jim almond
New Member
Hi, does anybody know if a tilt column out of a 67 imperial will fit in a 69 300?
parts swapping, is a imperial considered a C body?
- Thread starter jim almond
- Start date
Imperial is a Y-Body. Some stuff is the same as far as running gear goes. You would have to measure the column as I think the Imp has a longer unit.
Dave
what makes it a Y-body is the extended front clip, making this good advice as the column is likely longer on an Imperial.......
patrick66
Old Man with a Hat
It is NOT a "Y-body", folks!!! It is a C-body from 1967 onward, and it is the Y-car line. 1964-1966 Imperials were "D-body" cars, but also "Y-line" cars.
Look at it this way - a 1966 Dodge Coronet is a "B-body", right? A '66 Satellite is also a "B-body", yes? Yet, the first letter of the VINs are "W" and "R", respectively. Does anyone out there at all call them W-body or R-body cars? Of course not, because the W and R are the car lines! Same applies with Imperial.
The ONLY time an Imperial was ever a "Y-body" and a "Y-line" car was the 1988-1991 front-wheel drive Imperial.
You can verify this in any Imperial FSM.
And now, back to the OP question - The Imperial column is about three inches longer than the Chrysler 300 is, IIRC.
Look at it this way - a 1966 Dodge Coronet is a "B-body", right? A '66 Satellite is also a "B-body", yes? Yet, the first letter of the VINs are "W" and "R", respectively. Does anyone out there at all call them W-body or R-body cars? Of course not, because the W and R are the car lines! Same applies with Imperial.
The ONLY time an Imperial was ever a "Y-body" and a "Y-line" car was the 1988-1991 front-wheel drive Imperial.
You can verify this in any Imperial FSM.
And now, back to the OP question - The Imperial column is about three inches longer than the Chrysler 300 is, IIRC.
Last edited:
jim almond
New Member
thanks, that wouldve been too easy I guess. Here's another question, it may take a parts catalog to answer... will power seat motors/frame etc from an imperial work in a C?
1970FuryConv
Old Man with a Hat
I thought Chrysler went to the unibody on all cars in 1960, except the Imperial stayed full frame through 1966.
What body are Imperials 1960-1963? Thanks
patrick66
Old Man with a Hat
The lettering scheme began in the 1964 model year. The 1963 and earlier cars were not designated as A/B/C/D bodies.
And yes, unibody construction began in 1960 for all but Imperial, which ran a full frame through 1966.
And yes, unibody construction began in 1960 for all but Imperial, which ran a full frame through 1966.
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2010
- Messages
- 28,178
- Reaction score
- 27,378
From ‘67 Imp to ‘69 300 they could probably be made to work but the ‘69 power bases were different in almost every way.
sounds like you might have a ‘67 parts car?
1970FuryConv
Old Man with a Hat
Thanks Patrick!
patrick66
Old Man with a Hat
To add to this, for cars 1964 and older, look in the FSM in the front page or two, and it'll tell you the car line. Again, it's not the body, but rather the car line. Later-year also list the car line there.
In the 1966 FSM example below, you'll see the BC-1 and so on. The "B" represents the series (1966), and the "C" and "Y" represent the car line. On the second page, you'll see the 1965 AND the 1966 differences. The number next to the two-letter combo reflects the model, from the base to the top model. Notice with Imperial, both the Crown and LeBaron are "top" models (both say -3).
As to why the '64-'66 Imperials are "D" rather than "C"-body cars, my opinion is that the Imperial had a full-frame, whereas the Chrysler cars were unibody. I'll have to research this a bit further to determine if that is indeed the reason, but it is logical, to me, anyway. Because the Imperial became a "C"-body in the 1967MY as it too, became a unibody car.
Last edited:
Similar threads
