The 1972 Chrysler Thread
- Thread starter ayilar
- Start date
Keith926
Member
Love my wheel covers!!!
superbyrd
New Member
my 72 newport royal. a new work in progress...
Last edited:
In a separate thread, I gave to @73 New Yorker the part number for the butterfly nuts that I bought (back in August 2020) to re-attach the skirts on Buttercup, my 1972 NYB. They pop up occasionally -- I was lucky to get a set on eBay (P/N 6028934 or 602 8934 -- they work on later C-body Chryslers too). FWIW, I paid $26.56 shipped for a pair. Here are photos for records:
About as bare bones as one could get.........................but apparently loved and well kept.
The car has original 56tmls on the clock, I was not looking at all for a Newport the original owner passed away about 15 years ago and the kids sold of the estate. I had to pull the heads due to a stuck valve and cleaned them up lapped the all valves in and new seals runs cherry now.
I’m looking for the passenger side rear quarter moulding trim.
I have not seen many 1972 C-bodies painted EA9, but I know of two. DM41K2F234534 is a Polara Custom sedan owned by @Polara-Star and discussed here. Here is another C-body, this one directly relevant to the present thread.
CS43T2C174686 is a 1972 NYB 4dr hardtop -- parts car, obviously, but the bumper and brightwork have been saved and they will live on.
CS43T2C174686 is a 1972 NYB 4dr hardtop -- parts car, obviously, but the bumper and brightwork have been saved and they will live on.
Looking ahead at the restoration of Buttercup, my 1972 NYB, I have come up with a question for all 1972 lovers.
Since @david hill has been restoring BC's engine bay, I have decided to replace the carburetor heater stove. David sent me the following illustration:
The setup in Buttercup (my 1972 NYB) looks like the one on the LHS above -- see the engine pic from when I bought the car in June 2020, and see the " air heater upper " that @david hill took out last month:
--> Question 1: Does anyone's setup look like the RHS photo (one-piece air heater) in David's illustration? I have found one on eBay, sold as P/N 3671790).
--> Question 2: what are the correct part numbers for the LHS illustration (I need both the upper and lower P/N). Here is what I found in the 1972 parts manual:
@saforwardlook @70 Sport Suburban @ricks_RR @MattfromMaine @schwarzsurfer @Xlratr @fc7_plumcrazy @oliver @Rob Mandolene @Thomas
Since @david hill has been restoring BC's engine bay, I have decided to replace the carburetor heater stove. David sent me the following illustration:
The setup in Buttercup (my 1972 NYB) looks like the one on the LHS above -- see the engine pic from when I bought the car in June 2020, and see the " air heater upper " that @david hill took out last month:
--> Question 1: Does anyone's setup look like the RHS photo (one-piece air heater) in David's illustration? I have found one on eBay, sold as P/N 3671790).
--> Question 2: what are the correct part numbers for the LHS illustration (I need both the upper and lower P/N). Here is what I found in the 1972 parts manual:
@saforwardlook @70 Sport Suburban @ricks_RR @MattfromMaine @schwarzsurfer @Xlratr @fc7_plumcrazy @oliver @Rob Mandolene @Thomas
The purpose of those systems was to hasten engine warm up so as to lower emissions of hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide on engine cold starts in order to meet federal or California emission requirements. California standards were more stringent than the federal limits. Accordingly, those heat stoves also improved cold drivability as another benefit, so they are worth having. It seems likely to me that your car is a federal model and not originally built destined for a California dealer/customer (California models had blue and white emission control labels affixed to the inner fender on the driver side whereas federal models had green and white emission labels affixed to the inner fender).
I would wager that federal vehicles only used the single heater at least at the start of regular production rather than the two piece destined for California (translate - "with emission control") since the Corporation loved saving pennies as long as driveability wasn't too bad. If cold start driveability wasn't very good on a federal model then Chrysler might have opted for the system in the left hand drawing anyway (I assume you concluded that the upper stove on your model was a two piece set up since the upper stove wrapped around the manifold a full 180 degrees)? From your photo, I can't tell if the upper piece wrapped a full 180 degrees or was it less, signifying the one piece setup in the right side drawing if less than 180 degrees or did you conclude that it was the set up in the left hand drawing because it did have a lower shield as well but isn't shown in your photo??).
If your system is the one in the left hand drawing, then I would go with an upper number of 361482 and a lower one of 3614843 unless your car was built after July, 1972, in which case you could use 3671790 lower one.
In either case, no one but you would likely know what was correct or not on your car.
If it was me that owned the car I would go with the left hand set up regardless in order to yield the best cold start driveability unless you would prefer to save some cost to replicate the system if drivability is OK at present.
Also I am not sure how easy it would be to find one of those two piece stoves nos anymore but maybe you could find a used one on ebay. The corrugated connectors can be found new in some better parts stores such as NAPA.
I am glad David was able to get the small bolts out of the manifold without shearing them off hopefully since they are very likely to shear off if not soaked well with Kroil or other effective liquid penetrant and even then it is 50-50.
