Interesting article at
www.indieauto.org/2021/04/09/1969-71-chrysler-fixing-a-promising-idea-gone-bad/
In the middle 1960s, it seemed that when a Chrysler product was "good", it was good and when it was not, it was really bad, by observation. What made the difference? HOW the car was ORDERED by the dealer. For example, many felt that Chryslers were "tinny" and noisy, but if the dealer ordered the factory undercoat and hood pad (or those two items came in an option package or upscale model), things were better and quieter. The local dealer ordered his cars pretty much one way, with some exceptions on particular models. Almost everything was a "Basic Group" option package car, which got most of the desired items in it from the start. Add the "Light Group" and a few other things. Made for a "nicely-equipped" car at a good price, by observation. Most C-bodies had the 383 2bbl V-8, although many Fury IIIs had the 318 2bbl.
By comparison, a dealer could also order "line item options" separately. Made the window sticker longer and more impressive, but without the cost savings of the option groups. Usually, when they did that, they could also delete some items (as the undercoat and hood pad), too. I feel that much of the "tinny feel" reputation could have been the result of these things. Why a base car felt really "base" and a VIP or New Yorker would feel really nice, by observation. Or perhaps this was a tool to get the prospect into the nicer car?
It was in the Chryser factory warranty to "tighten bolts and nuts" at the first oil change, too, but I suspect that many didn't get that done. Although I suspect that individual "squeaks and rattles" were addressed as possible? When I came home for the first weekend that my parents had their new 1972 Newport Royal, I drove it and determined that it felt "looser" than the '66 Newport Town Sedan that I had taken to college with me. So, per the advice in a magazine, I waited until it got a few thousand miles on it, and then tightened every nut/bolt/screw I could get to on that car . . . the WHOLE thing. That, by itself, got rid of about 98% of the "noisy" issues.
Serviceability on the Fuselage cars was generally worse than on the Slabs, expecially underhood. That sylish higher fender line did not help anything. It was much more GM-like that I opined that "They must have let some engineers they got from GM to design that car". FWIW But I liked the 4drs a lot. Especially the huge trunk, when compared to the '66 Newport Town Sedan.
Each generation of C-body had their own traits, good and not-so-good, from 1965 to 1978. Just depends on which of the "good" things you like best.
Just some thoughts and observations,
CBODY67