Chrysler engineering for 1971
- Thread starter Joseph James
- Start date
Gotta love the "corrosion prevention" blather they put out back then.
Joseph James
Senior Member
Agreed. Rust is the biggest issue I have with mine.
Did your cars have the factory undercoat? THAT can make a difference.
Several years ago, on BarnFinds.com, there was a '75 small Fury for sale, with rust issues on the rh b-pillar (it was a 2dr hardtop). Seems that all of those different welded panels were very rusty. ALSO the vehicle had had a name-brand rust prevention compound applied in that area. Whomever did the application, where small holes were drilled so the dispensing wand could be inserted, did something wrong. OR the company didn't fully know how the cars were built! The rust prevention compound all pooled above where the rust was, rust obviously caused because moisture was trapped and stayed for extended periods of time. It was all below the door striker, from the supplied pictures. You could also see where the compound stopped and trapped the moisture, which could not evaporate. Otherwise, the car looked about normal for that age of car. Seems like it was in the NC area?
The other thing is that GMs typically had none of the protective dips. Ever seen a rusted frame? Which only had "black paint" as its major rust preventative? Even on Corvettes?
As good as they might not have been, they were more sophisticated than what anybody else was doing with unit-body construction back then, from what I could tell.
Seems like there is a thread in here of the most common rust places on the fuselage cars? Even the formals? And how they were repaired.
One side issue would be that the Chrysler products tended to last longer than similar GM cars did, so any "short-cuts" which were made tend to be more prevalent as the cars got older. Chrysler products might have been #3 in sales volume, but typically #1 in long-term durability, by observation. Every now and then, I'll see a '70s Valiant on the road (unrestored and still going) and TRY to remember the last time I saw a similar unrestored '70s Chevy Nova on the road.
Enjoy!
CBODY67
Several years ago, on BarnFinds.com, there was a '75 small Fury for sale, with rust issues on the rh b-pillar (it was a 2dr hardtop). Seems that all of those different welded panels were very rusty. ALSO the vehicle had had a name-brand rust prevention compound applied in that area. Whomever did the application, where small holes were drilled so the dispensing wand could be inserted, did something wrong. OR the company didn't fully know how the cars were built! The rust prevention compound all pooled above where the rust was, rust obviously caused because moisture was trapped and stayed for extended periods of time. It was all below the door striker, from the supplied pictures. You could also see where the compound stopped and trapped the moisture, which could not evaporate. Otherwise, the car looked about normal for that age of car. Seems like it was in the NC area?
The other thing is that GMs typically had none of the protective dips. Ever seen a rusted frame? Which only had "black paint" as its major rust preventative? Even on Corvettes?
As good as they might not have been, they were more sophisticated than what anybody else was doing with unit-body construction back then, from what I could tell.
Seems like there is a thread in here of the most common rust places on the fuselage cars? Even the formals? And how they were repaired.
One side issue would be that the Chrysler products tended to last longer than similar GM cars did, so any "short-cuts" which were made tend to be more prevalent as the cars got older. Chrysler products might have been #3 in sales volume, but typically #1 in long-term durability, by observation. Every now and then, I'll see a '70s Valiant on the road (unrestored and still going) and TRY to remember the last time I saw a similar unrestored '70s Chevy Nova on the road.
Enjoy!
CBODY67
Joseph James
Senior Member
I only gripe about frame rust which was (I believe) from the car sitting in a field for a while. The frame area under the trunk and stub frame. The rest has some surface rust and dirt dauber nests. I don’t know if the car was dealer undercoated but there is some material still left underneath that looks like asphalt.
having driven mostly Ford and GM products during my lifetime, I think Chrysler had the best engineers.
Last edited:
The Goose
Senior Member
I sure as hell wish they let the trunk pan soak a little longer when they dipped em !!!
I think the trunk floor issues could have been due to the rubber-type mats they used back there, on the cars that didn't get the upscale "trunk carpet" treatment. Reason I say that is that at some time in the '70s, I happened to raise the mat on our '66 Newport Town Sedan and found water in the stiffening ribs and on the bottom of the mat. YIKES! No known issues with water leakage from the rear window. At this time, the car was only about 6 years old. The body paint in that area seemed to be thicker than normal, which was probably that way for a reason.
When I got the '70 Monaco in '75, with factory trunk carpet (it had the Brougham Package), everything in the trunk floor under the carpet was completely dry with no signs of water having collected back there.
I suspect that just the normal temperature swings, over time, will make condensate under the mat with NO place to go. The rubber/vinyl mat being the barrier from it evaporating fully.
Just some thoughts,
CBODY67
When I got the '70 Monaco in '75, with factory trunk carpet (it had the Brougham Package), everything in the trunk floor under the carpet was completely dry with no signs of water having collected back there.
I suspect that just the normal temperature swings, over time, will make condensate under the mat with NO place to go. The rubber/vinyl mat being the barrier from it evaporating fully.
Just some thoughts,
CBODY67
Now that's dang funny!
Totally agree.
Similar threads
