Has Chrysler ever had a point in time where its vehicles weren't collectively cheap janky shitboxes?

Kek.

Go figure mopar fans are retarded.

what am i looking at

>MOPAR is SHITCAR.
but we both know mopars are the valuable classics. you can get a few camaros or mustangs for the price of one GTX or Challenger.

the bigger their box the more gay they have

>posting a table with no labels for the axes

such a juvenile comment but i fucking kekked to tears lol!

These are considered one of the worst cars of all time.

NASCAR champions, the only thing Dodge ever did was shit out the HEMI which they didn't even invent. Their cars are garbage.

Yeah because no one wanted them back then so hardly any of them were made. You can find nearly every Mopar for next to nothing compared to GM or FoMoCo unless it's rare.

thx lol

>Yeah because no one wanted them back then so hardly any of them were made. You can find nearly every Mopar for next to nothing compared to GM or FoMoCo unless it's rare.
this entire post is wrong, though. the cheapest challenger I've found in my life as a driver was $7000 and it was mostly a pile of rust, with no motor/tranny. mopars sold exceedingly well

So you found a piece of shit for sale so that means they sold well back in the day? Your logic makes 0 sense. The only value in a Challenger is because it's rare compared to something like a Camaro or Mustang.

They did sell well back in the day, ya dingus. Mopars have always been the high end, pricing reflects it. Ferd and GM shit has always been dime a dozen mass produced crap

Lol

>1970 Mustangs
198,239
>1970 Camaros
124,901
>1970 Challenger
76,935

Dodge was the worst of the 3, AMC saved them from being the worst overall. They're just car collector wet dream pieces and investments at this point.

>These are considered one of the worst cars of all time.
Really? you are probably right as I only know about them through internet gossip but i remember reading articles about how Lee Iacocca made them to be reliable shitboxes and they were a mass-market success with high sales and I've heard stories about how the 2.2 Chrysler engines were really reliable but probably just memes.

exactly, dime a dozen mass produced crap. Mopar was on an entirely different level of quality and performance by comparison, as reflected in pricing and production. They only made 17k vettes in 1970 but I don't see many people hating on the Stingray except poorfags who know they'll never have one.

Kinda like you and any given Mopar.

They were cheap and horribly put together but compared to Dodges other shit they were good economy cars.

Probably because Chevy actually made good cars, something Dodge never learned. Yes the quality was worse and the performance wasn't that great either.

Good cars for hipsters like you I guess, mopar has always been the snowflake brand.

damn, didn't know production cars from 1993 had twin turbo engines

Yep

1960-1973

inb4 boomer

>Viper was a true janky shitbox it just had a V10.
the words of a person that doesn't own one.

pic related, i do, and its a great car.

DaimlerChrysler is best Chrysler.

>This
Never forgetti the best spaghetti

The legendary Dodge Avenger!

I'm an FCA technician. When servicing older vehicles I often cringe at how poorly designed certain things are, but I must admit that their older products are better than the things they producing now. Case in point, oil pans. Newer FCA vehicles (with the exception of anything SRT) have an oil pan that bends easily when tightening the drain bolt, but that's just one example. The 2.4 Multair engine has got to be the worst fucktardary I have ever seen as they are known to consume oil. I've had to try to get warranty replacement on these engines with as low as 20k miles due to how excessive the oil consumption was. The older technicians swear by FCA products, but I'll stick to my Jap shit. I guess the grey imports weren't bad.

It looks cheap inside and out.

not really.

Is that a base model truck?

yes.