MM Retro-Write-Up: 1964 Plymouth Belvedere
11-22-23, 07:52 PM
#1
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
MM Retro-Write-Up: 1964 Plymouth Belvedere
By CL-member-request, MM Retro-Write-Up: 1964 Plymouth Belvedere/Belvedere-Hemi
IN A NUTSHELL: Chrysler atones for several years of serious mistakes.
In 1957, Chrysler, Plymouth, DeSoto, and Dodge caught the entire American auto industry (and particularly major rivals GM and Ford) off-guard with their low, wide, sleek, high-finned “Forward-Look designs” and the “Suddenly, it’s 1960” ads. Studebaker’s new 1957 Hawk also was much sleeker than their previous models, but they, of course, were a very minor player by then, nowhere near the level of Chrysler. Anyhow, the Forward-Look models were an instant success, and the public raved over them. GM and Ford planners, taken aback, immediately laid down plans for competitors…which resulted in their own very low, wide (and, IMO, overstyled) 1959 models.
But, unfortunately, these 1957 Chrysler models had beauty that was only skin-deep….and, in some cases, not even that. Quality-control on these cars was a disaster, even compared to what we saw in Detroit’s dark days of the late 70s and 80s. Hoods wouldn’t close and latch properly. Misaligned doors let in horrendous wind-noise. Seat-springs broke and poked out of the upholstery. Windshields and rear-windows leaked. Window-cranks and door-handles fell off. Front torsion-bars, especially on the entry-level Plymouths which lacked some of the suspension reinforcements the more expensive models did, would snap and break with a loud bang, leaving the car basically undrivable. Worst of all, factory-warranties in those days were rarely more than one year…and sometimes less than that. Thousands upon thousands of car buyers snapped up these cars….only to have them spend more time in the shop than on the road. Needless to say, the company’s previous reputation suffered badly for several years after that….the 1958, 1959, and 1960 models slowly improved, but were still below average in quality control. Of course, that doesn’t mean that Ford and GM models were always perfect, either….1957 Fords had a body-structure so loose and flexible that fully-locked doors would fly open in sharp turns from the bodies twisting from the torsion-forces….in an age where most new cars did not even have seat belts.
Added to the quality-problems Chrysler faced in the late 1950s was the fact that, despite somewhat better quality control, the styling of the later early-60s models was weird and controversial, costing sales. And another serous mistake was made when their 1962 models were not only weirdly-styled but significantly downsized…based on some false-intelligence in the shady world of automotive-spies that sales-leader Chevy was going to downsize their own 1962 model, which never happened. The public never really accepted the downsized (full-size) Chrysler models, which were not really full-size again until 1965…and some Chrysler managers were fired as a result. By this time, of course, American compact cars had become established in the market place, and those who wanted smaller and more economical products were gravitating to Plymouth’s compact Valiant and Dodge’s Lancer/Dart.
Plymouth’s 1963 Belvedere was an attempt to improve on the weird styling and short length of the 1962 model, and sales improved slightly. I personally think it looked a little better, style-wise, than the subsequent 1964 Plymouth (which went up against the beautiful 1964 Ford Galaxie), but mechanically it was the same. In 63/64, Belvederes were still considered basic sedans…Plymouth did not get into the upmarket/semi-luxury VIP series until 1967, in responce to Ford’s upmarket LTD and Chevy’s Caprice.
