Clay,
Your point about realizing just how far Chrysler had sunk by then, and also
what a leap of faith would have been required to put out that much money for
their best car was a good one, and one that I made a couple of weeks ago in
another thread.
As far as the comparison between the Imperial and the K-car, I can only say
that the K-car was a success (in fact it and the soon to come mini-van saved
the company) while the Imperial was not.
Paul
In a message dated 2/6/2004 5:29:28 PM Eastern Standard Time,
imperialman@xxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
> I just finished reading cover to cover the June 1981 Motor Trend magazine.
> Though no Imperial specific articles, the letters to the editors section
>did mention Imperial.
>
> The June issue had the MT editors taking a lot of heat about their
>selection for the Motor Trend car of the year, the Plymouth-Dodge K-car .
>
> One irate reader wrote in part
> " You(also) gave the Imperial, obviously more luxurious than any other
>car tested a rating of 6 in comfort and 5 in ride and drive, while the Reliant
>turned in the highest rating
> in both categories.
> I fail to see how the Reliant could score better than the Imperial, C#$lass
>and G%nada in ANY of the luxury categories.
>
> The short answer from the MT editor was " We don't feel that comfort and
>ride & drive are necessarily synonymous with
> "luxury"
>
> Now what kind of answer is that ?
>
> I don't think anyone on this list would argue that an 81 Imperial's ride
>is better than any K- car and I sure don't want to start a K-car discussion
>so I am offering up this letter because it mentions Imperial and I think it
>shows how political Motor Trends car of the year (was)is.
>
> Something that also impressed me after reading this 1981 Motor Trend was
>how far Chrysler really had sunk.
> What a leap of faith it must have taken someone to even
> consider laying out 18K to buy an Imperial
>
> Clay Smith
> 67 Crown Coupe
> 60 Custom
>
>
>
>
>
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network