / design thing.

 

[Ripinator]

I clearly remember that all it took to make the rear sag was a full tank of gas and your usual assortment of **** you learn to carry in the trunk up north in the winter.

Please note: When travelling with wimmin, you must factor in the additional weight of at least two more two-suiter suitcases. . .

 

[Imperialist67]

Love period car photos like this, especially with this Crystal Blue 300...... it seems to have an even stance to me, I think the fender line makes it LOOK lower in the rear, which the 67's "boat-tail" accentuates. Your grandparents had good taste, that must have been great to ride around in......

 

[commando1]

Stqn, can I see a pic showing a difference of your memory of the normal look of them in the day vs whatever caused the comment so I can see a difference?

 

[68 300 Convertible]

I started working for Chrysler in Highland Park, MI in 1969, and all I can say is that I have personally thought that Chryslers in general did sag in the back a little compared to the front when brand new, and I never liked them that way - they always needed a little rake (slight though) to look correct in my eyes. So although this photo of the 67 doesn't necessarily prove anything, I do generally agree with Stan. I have always wondered why and have questioned whether being slightly lower in the back would slightly minimize rear "wheel hop" even when new during panic stops. It was a problem that was well known in engineering back then.

This video shows a new 1971 Chrysler New Yorker 2 door test car undergoing magazine testing, and the low rear end look is also present throughout, and the panic stop wheel hop is highlighted as perhaps the cars greatest weakness.

My first car was a 1971 Chrysler 300 Two Door, 440 cu in, PW, PL, AC, Moonroof, Console mounted cassette player that recorded. This was a blast to watch. Thanks

 

[Duncan]

The way I remember the late 50s - early/mid 60s - most cars, Mopar as well as Ford and Chevy all 'sagged' in the back. I always thought they were trying to give the cars the effect of 'taking off' (I remember I never liked that look). I also think that is why lifting the rear (turning the shackles on the leaf springs, etc) was so popular. It made the cars more level and even gave them some 'lift' in the rear. My memory may be faulty but that is the way I remember it.

 

[hergfest]

My Dad convinced them to get the 300 because it had a standard 440 in it. He was 17 at the time.

 

[Verse]

I started working for Chrysler in Highland Park, MI in 1969, and all I can say is that I have personally thought that Chryslers in general did sag in the back a little compared to the front when brand new, and I never liked them that way - they always needed a little rake (slight though) to look correct in my eyes. So although this photo of the 67 doesn't necessarily prove anything, I do generally agree with Stan. I have always wondered why and have questioned whether being slightly lower in the back would slightly minimize rear "wheel hop" even when new during panic stops. It was a problem that was well known in engineering back then.

This video shows a new 1971 Chrysler New Yorker 2 door test car undergoing magazine testing, and the low rear end look is also present throughout, and the panic stop wheel hop is highlighted as perhaps the cars greatest weakness.

On bias ply tires too.

 

[has2bmopar]

The '68 brochure shows the Newport having less leaf springs than the 300 and New Yorker.