You have to remember that there are different type of "quality" in a vehicle. Other than "quality of materials", there is "quality of assembly", with the later usually being where Chrysler did not meet what GM and especially Ford were doing back then.
All it would take to judge the assembly issue is to sight down the side of the car and look at the reflections. On any Ford product, the sheet metal was completely flat and linear reflections indicated that. On Chryslers, there were little bulges at the edges of the door skins and front fenders. Very slight, but still there. On GMs, it was panel gaps as (according to the DeLorean book on GM), GM waited too long to get the new models approved, so the tool and die operatives had to work overtime to get the jobs done, which resulted in things not being completely "as designed" on GM cars back then (later 1960s into the 1970s).
In pricing out a car for production, (as DeLorean noted) the engineers will usually make good decisions as to quality of materials, tire vendors, and such to have each model year a bit better than the prior, which maintains or increases customer satisfaction and maintains re-sale values. All good to this point, BUT when the proposal is presented for approval, the "accounting operatives" an dismantle some of these things (as DeLorean also noted) by claiming "Youi need to get $25.00 (production cost) out of that car." As this usually happened in July or August before the cars were to be built in September, a juggling act suddenly began. Which explained by the seat fabric in our '61 BelAir came apart by the 3rd model year, uet the imterior in my uncle's '62 Impala wagon wore like iron, for example. Things not related to engineering were about all that could be changed, at that late date.
In the case of GM and every other OEM, "accounting" knows what they want the cars to cost to get to the end of the assy line. It's "engineering's job" to make that happen, which accounting can then possibly tweak (while in the design stage) by desiring parts with a projected higher failure rate than a slightly more-costly part with a lower failure rate (which related to warranty costs).
The possible scenario I saw was that after the first model year of a new platform, after things seemed to settle down, the problem areas of the first model year would be quietly fixed for the second model year. With lower-failure rate items rather than the earlier ones which did fail too much,l for example.
One thing Chrysler did in the development of the LH cars was to bring the vendors into the design process for the cars. Each component was presented and the vendor-rep was involved in the approval and pricing stages. Minor design tweaks resulted in savings with little impact on the final product. This, plus on-the-fly innovations resulted in the LH cars coming in after 3 years of development, under budget, and generated "golden eggs" for Chrysler (which Daimler lusted after, I suspect, but that's another story).
Looking back, Chrysler's finances probably started to get flaky about 1/2 way through the Fuselage Years. As the '74 cars were in design. As good as the cars appeared to be, to me, seeing them at the dealership), the '74 cars (in retrospect) had issues (as
@saforwardlook mentioned) that would not appear for a few years, if not sooner. Compound that with mediocre build quality (par for Chrysler at the time, it seemed), and things went downhill after gasoline prices increased.
As "big cars" were perceived to be non-economical to operate, Fenner Tubbs in Lubbock took their C-body demo fleet on a little mileage check. Filled the tanks at the Shell station across from the dealership, headed south to the edge of the Caprock (north of Post, TX), then back. Using the factory cruise controls set at 55mph (the national speed limit of the time). Then re-filled the tanks at the same pump at the same Shell station. The New Yorker 440 was 20.66mpg, the Newport 400 2bbl was 20.33mpg, and the Fury 360-2bbl was high 19s. To me, that was impressive and a testament to how well Chrysler engineering was doing back then. Then, they had some copies made of the results for each car, signed, notorized, and placed them in the showroom for customers to see and take with them. That was a good year for cotton on the South Plains. When an exiting Olds 98 or Buick Electra owner came in looking for new car, they saw the mpg test results. Knowing what their current cars did on fuel economy, they were surprised and laughed. Then the salesman let them drive a new Chrysler for the weekend, to see for themselves. On Monday, the new Chrysler replaced their thirsty GM car. Fenner Tubbs had a good service department, so if anything happened during the warranty period, I suspect these new Chrysler customers were taken care of as good as they could have been. BTAIM
Chrysler was a big law enforcement vehicle provider, back then. That fact became evident to me when I was putting the factory dual exhaust under my '80 Newport. ALL of the exhaust and "undercarriage" items were ABOVE the lowest level of the rocker panel! Nothing hanging down to hang on curbs and such. Which explained why the trunk floor was higher than normal on the Formals and the R-cars which replaced them in 1979. Plus the shorter floor-to-headliner distance on the R-cars, too.