But there was some good news in all of this…Chrysler’s poor quality-control saw major improvements in the early 1960s, and some nearly bulletproof new Slant-Six and V8 engines and Torqueflite automatic transmissions were introduced, to the point where the company was able to offer a 5-year/50,000 mile powertrain warranty….previously unheard-of in Detroit. Quality and reliability (verified by Consumer Reports) surpassed almost every other American car-line, with the possible exception of Cadillac…always a world-standard in those days. A neighbor of mine, a local cop, owned a 1964 Belvedere (I forgot what engine/transmission it had)…and later told me that it was the best car he ever owned. Quality-control and workmanship was to start dropping again at Chrysler after 1966 (it became quite serious by 1970, almost as bad as the late 50s)..but Plymouths were clearly ahead of their Ford and Chevy rivals in the mid 1960s. Their unibody frame-structure and torsion-bar front suspensions (which didn’t snap any more LOL) and leaf-rear-suspensions produced significantly better handling than the body-on-frame and coil-spring Ford and GM cars, although some Ford products were also unibody. This was negated to some effect, though, by Chrysler’s classic over-boosted power steering, which, despite the better torsion-bar handling, gave the driver significantly less road feel than GM’s well-done Saginaw steering systems. Chrysler’s drum brakes, particularly without power assist, also tended to be second-rate, with a lot of fade and loss of effectiveness with heat build-up. But it was in the durable powertrains that Chrysler products of that era excelled, although the 3-speed Torqueflite automatic transmission, with its unique push-button gear-selectors and Park-Lever, made some whining noise in first gear, and, as it aged, tended to thump going into reverse. The standard Slant-Six engine became famous for its longevity, powering, along with Chevys Stovebolt Six, many of the taxicabs of the era. Chrysler products of that era also had more road noise than most Ford or GM cars, because the torsion bars and leaf springs transmitted more road-shock and noise through the front subframe and unibody structure than coil spends and/or a body-on frame structure. That, plus the fact that Chrysler did not put a lot of sound-deadening in their cars to help keep the weight down.
So…the 1964 Belvedere. As mentioned earlier, the restyled and slightly-lengthened ’63 model tried to undo some of the mistakes of the ’62 version, and it succeeded to an extent. The ’64 model was basically the same, although the front end was restyled, and, IMO, did not look as good as the ’63. But, in addition the ’64 model got a major (and quite famous) new optional addition…..Chrysler’s brutish Hemi V8 powerplant. Displacing 426 cubic inches (7.0L), it had either a single or dual four-barrel carburetor options, and, in its regular top versions for the street, produced 425 horsepower and 490 ft-lbs. of torque. It was meant, of course, to compete with Ford’s 427, Chevy’s 427, and Pontiac’s 421. The term “Hemi” of course, came from
A limited-production option on the ’64 Hemi Belvedere, meant more for the drag strip than the street, was the Super-Stock Commando package, with an even more powerful Hemi modification and a 12:5 compression ratio. As I understand it, the actual power figures on this package were not advertised, and there were some warranty-restrictions. So much power was made with his engine that a disclaimer was given to drivers that full-throttle was not to be held for more than a couple of seconds because of over-stressing. Unlike Ford and GM, many Plymouth and Dodge dealers (although I’m not sure if this was official company policy at the factory-level or not) would not sell you a top-spec Hemi unless you could show you had taken a Driving-Course adequate for a vehicle of that kind of power. Indeed, not only with Hemis, but, as the 1960s wore on, all of the classic American muscle-cars of that era had become quite risky dangerous in the hands of careless, immature, unskilled, or over-aggressive drivers, and insurance rates skyrocketed, which, along with fuel-shortages and gas-mileage/emission rules in the 1970s, helped hasten their demise. I myself sampled some of these ’60s-era muscle-machines, but, even at my young age, I had a healthy respect for safe driving (unlike some of my friends and school-classmates), and never tried any really dumb stuff myself behind the wheel. Unlike some of them, I stayed in one piece, and lived to tell about it.
The 426 Plymouth/Dodges were not only beasts on the street, but, as expected, on drag strips and NASCAR tracks as well. On the drag strip, the efficient Torqueflite automatic transmission was sometimes preferred over the standard 3-speed manual and Hurst 4-speed manuals because of its trigger-quick shifting….and the manual transmissions were not as durable as the Torqueflite. On the NASCAR tracks, Richard Petty, in particular, who was the son of racing legend Lee Petty, racked up impressive win-records in his bright electric-blue #43 Hemi Plymouths. Petty’s main rivals, of course, would be brothers Donny/Bobby Allison and Cale Yarborough in the Ford and Mercury Cobra-Jet 428s, as GM, at this time, was not involved in track-racing. (see my separate write-up on the 1969 Mercury Cyclone CJ 428).
