Which do you like better? Slab side or Fuselage?

[cantflip]

This is easy. I prefer Formals! No bulkhead connectors and the best ride/ handling/ braking of all the C bodies.

I opened the thread to vote Formal... but I like/love most of the products with a few exceptions. My passion is with the Formals and Forward Looks, Fuselage and Slab sides are a close second/third. In C bodies I tend to prefer Chrysler and Imperial lines, but there are so many Plymouths and Dodges I like...

Few cars show up on these pages that I don't appreciate in some way...

 

[rapidtrans]

Any with a 300 badge. Then my preference is for first year models. So that's the 65, 67 & 69 models with the slab sides the winner. First years tend to be the best and cleanest design i.m.o. Following year trim changes weren't always an improvement.

 

[polara71]

Obviously Im a Fuselage guy, they have the best styling and most aggressive appearance. While they may not have the comfort of a couch like a formal they can be quite comfortable. In my mind, the best of both worlds ...

 

[70_NPORT]

Oh brother here we go once again, lol.
Ok IMHO its the fuselage cars hands down. Much more aero dynamic then their slab and the formal bretheren..and..much more radical departure from the norm. The fusealge cars were "aero" when they didnt have to be. They look sleek and fast even when parked from some angles. A purely "engineering" vantage point doesnt allow one to appreciate the fuselage design cues. The forward look cars are studies in how not to design cars IMO..what with four foot tall batwings hanging of the *** ends and headlight eyebrows upfront..thats the reason why Exner got canned eventually.

 

[LocuMob]

I love my slab, but would take some fusies without hesitation.

 

[rapidtrans]

O.P. was pretty simple. Slab side or fuselage?
97 Lexus and Exner revisionist history took quite a turn.

 

[MYSINBIN]

I'm a slabsider guy. The '67-'68 2DHT cars with their reverse angle rear windows were unique in their time.

I'm also a chrome guy. The '65-'66 dashes were way cool. Same with '67-'68.

I've just never liked the styling of the fuselage cars. The chrome started to disappear, as mentioned by OP the front ends were longer than necessary. Some of the body styles remind me of a panting dog. The plastic dashes seemed thrown together to me.

I've always wondered if the fuselage cars were the result of a lost argument/discussion. If you compare any '65-'68 car with it's '74 counterpart, it seems like a natural progression in styling.

To be clear, I think just about any Mopar is cool. And I'm not putting down anyone's cars.

It's only my personal taste and opinion.

And we all know that each of our opinions are right.

John

 

[BillGrissom]

The Slab is becoming modern-looking, because several recent concept cars had similar long wavy side panels and a chrome edge strip. The Chrysler 300 and PT Cruiser brought that back a bit. Fusies look more bland to me, like the gazillion GM Belair's of the 1970's. The strange thing with all is that many people immediately associate "poor mileage" when they see them, at least baby-boomers like me who lived thru the gas crisis days when U.S. cars became 4 cyl overnight. That mind-set continued thru the Hummer, Escalade era when gas was 69c/gal (in GA). I have always gotten 18 mpg hwy in my 65 Newport, which wasn't terrible, and hope to exceed 20 mpg when I finish playing w/ EFI.

 

[70_NPORT]

Yep...its all mopar in the end....even the fin cars, lol.

 

[Ripinator]

Fuseys and Forward Look are hands down the best! The others are generally bland in the styling department, mostly being boxy squared off designs. I do like the 1965 and 1968 300s and 1968 Sport Furys though - at least they tried to have some style with their C pillars (2 doors) and other styling features.

View attachment 95330 View attachment 95331 View attachment 95332 View attachment 95333

Show off. . .

 

['69FuryIIIConvertible]

Fuselage......even in thier worst condition they still shine through with beautiful styling. I can appreciate the engineering of the formal, but the interiors are hard to look at and let's face it the exterior looks like it fell off a Lincoln or Cadillac design table. The slabs are neat, but again the design is pedestrian at best.

That's my opinion. That and the 73 fury is hardly the bad as per someone else's comment. It was a last minute idea for a final year of that body and for how rushed it was I'd take it any day over a 74 in the styling department. There's so many fine details in its styling and every other Fuselage styling.