Then, in the '80 Newport, when I replaced the factory AM/FM radio with a fancier factory stereo radio, seeign how easy this was when compared to earlier models, plus getting the instrument cluster R&R'd, with plastic pins rather than screws, it was obvious they were designing-out labor times to decrease warranty labor costs. Which could also mean less down-time in the repair shops for law enforcement vehicles.
On the '80 Newport, evidence of cost-cutting was prominent. The basic body structure and such were better than prior models, butrvation. the "equipment" was good but not as robust as the Slabs, by observation. Some of the innovations made servicing harder to do. Like the battery heat shield/windshield washer reservoir. Changing the battery suddenly became a major operation. With the multi-integrations, more labor time was involved. But, like the ELB system, it was probably "sold" as a good thing. The a/c system worked great (with the Denso compressor), but the window regulators were not as good as they needed to be (or as good as a similar-design GM regulator). So, consider the R-cars were "Cost Cutting 3.0" (if Formals = Cost Cutting 1.5), in many areas. Quality of materials? The velour on my car was mostly gone on the lh frt seat, with a strong base fabric remaining. The deep carpet was there for additional heat shielding from the cat converter, I suspect, but still looks pretty good. The foam-backed headliner was having issues, aggravated by its initial years in Midland, TX. The car had signs of rough usage, being sold to an oil field tool company. Evidenced by the Midas-brand air shocks and rear home-made angle iron trailer hitch, plus the wadded-up and re-welded section of the Y-pipe behind the oil pan. So it took all of that and then some before I got it. It was spec'd out as a company car by the then-gone long-time dealer in Midland, which is how a dealer CAN order cars for their intended uses. So it had the factory HD load carrying suspension on it, just no rear sway bar. Some new Chrysler HD front shocks and Monroe air shocks brought back that firm, gutsy feel I like, which was good.
In the ultimate pricing out of vehicles to be approved for production, you can spend so much on the engine, so much on the transmission and rear axle, so much on the suspension, and so much on cosmetic and "touch" items. How the OEM balances all of these things while still meeting customer desires and sales objectives is a tricky balance to hit. Much less what is standard and what is optional equipment. And it can give the customer of what is good or not so good about a vehicles. For example, import brands do not change engine designs much over the years, just refine them for emissions and such as needed. So many import engines are more-durable over the long haul, but can cost more to fix when they fail. Compared to USA brands, they "over-spend" in this area, or used to. But the import brands will compensate for those greater expenses by spending less in other areas, as interior fabrics which cooked on the top of the rear seat, in TX much less AZ, under the summer sun. Or an instrument panel pad which was molded, one piece rather than a USA brand which took 15 pieces to do the same thing. And there are other examples.
Then, once the powertrain costs were paid for, the import brands started to spend more money on their interior designs and fabrics. A new focus for them, but something USA brands had generally done well at. Now the game changed and the imports were suddenly "leaders" in that area.
ONE thing to remember, Toyota dealers can't exist only doing oil changes and tire rotations. Those cars have their own service and design issues, just that nobody talks about that (although they seems to be fewer in number). Similar to what GM and Ford did, which went unnoticed by others, in prior times. When Chrysler had a little hiccup, it was major news, by comparison, which is what I saw happening with the Volare/Aspen cars. GM accountants caused more problems than many might desire to count, but it was their dealers who ordered cars with the right options and right equipment mixes to keep their customers coming back again and again, universally. For some reasons, Chrysler dealers didn't get that memo of how to do that, or understand why that was important, especially in the "big-city" stores. In TX, at least from what I could see, the most successful Chrysler stores were either "old line" Chrysler dealers (and their kids) with lots of product knowledge, or former GM dealers who got displeased or otherwise, but were successful for a good while before they left.
Thanks for your time. Sorry for the length,
CBODY67