For the next model year, 1965, the full-size Plymouths and Dodges were finally lengthened to about the same size as their rival Fords and Chevies, and sales continued to increase. Many automotive historians believe that 1965 was the peak year for Chrysler quality, engineering, and owner satisfaction….IMO, I have no reason to disagree.
I myself owned a 1964 Plymouth Barracuda for about a year or so, which was smaller than a Belvedere, but I’ll cover that in another write-up.
And, as Always, Happy Vehicle-Memories.
MM
IN A NUTSHELL: Chrysler atones for several years of serious mistakes.
In 1957, Chrysler, Plymouth, DeSoto, and Dodge caught the entire American auto industry (and particularly major rivals GM and Ford) off-guard with their low, wide, sleek, high-finned “Forward-Look designs” and the “Suddenly, it’s 1960” ads. Studebaker’s new 1957 Hawk also was much sleeker than their previous models, but they, of course, were a very minor player by then, nowhere near the level of Chrysler. Anyhow, the Forward-Look models were an instant success, and the public raved over them. GM and Ford planners, taken aback, immediately laid down plans for competitors…which resulted in their own very low, wide (and, IMO, overstyled) 1959 models.
But, unfortunately, these 1957 Chrysler models had beauty that was only skin-deep….and, in some cases, not even that. Quality-control on these cars was a disaster, even compared to what we saw in Detroit’s dark days of the late 70s and 80s. Hoods wouldn’t close and latch properly. Misaligned doors let in horrendous wind-noise. Seat-springs broke and poked out of the upholstery. Windshields and rear-windows leaked. Window-cranks and door-handles fell off. Front torsion-bars, especially on the entry-level Plymouths which lacked some of the suspension reinforcements the more expensive models did, would snap and break with a loud bang, leaving the car basically undrivable. Worst of all, factory-warranties in those days were rarely more than one year…and sometimes less than that. Thousands upon thousands of car buyers snapped up these cars….only to have them spend more time in the shop than on the road. Needless to say, the company’s previous reputation suffered badly for several years after that….the 1958, 1959, and 1960 models slowly improved, but were still below average in quality control. Of course, that doesn’t mean that Ford and GM models were always perfect, either….1957 Fords had a body-structure so loose and flexible that fully-locked doors would fly open in sharp turns from the bodies twisting from the torsion-forces….in an age where most new cars did not even have seat belts.
Added to the quality-problems Chrysler faced in the late 1950s was the fact that, despite somewhat better quality control, the styling of the later early-60s models was weird and controversial, costing sales. And another serous mistake was made when their 1962 models were not only weirdly-styled but significantly downsized…based on some false-intelligence in the shady world of automotive-spies that sales-leader Chevy was going to downsize their own 1962 model, which never happened. The public never really accepted the downsized (full-size) Chrysler models, which were not really full-size again until 1965…and some Chrysler managers were fired as a result. By this time, of course, American compact cars had become established in the market place, and those who wanted smaller and more economical products were gravitating to Plymouth’s compact Valiant and Dodge’s Lancer/Dart.
Plymouth’s 1963 Belvedere was an attempt to improve on the weird styling and short length of the 1962 model, and sales improved slightly. I personally think it looked a little better, style-wise, than the subsequent 1964 Plymouth (which went up against the beautiful 1964 Ford Galaxie), but mechanically it was the same. In 63/64, Belvederes were still considered basic sedans…Plymouth did not get into the upmarket/semi-luxury VIP series until 1967, in responce to Ford’s upmarket LTD and Chevy’s Caprice.