 

[Snotty]

For me it's a Fusey over a slab any day o fthe week. While I loved the '65-6 Chryslers, I equally have disliked the '67-8s. I thought, and think, they are ugly. The '69s were a very welcome sight for me.

I There's a lot of DEAD space ahead of the radiator that serves no purpose.

Oh, yes it did and does: Crumple Zones. It was for safety purposes in the event of a crash. I remember thinking the same thing as you when I was a kid looking at these brand new. When I learned why they were built like that I understood.

 

[68Nwprt]

I equally have disliked the '67-8s. I thought, and think, they are ugly.

As a car guy, from a styling view point, your saying this is ugly?

 

[saforwardlook]

As a car guy your saying this is ugly?
View attachment 95659

I would not call a slab side ugly, but some were better than others. I guess I am tainted a little because I was still fairly young then and while I looked at what Chrysler was offering in 1966 - 7 in the form of slabsides they didn't compare to what I was looking at from GM in the same timeframe. I was actually excited at the 1965 300s including the L letter car, but when I saw this from GM, slabsides after 1965 were no longer the epitome for me.................and I was relieved when Chrysler came out with the fuselage styling and did GM one better in 1969 compared to most of their designs. Nothing has ever matched the fuselage styling, for me at least, ever since the 1969 - 1971 300s.

I guess I also like innovation, creativity and out of the box thinking and that is why the Forward Look cars also appealed to me - when I was a kid then, I was floored when I saw a 1957 Chrysler 300C for the first time.

But to me, GM had it right in 1966 with this car, and nothing from Chrysler, including slabsides, compared at the time, not even close......................I mean, look at that beauty - it still looks great today! It is probably the only non-Chrysler vehicle I wouldn't mind owning today.

 

[68Nwprt]

For GM in 1966 I like the Cadillac for styling over the Riviera.

 

[saforwardlook]

For GM in 1966 I like the Cadillac for styling over the Riviera.
View attachment 95668


View attachment 95669

While I prefer the Rivera, I still think the Cadillac was outstanding too! Those were zenith styling years for GM.

 

[67 chrysler300]

Its all very interesting and all pretty much a matter of personal taste. One thing I can tell you though; my 67 300 'vert receives plenty of attention and "thumbs up" whenever I drive it. It seems Everyone loves the car and its got to be about the styling since that makes the first impression.
Today, for instance, I pulled into a mom and pop convenience store to get some beer. There was a black guy walking out and he stopped and starred at my car! I often wonder why that is, but as I walked out of the store I took a good look at my car...I have to admit it is beautiful and has a very interesting styling.

Do you guys get that kinda reaction with your fusey cars?

 

[The Horvaths]

Its all very interesting and all pretty much a matter of personal taste. One thing I can tell you though; my 67 300 'vert receives plenty of attention and "thumbs up" whenever I drive it. It seems Everyone loves the car and its got to be about the styling since that makes the first impression.
Today, for instance, I pulled into a mom and pop convenience store to get some beer. There was a black guy walking out and he stopped and starred at my car! I often wonder why that is, but as I walked out of the store I took a good look at my car...I have to admit it is beautiful and has a very interesting styling.

Do you guys get that kinda reaction with your fusey cars?

Can't speak for fuselages, but both my slabs get a lot of attention. People always come up and ask "What is that" or "Nice car!" and my favorite, "Is it for sale?".

 

['69FuryIIIConvertible]

Hauling a rotted out 4 door 69 fury home on my trailer I had people asking me what it was and what I was going to do with it because it was a "cool car" so yes. Us fussy guys get the same attention. My 73 I've taken to 3 cruise nights and each time it drew a crowd of people who wanted to look at it. Wanted to know what it was. Wanted to know this or that. Had fond memories of this or that. My blank had one of those. Etc.

They all are received and perceived the same way guys. Its the owners opinion if you ask me.

 

[monaco75]

Fuseys have to take the cake in the styling department. Theres no doubt they are sexy! Even the '73s with the big gawdy bumper etts still look damn good. I lust after a '73 imperial 2 dr, I will own some day.

Regardless though, as a car over all, and whole, there is no beating the formals. Sure not as much sex apeal as a fusey, but once you get behind the wheel of one, you completely forget about it. You can imediatly tell the difference. They are such GREAT driving cars.

Ofcoarse I'm biased lol. They all have their strong, and weak points.