The new Dodge Dart?

My wife can’t believe that her “compact” 1965 Dodge Dart GT was 4 feet longer than her Nissan. Although a good car by 1965 standards, it would be the bottom of the barrel today. We kept ours for 13 years, and replaced just about everything over that period, except the engine and transmission, which were bullet-proof.

Just the same, the following items were replaced:

  1. Alternator (2X)
  2. Gas tank
  3. Starter
  4. Torsion bar anchor
  5. Drive shaft universals
  6. Shocks (2X)
  7. Exhaust system (3X)
  8. Battery (2X)
  9. Water pump
  10. Ignition switch
  11. Paint job
  12. Distributor shaft
  13. Windshield washers
  14. Master cylinder
  15. Turn signals
  16. Transmission shift cable
  17. Seat belts
  18. Leaking head gasket
    18 Heater fan motor
  19. Brakes and drums (2X)

The only thing I remember about Dodge Darts is that a H.S. buddy had one back in the late '60s, and it had a pushbutton automatic, with teh buttons on the dash. I always thought that made a great deal of sense, and wonder why the idea was never resurrected.

Jaguar has a rotary-dial shifter in its XF now. Looks awesome - like something out of a scifi movie, but the rotary knob retracts when the car is turned off, and then extends electronically when it’s started. I can see this getting jammed, and then you can’t put the car in gear. Of course, when has Jaguar ever cared about long-term reliability :wink:

Supposedly BMW is playing with push button shift selectors.

Really, if they ever replace the normal drive selector on automatics, at this point I’d not be surprised if they went to some sort of touch screen interface.

Give it time MB. Give it time.
The 65 Malibu I had was considered a mid-sized car in it’s day, yet it had just about as much leg room, if not less, in the back than my old Civic, despite being much longer.
Not sure how long it was, but it just barely fit into the garage where I used to live. There’s an 08 Ford Escape that resides in there now, and it still has more room than the Malibu did.

Triedag…

…I finished college with a 62 Rambler American classic. At 50k it began burning oil and had constant carb problems throughout my ownership of it. On the highway, it was a six in name only as far as performance is concerned. It was the smaller (for then)200 cu inch 6 which may explain it’s lethargy. The one saving grace that made it popular trade bait in getting one bros. Corvair Monza and the other’s Triumph, was the bed feature. I must confess, I seldom saw my car on weekends…so I know not what they did with it.
That may explain the poor erformance. Maybe it was just tuckered out when I got it on Mondays.

The Dodge Dart has been several sizes of automobile. In 1960, the Dodge Dart was a full size on a 118 inch wheelbase and was a full size Plymouth but with a different, and I think, more attractive body. The Dodge Dart station wagon was on a 122 inch wheelbase. The engines ranged from a 225 cubic inch 6, a 318 cubic inch V-8 and a 361 cubic inch V-8. There was a senior Dodge on a 122 inch wheelbase that came in two series: 1) Polara; and 2) Matador. The senior Dodge had a 383 cubic inch V-8. The 1961 models were the same, except that the Dart and the larger models offered a 413 cubic inch V-8. Also, in 1961, a compact car based on the Plymouth Valiant was offered and this car was called the Dodge Lancer. It came with a 170 cubic inch slant 6 or the 225 cubic inch slant 6. In 1962, the Dodge was slimmed down and on a 116 inch wheelbase. There was the Dodge Dart 330, Dodge Dart 440 and Dodge Polara and were available with the same engines offered in the 1961 models. I am probably the only person on the planet that found these 1962 Dodges attractive. The Plymouth had corresponding offerings. The Dodge Lancer was also continued in 1962 and was not changed much from 1961. The downsized Dodge Dart did not sell well, so Dodge added a large car which was more like the Chrysler and it was called the Dodge 880. In 1963, the regular Dodge grew and was on a 119 inch wheelbase. The Dart then became a compact and took over for the Lancer. This Dodge was essentially a slightly stretched Plymouth Valiant and was considered a compact. The Dart remained a compact and was offered through the 1970s; Sometime in the late 1960s, the 170 cubic inch 6 was dropped and a 273 cubic inch V-8 was added.

dagosa—
My guess is that your 1962 Rambler American either had a 196 cubic inch flathead six or a 196 cubic inch overhead valve 6. The block was about the same, but the overhead valve configuration was added. The Rambler Classic 6 had the overhead valve engine. Also, in 1961, the overhead valve engine was offered with an aluminum block as an option as well as the regular cast iron block for the overhead valve engines. These aluminum block engines were notorious for burning oil at an early mileage interval. A completely redesigned 6 became available on certian 1964 Rambler Classics in 1964. This engine had a displacement of 232 cubic inches. In 1965, this became the standard engine in the Rambler Classic 660 and 770 series. A smaller displacement 199 cubic inch version was standard in the lowest trim line Classic 550. The Rambler Ameridan modes came with the old flathead and overhead valve 196 cubic inch engines. However, the top of the line Rambler American did have as an option the new 232 cubic inch 6 cylinder engine.
As I remember, International Harvester bought engines from Rambler (AMC) for use in their pickup trucks. This engine also was used in the Jeeps when AMC acquired Willys.

Trie…that’s probably why it was so cheap to buy. Except for the motor, with it’s boxy design, I liked the car. Not enough to buy another. But for $450, it was worth the aggravation. Friend had latter model Gremlin with 232… It was a big improvement in motor but one butt ugly car.

It does, doesn’t it?

That’s why it has the “Dodge” warning above the grille.

I’m sure it will be a fine car, but what a shame to bring an Italian car to our shores and not offer it as a hatchback.

I’m with MikeInNH - I loved our old 72 Dart. Couldn’t kill that slant 6.
The body, on the other hand, no so much…

This is definitely one of my favorites from this year’s Detroit auto show. The other would have to be the Fusion. Here’s my 2 cents on the Dart 2 cents on the Dart. What worries me the most is whether this new Dart will be reliable. Fiat and Chrysler don’t have a stellar reliability track record these days.

Nice car! Would I buy one? NO WAY, not until after a few years if it has proven itself to be at least as good as the best compacts on the market. Both Chrysler and Fiat have spottty quality records, and so far no one knows how good it will be.

I would like to like it, but it’s just “meh” to me

I would consider it, but I wouldn’t buy a car in the first model year from ANY manufacturer.

Hey, Whitey, where you been? I was thinking today that I hadn’t seen you on here for a while.

MikeinNH: Pontiac Lemans what an Awful, Awful Car! My mom owned one. She a 1988 Lemans, it was a very uncomfortable car! Two doors and two kids (my brother and I) and no trunk! And that car had some mechanical issues. The shocks or struts (not sure what they put on that car in that year) went out. Had to change the O2 sensor in it 3 times and all within two years. Once it hit about 30k miles, started leaking oil. At 40K miles, the clutch on it went bad but of course that wasn’t the car, it was my mom’s driving. See my mom is a Cluth’s worst enemy. I wasn’t unhappy to see GM stop manufacturing it. If mom would’ve kept that car instead of trading it for the 1992 Plymouth Laser that I eventually ended up buying off my Dad, I would’ve ended up with that stupid Lemans! Now a days anyone suggest I buy a Two Door Car unless its like a mustang or a corvette, I go crazy!

An amazing car by most standards. These babies could fly. I was on http://www.almostdawn.com a few days ago and found one of their old music videos. Looks like they used one it in. I am surprised that other bands don’t use it more.