But there was some good news in all of this…Chrysler’s poor quality-control saw major improvements in the early 1960s, and some nearly bulletproof new Slant-Six and V8 engines and Torqueflite automatic transmissions were introduced, to the point where the company was able to offer a 5-year/50,000 mile powertrain warranty….previously unheard-of in Detroit. Quality and reliability (verified by Consumer Reports) surpassed almost every other American car-line, with the possible exception of Cadillac…always a world-standard in those days. A neighbor of mine, a local cop, owned a 1964 Belvedere (I forgot what engine/transmission it had)…and later told me that it was the best car he ever owned. Quality-control and workmanship was to start dropping again at Chrysler after 1966 (it became quite serious by 1970, almost as bad as the late 50s)..but Plymouths were clearly ahead of their Ford and Chevy rivals in the mid 1960s. Their unibody frame-structure and torsion-bar front suspensions (which didn’t snap any more LOL) and leaf-rear-suspensions produced significantly better handling than the body-on-frame and coil-spring Ford and GM cars, although some Ford products were also unibody. This was negated to some effect, though, by Chrysler’s classic over-boosted power steering, which, despite the better torsion-bar handling, gave the driver significantly less road feel than GM’s well-done Saginaw steering systems. Chrysler’s drum brakes, particularly without power assist, also tended to be second-rate, with a lot of fade and loss of effectiveness with heat build-up. But it was in the durable powertrains that Chrysler products of that era excelled, although the 3-speed Torqueflite automatic transmission, with its unique push-button gear-selectors and Park-Lever, made some whining noise in first gear, and, as it aged, tended to thump going into reverse. The standard Slant-Six engine became famous for its longevity, powering, along with Chevys Stovebolt Six, many of the taxicabs of the era. Chrysler products of that era also had more road noise than most Ford or GM cars, because the torsion bars and leaf springs transmitted more road-shock and noise through the front subframe and unibody structure than coil spends and/or a body-on frame structure. That, plus the fact that Chrysler did not put a lot of sound-deadening in their cars to help keep the weight down.
So…the 1964 Belvedere. As mentioned earlier, the restyled and slightly-lengthened ’63 model tried to undo some of the mistakes of the ’62 version, and it succeeded to an extent. The ’64 model was basically the same, although the front end was restyled, and, IMO, did not look as good as the ’63. But, in addition the ’64 model got a major (and quite famous) new optional addition…..Chrysler’s brutish Hemi V8 powerplant. Displacing 426 cubic inches (7.0L), it had either a single or dual four-barrel carburetor options, and, in its regular top versions for the street, produced 425 horsepower and 490 ft-lbs. of torque. It was meant, of course, to compete with Ford’s 427, Chevy’s 427, and Pontiac’s 421. The term “Hemi” of course, came from
A limited-production option on the ’64 Hemi Belvedere, meant more for the drag strip than the street, was the Super-Stock Commando package, with an even more powerful Hemi modification and a 12:5 compression ratio. As I understand it, the actual power figures on this package were not advertised, and there were some warranty-restrictions. So much power was made with his engine that a disclaimer was given to drivers that full-throttle was not to be held for more than a couple of seconds because of over-stressing. Unlike Ford and GM, many Plymouth and Dodge dealers (although I’m not sure if this was official company policy at the factory-level or not) would not sell you a top-spec Hemi unless you could show you had taken a Driving-Course adequate for a vehicle of that kind of power. Indeed, not only with Hemis, but, as the 1960s wore on, all of the classic American muscle-cars of that era had become quite risky dangerous in the hands of careless, immature, unskilled, or over-aggressive drivers, and insurance rates skyrocketed, which, along with fuel-shortages and gas-mileage/emission rules in the 1970s, helped hasten their demise. I myself sampled some of these ’60s-era muscle-machines, but, even at my young age, I had a healthy respect for safe driving (unlike some of my friends and school-classmates), and never tried any really dumb stuff myself behind the wheel. Unlike some of them, I stayed in one piece, and lived to tell about it.
