Post- World War 2, Chrysler Corporation was in second place in terms of sales behind General Motors and ahead of the then-struggling Ford Motor Company. It was prosperous enough to spend more money than was perhaps necessary on its redesigned 1949 model line that I wrote about here.
Besides a set of what can be considered standard-size bodies used for all brands (Plymouth, Dodge, DeSoto and Chrysler), shorter-wheelbase bodies were produced as entry-level models for Plymouth and Dodge. They never sold well, but were mostly kept in production during the basic 1949-1952 lifetime of that body range. For example, model-years 1951 and 1952 saw entry-level Dodge Wayfarers' share of Dodge production at 19.2 percent. For those years, Plymouth's Concords were only 12.6 percent of total Plymouth production.
Total production of these smaller Plymouths and Dodges over 1949-52 was 465,139 - perhaps enough that Chrysler didn't lose money on them. An average annual sales total of around 115,000 in those days would have been profitable for a maker of mid- or higher-price cars. For example, Nash production for 1949 was 135,328 while Hudson built 159,100 cars. More-upscale Packard produced 116,248. But aside from Plymouth's new, all-metal station wagons, the rest of the model line cars had entry-level prices and lower break-even points. So I can't rule out that Chrysler lost some money there.
Moreover, Plymouth and Dodge versions differed in wheelbase and, as will be shown below in the Gallery, differed in some structural areas.
Regarding wheelbases, Plymouth DeLuxes and (later) Concords had 111-inch (2819 mm) wheelbases, compared to 118.5-inch (3010 mm) wheelbases for standard size Plymouths. Dodge Wayfarer wheelbases were 115 inches (2921 mm) compared to 123.5 inches (3137 mm) for regular Dodges. So the smaller Plymouth and Dodge wheelbases differed by 4 inches (102 mm), resulting in additional tooling expenses for chassis' and bodies. Why couldn't they have shared the same, say, 113-inch (2870 mm) wheelbase?
Featured below are fastback 2-door sedans and business coupes. Not shown are roadsters and station wagons.
Fastback styles were still in production around 1950, though rapidly losing popularity to the more practical (in terms of trunk carrying capacity) bustle-back designs. Perhaps playing it safe in case trends changed, Chrysler Corporation added the Plymouth and Dodge fastbacks discussed here.
The Dodge version was partly a fastback, but did feature a small aft bustle.
At least the fastback Plymouth looked less boxy than standard Chrysler Corporation sedans.
Rear sheet metal is considerably different than shown on the Plymouth above. Was the additional tooling expense worth it?
Plymouth dropped its Business Coupe line after 1951.
But Dodge built coupes 1949-1952 even though sales were less than half those of Plymouth's.
Unlike the 2-door sedans, rear end sheetmetal was shared by Plymouth and Dodge business coupes.
The different aft curve of the rear fenders of both Plymouth and Dodge business coupes was introduced for 1951.
%20-%20for%20sale%20-%20left%20side.png)
Side views often tell the tooling tale best. Note especially the shape of the Plymouth's door, including the vertical B-pillar.
The Dodge has added length between the front wheel opening and the forward door cutline. The door seems to be the same width as the Plymouth's, but the B-pillar leans forward above the beltline. As mentioned above, aft shaping is different.
Business coupe styling was almost the same for both brands.
Again, the longer wheelbase is accommodated by the added length forward of the cowling and door. The forward slant of the above-the-beltline B-pillar is carried over from the Dodge 2-door sedan to this coupe. Rear overhang is longer than shown in the previous photo, but shared with the slightly facelifted 1951 Plymouth Business Coupe.
No comments:
Post a Comment