73Coupe
Senior Member
My '73 (federal model) had a two piece shroud, as does my '71 that was sold in Canada. Pics below of the '73 logs and shrouds (shrouds identical to the '71). And the small bolts did indeed break off, here we were removing them below....
Thank you, this is very helpful!
I have traced my car's history back to August 1999, and at that time Buttercup was in NJ. When @david hill refinished the inner fenders earlier this fall, he did not take off the original label -- the photo that he posted here shows that Buttercup's label is teal or green, so I will submit that my car is a federal model (and there is no code in the fender tag suggesting otherwise). If I am correct, then I can eliminate P/N 3614842 from consideration.
Correct! Both of your guesses are right (the shape of the upper part taken out by @david hill, and the fact that Buttercup came to me in 2020 with a 2-piece setup on the manifold -- according to both David and @71Polara383 (Wyatt had noticed that the lower part was in poor shape when he receptioned the car for me).
I don't have a photo of the lower part. In the following photo of my original upper part, taken yesterday, you can clearly see that the cross-section is indeed a full "U" (not a "J" as in the single-part setup) and thus necessitates a lower part for bracketing:
Actually, not quite -- because I think that the parts manual is confusing. The manual makes it look like PN 3671790 is the lower part after July 1972, whereas from what I have been able to find out it is actually a single-upper-part setup. If so, then that would imply that late-build 1972 T-codes had a one-part simplified carburetor heater stove.
The reason why I say so is because I managed to find PN 3671790 online yesterday. AMS Obsolete had not one but two (!) NOS for sale on eBay -- now they have only one because I bought the other. I also found the part on another site (at a much higher price...). Together, this info strongly suggests that P/N 3671 790 is the "one-piece upper" carb heater stove shown in David's diagram
Here are a couple of photos for records, from the AMS Obsolete eBay listing:
Note the "J" cross-section, as in David's illustration:
Technically, that one-piece setup should not be correct for Buttercup as her scheduled build date was Jan. 19, 1972 (not July). If it fits her manifold, though, then I may end my search there and put it on as cold-engine performance seems fine even without the shroud (I drove Buttercup in very dry and sunny but freezing weather on Nov. 30, and she started right away and ran just fine after just 5' of warming up). Of course, if I find the right two-part setup (see below, in my follow-up to @73Coupe), then I can always resell 3671790.
Well, I searched far and wide this weekend and could not find anything. I did find the two-piece setup that I will need for my 1970 TNT at a couple of places. The part numbers for that 2-pt manifold heat stove are 2951913 & 2951914. I found a used set here. They are reproduced -- see here for example. ( @Ripinator will be happy)
This is extremely useful, because both your 1971 NYer and your 1973 NYB have a T-code engine like my 1972 Buttercup.
BOTTOM LINE: What I conclude from all this is that pre-July federal 440s had 2951873 upper and 3614843 lower carb heater stoves.
--> Happy to get feedback on my conclusions AND to see other owners of 1972 M-codes or T-codes to show their stoves.
@saforwardlook @70 Sport Suburban @BLIMP @ricks_RR @MattfromMaine @schwarzsurfer @Xlratr @fc7_plumcrazy @oliver @Rob Mandolene @Thomas @SwissABC @Beep Beep Dave
Last edited:
I must say, it was not until I had read your and @73Coupe 's replies that I realized what may have happened. I am not 100% sure, but it the one-piece fits my car, then I'll call it a day.
Thank you again for the info. Looking for more replies of owners, just in case they have pics to share.
I had a chance to inspect my 1972 and 1973 Imperials today since the rain subsided after yesterday's downpour.
My 1972 Imperial is a California model and has the two piece heat stove on the driver side exhaust manifold as shown in the photo below:
Here is an image of the door sticker showing a 5/72 build date:
Here are a couple photos of the heat shield on my 1973 Imperial with a January 1973 build date and it is a single piece shield that could have also been used on a late 1972 model:
Therefore, I would conclude that the single piece stove should fit fine on your 72 NYB.
My 1972 Imperial is a California model and has the two piece heat stove on the driver side exhaust manifold as shown in the photo below:
Here is an image of the door sticker showing a 5/72 build date:
Here are a couple photos of the heat shield on my 1973 Imperial with a January 1973 build date and it is a single piece shield that could have also been used on a late 1972 model:
Therefore, I would conclude that the single piece stove should fit fine on your 72 NYB.
Last edited:
Rare colour.
As I prepare to further improve Buttercup, the exhaust is next: there is an exhaust leak, and I might as well replace the whole exhaust as I do that. I like Waldron a lot, and have used them for three exhausts thus far. Unfortunately, on their website, they do not offer a dual exhaust setup for any 1972 Chrysler (though they do for 1971).