The 426 Plymouth/Dodges were not only beasts on the street, but, as expected, on drag strips and NASCAR tracks as well. On the drag strip, the efficient Torqueflite automatic transmission was sometimes preferred over the standard 3-speed manual and Hurst 4-speed manuals because of its trigger-quick shifting….and the manual transmissions were not as durable as the Torqueflite. On the NASCAR tracks, Richard Petty, in particular, who was the son of racing legend Lee Petty, racked up impressive win-records in his bright electric-blue #43 Hemi Plymouths. Petty’s main rivals, of course, would be brothers Donny/Bobby Allison and Cale Yarborough in the Ford and Mercury Cobra-Jet 428s, as GM, at this time, was not involved in track-racing. (see my separate write-up on the 1969 Mercury Cyclone CJ 428).
For the next model year, 1965, the full-size Plymouths and Dodges were finally lengthened to about the same size as their rival Fords and Chevies, and sales continued to increase. Many automotive historians believe that 1965 was the peak year for Chrysler quality, engineering, and owner satisfaction….IMO, I have no reason to disagree.
I myself owned a 1964 Plymouth Barracuda for about a year or so, which was smaller than a Belvedere, but I’ll cover that in another write-up.
And, as Always, Happy Vehicle-Memories.
MM
Last edited by mmarshall; 11-22-23 at 08:01 PM.
11-23-23, 05:23 PM
#2
Lexus Test Driver
thanks for the write up! that was a nice history lesson, the late 50s quality control stuff had me cracking up lol i can only imagine how those cars would feel to us now being used to present day cars
on the other note, a 5 year / 50,000 mile powertrain warranty in the early 60s?!? that's impressive stuff! well i'm happy to know about the belvedere now, hopefully i see one out on a nice sunday afternoon out sometime and i'll know to get a bit excited lol... and i'll know to look out for that 426 hemi V8 mohturrrr
on the other note, a 5 year / 50,000 mile powertrain warranty in the early 60s?!? that's impressive stuff! well i'm happy to know about the belvedere now, hopefully i see one out on a nice sunday afternoon out sometime and i'll know to get a bit excited lol... and i'll know to look out for that 426 hemi V8 mohturrrr
11-23-23, 06:08 PM
#3
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
thanks for the write up! that was a nice history lesson, the late 50s quality control stuff had me cracking up lol i can only imagine how those cars would feel to us now being used to present day cars
on the other note, a 5 year / 50,000 mile powertrain warranty in the early 60s?!? that's impressive stuff! well i'm happy to know about the belvedere now, hopefully i see one out on a nice sunday afternoon out sometime and i'll know to get a bit excited lol... and i'll know to look out for that 426 hemi V8 mohturrrr
on the other note, a 5 year / 50,000 mile powertrain warranty in the early 60s?!? that's impressive stuff! well i'm happy to know about the belvedere now, hopefully i see one out on a nice sunday afternoon out sometime and i'll know to get a bit excited lol... and i'll know to look out for that 426 hemi V8 mohturrrr
Yes, that 5/50 warranty was one thing that helped with Chrysler's success in the mid-60s, but, as quality control dropped again in later years, and new, less-reliable drivetrains were introduced, that 5/50 drivetrain warranty was scaled way back, but I don't remember what year that was.
As for the late-50s quality-control debacle, it affected Plymouths somewhat more than the more upscale Chrysler makes, but they suffered some, too. And Chrysler was not the only manufacturer to have QC problems at this time....Ford, Mercury, and Edsel also had problems, but not to the same serious extent, except for the tendency of the doors to sometimes pop open when the inadequately-strengthened bodies/frames twisted too much in hard turns. GM, in contrast, except for poor-quality paint, did a much better job of assembling their vehicles, and used nicer materials inside...one reason why it got so much of the market share.
Last edited by mmarshall; 11-23-23 at 07:30 PM.
11-23-23, 07:47 PM
#4
Lexus Test Driver
11-23-23, 08:12 PM
#5
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Thanks, Margate.
That's one of the limited-production Super-Stock models.
Notice how the grille, in front, with only two headlights as opposed to the four in some other versions, looks like the grille on some early Ford Falcon models.
Last edited by mmarshall; 11-23-23 at 08:16 PM.
11-23-23, 09:04 PM
#7
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post