Is this worth the cost of being a 1 or 2 ever built??????

[polara71]

I understand...... I will refrain and let someone here answer that question.... I am certain he has answered it before

 

[kmccabe56]

Gentleman...I am not diving into the deep end of the pool on this as it appears to be settled issue between the members' alternative views.

Before looking at this thread, my understanding was Chrysler's production records after 1967 were lost in a fire. Someone told me, "yeah, but Chrysler Historical knows..."

I wrote Chrysler Historical with a question. "How many Dodge Monaco Police Cars did Chrysler build in 1978". Here's their actual reply (letter attached, names smudged to protect the innocent).

My question for the Forum..are the Chrysler production records past 1968 available to the general public? If yes, where can we find them?

View attachment 36224

This is my last post on this topic. I've had enough.

I haven't been in Historical in at least 20 years, so I have no idea what's there now, but I know what was there then.

Historical "should" have the following:

1. Production reports which indicate production, i.e. cars BUILT by engineering model code and body style. At least to 1934 and possibly earlier.

2. Option & Accessory Reports. These are what most people consider "production" although they actually indicate the number of cars SOLD in a particular market. The number SOLD and the NUMBER BUILT car be anywhere from 100% accurate to mid 80% accurate. Historical has or had this information in detail from 1967 on, and in a cruder non model, non body style specific layout to 1960. As I've said before, and this is the last time, this is the installation rate of individual options. About the only combining of options relates to engine & transmission. Historical should or did have this information for the U.S. market. They never had Canadian information or export information (well, I think they have a very little bit of it). Never tracked were cars built for engineering, sold through a U.S. military PX and possibly some other obscure subset market outlets.

3. Shipping invoices. There are/were hundreds upon hundreds of reels of microfilm of shipping invoices or IBM cards for cars sold in the U.S. These went from nearly the dawn of time up into the early 1960s. After that up through early 1967 model year the actual paper copies of the invoices were stored in an area with several hundred four drawer filing cabinets. The shipping invoices listed any optional equipment installed on the car, identified the dealer the car was shipped to, and what was considered to be the official "build" date of the car. Throughout much of the 1967 model year all the way through the 1971 model year, a moronic supervisor working in the building historical and these paper records occupied, took it upon himself to throw out these invoices under the guise of "They're more than 7 years old, we aren't required by law to keep them any more." ( I don't make this **** up.) Once someone realized what he was doing, he was stopped. At least some of the invoices `could' have been reprinted because I learned that at least the master tape from Hamtramck Assembly for the 1970 model year still existed (that's a whole 'nother story), but no one wanted to step up and take the hit on their departmental budget to undertake such a major task.

In the case of your letter, you obviously got a canned response from someone working in Historical who was only regurgitating what they'd been told and either didn't have the will or the skill to find out anything to the contrary.

Polara71 has given us the very short version of this same answer. Historical either doesn't have or doesn't know they have the material listed above. I don't know which. Does someone else have the information?

 

[amazinblue82]

kmccabe56, you seem to have some energy around this topic. thank you for taking the time to be thorough for my benefit and others'.

seems you have answered this question many times but i have never seen your explanation of the situation before now. sorry to drag you through it again :icon_smile:

me? i am just one of the faceless masses trying to figure stuff out and i dont question "eyewitnesses" to conditions/events ..you appear to be one who has laid eyes on these data...especially when i do not have that same experience.

BTW, I took the letter, in person after I got it, TO Chrysler Historical in Auburn Hills Michigan to look somebody in the eye and ask my questions. I got the same answers as in the letter..."nope we dont have that stuff, sorry you drove all the way down here sir." they were nice people, identified themselves as "volunteers" but couldnt help me in the end.

Many explanations can be considered as to why Chrysler Historical replied to me the way they did three years ago...yours sound plenty good enough for me to just let it go and move on...

Anyway again, thanks for taking the time to help out. take care.

 

[commando1]

My head hurts

But thank you to all.