That does not seem right, as Chrysler offered Newports and NYers with dual exhaust according to this post by @Samplingman -- and Ma Mopar sold 1972 Newports for police duty (see, e.g., the car owned by @m38jeepman which must be CL41T2C257723 -- a Missouri State Highway Patrol discussed in this Sept. 2018 thread and more in this Oct. 2018 thread, @amazinblue82 and @commando1 will remember the car). Indeed, I think that I see dual exhausts in the latter car (I know it's a T-code, but if I understand correctly this post by @USSMOPAR the E99 code overrides it so it could have duals):
Bottom line, while Buttercup was built with a single exhaust, she's had duals for more than two decades and I would prefer to get quiet factory-like duals following a recommendation by @david hill that duals would be the way to go.
--> what company have 1972 Chrysler T-code owners used for duals? Paging among others:
@ricks_RR (I see that your car has greta-looking dual exhaust tips), @saforwardlook @MattfromMaine @Jon O. @schwarzsurfer @21_forever @Tobias74 @Shelbyz08 @marty koirtyohann @Keith926 @fc7_plumcrazy @Georg/DFL (@c-barge , did CP45T2C314443 have duals? same question for @Axel -- I am particularly interested in the front part as the rear exhaust is different between sedan/coupe and wagon models)
That does not seem right, as Chrysler offered Newports and NYers with dual exhaust according to this post by @Samplingman -- and Ma Mopar sold 1972 Newports for police duty (see, e.g., the car owned by @m38jeepman which must be CL41T2C257723 -- a Missouri State Highway Patrol discussed in this Sept. 2018 thread and more in this Oct. 2018 thread, @amazinblue82 and @commando1 will remember the car). Indeed, I think that I see dual exhausts in the latter car (I know it's a T-code, but if I understand correctly this post by @USSMOPAR the E99 code overrides it so it could have duals):
Bottom line, while Buttercup was built with a single exhaust, she's had duals for more than two decades and I would prefer to get quiet factory-like duals following a recommendation by @david hill that duals would be the way to go.
--> what company have 1972 Chrysler T-code owners used for duals? Paging among others:
@ricks_RR (I see that your car has greta-looking dual exhaust tips), @saforwardlook @MattfromMaine @Jon O. @schwarzsurfer @21_forever @Tobias74 @Shelbyz08 @marty koirtyohann @Keith926 @fc7_plumcrazy @Georg/DFL (@c-barge , did CP45T2C314443 have duals? same question for @Axel -- I am particularly interested in the front part as the rear exhaust is different between sedan/coupe and wagon models)
Last edited:
As I prepare to further improve Buttercup, the exhaust is next: there is an exhaust leak, and I might as well replace the whole exhaust as I do that. I like Waldron a lot, and have used them for three exhausts thus far. Unfortunately, on their website, they do not offer a dual exhaust setup for any 1972 Chrysler (though they do for 1971).
That does not seem right, as Chrysler offered Newports and NYers with dual exhaust according to this post by @Samplingman -- and Ma Mopar sold 1972 Newports for police duty (see, e.g., the car owned by @m38jeepman which must be CL41T2C257723 -- a Missouri State Highway Patrol discussed in this Sept. 2018 thread and more in this Oct. 2018 thread, @amazinblue82 and @commando1 will remember the car). Indeed, I think that I see dual exhausts in the latter car (I know it's a T-code, but if I understand correctly this post by @USSMOPAR the E99 code overrides it so it could have duals):
Bottom line, while Buttercup was built with a single exhaust, she's had duals for more than two decades and I would prefer to get quiet factory-like duals following a recommendation by @david hill that duals would be the way to go.
--> what company have 1972 Chrysler T-code owners used for duals? Paging among others:
@ricks_RR (I see that your car has greta-looking dual exhaust tips), @saforwardlook @MattfromMaine @Jon O. @schwarzsurfer @21_forever @Tobias74 @Shelbyz08 @marty koirtyohann @Keith926 @fc7_plumcrazy @Georg/DFL (@c-barge , did CP45T2C314443 have duals? same question for @Axel -- I am particularly interested in the front part as the rear exhaust is different between sedan/coupe and wagon models)
@ayilar
I was/still am looking for a fusie Chrysler-badged "A38"/E86 car. "E99" with, "T", and a "K" order prefix, could be properly equipped would do for me IF it had certain "fleet" equipment.
Yes, I had this Newp inspected by a gracious member and confirmed important aspects of it for me.
Unfortunately, I do not have the pics he texted me anymore. Plus it rained cats & dogs that day, and the seller didn't show to meet the member. So, we couldnt get in, start it, smell it, etc.
It did have dual exhaust (placed/angled tips as other fusie squads - polara, and fury - had) but unknown if factory or replaced over the years. It did (I believe) have HP manifolds, 4V carb (per the description seller gave me on the phone looking right at the car), auxiliary cooling, etc.
My investigation concluded it looked a lot like a "police-spec" (dunno about what BIW/broadcast sheet said) vehicle used in "government" duty of some sort. Sorry I couldn't be more specific on this for you.
Aside.
@ayilar, as you might imagine, we (FCBO) have discussed exhaust matters in dozens of threads. this one example has a lotta peoples' experienced views - high volume posters and lower volume posters weighed in there. Someone may be there that you've discussed your plans with via PM or something.
Full dual exhaust system
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
