1967 Chrysler Newport Reviews - Page 3 of 3

1967 Chrysler Newport Custom 440 LP (350hp) from North America

Year of manufacture1967
First year of ownership1997
Most recent year of ownership2002
Engine and transmission 440 LP (350hp) Automatic
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 4 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.5 / 10
Distance when acquired68000 miles
Most recent distance77350 miles
Previous carFord Tempo

Summary:

A very underrated classic

Faults:

When I bought it the engine was ticking badly, I was going to rebuild the engine anyway, so when I tore it down I discovered that the shaft that drives the oil pump and distributor had sheared off at the oil pump end, so I had 0 oil pressure... good thing I didn't run it very long before the rebuild.

About a year later the car would overheat now and again it turns out the driver's side head gasket was blown, this seems to be common in the 383 and 440's... nothing too serious if you fix it yourself though...

General Comments:

For being such a huge car (19+ feet long) it is remarkably quick thanks to the 440...smooth as silk on the highway you could run over a Mazda and not feel it.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 19th June, 2002

1967 Chrysler Newport Convertible- 2 door 383- 2 bbl. from North America

Year of manufacture1967
First year of ownership1967
Most recent year of ownership2002
Engine and transmission 383- 2 bbl. Automatic
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 4 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 4 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.3 / 10
Distance when acquired0 miles
Most recent distance256000 miles

Summary:

A Land Yacht with style!

Faults:

I've gone through 2 engines, the original 383 and a 440. (Both times I hit the oil pan which caused the engine to freeze).

The Convertible top needs new hydraulic cylinders.

The radio needed repair.

The under carriage needed to be reinforced as rust was getting to the car.

The manifold has a hole in it.

The rear wheel bearings needed to be fixed.

General Comments:

Although this car is very expensive to keep up, and drive, I love it. I've had it since high school and have drove it steadily through college and law school until 1984. Currently, it is in the process of a full restoration. The body has held up, and it still catches the ladies eyes.

This car will be in my family for years. My son and I quarrel who gets to drive it on the nice days. The first time he drove it to school, everyone was talking about it. "Whose is that?" was the question of the day.

This is more than a car to me now; it's a member of the family. My canary yellow convertible baby will live on. It will continue to draw attention to itself. Older is better baby!!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 5th May, 2002

1967 Chrysler Newport 383 2-V from North America

Year of manufacture1967
First year of ownership1990
Most recent year of ownership1991
Engine and transmission 383 2-V Automatic
Performance marks 5 / 10
Reliability marks 6 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 4 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
5.3 / 10
Distance when acquired92000 miles
Most recent distance99000 miles
Previous carDodge Dart

Summary:

Great for someone who understands beaters

Faults:

The car could not be driven above 35 MPH for several minutes until after the thermostat opened.

The contact posts on the voltage gauge were loose, and the incomplete circuit would prevent the car from starting.

The mechanical points required continual adjustment.

The electrical system consumed a number of mechanical voltage regulators.

The headlight switch developed a heat-sensitive short circuit that caused the headlights to cut out.

The heater worked poorly and was miserable in the winter.

General Comments:

This car was generally good transportation for the low price.

The 383 2-barrel never delivered on its promise of performance.

The drive train was rugged, and the transmission remained tight and shifted well even after being abused.

Installing electronic ignition solved some problems.

In general, small problems dogged this car. The main issues were the loose voltage gauge contacts that caused intermittent starting problems; the short circuit that caused the intermittent headlight failures; the poor performance of the heater, and; the time to achieve operating temperature after starting the car.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 20th April, 2002

2nd Oct 2008, 08:33

One can't really blame poor maintenance on a vehicle's performance. Buy a beater, you get a beater. A well maintained 67 Newport is a pretty nice car for its age.

2nd Oct 2008, 15:48

Au contraire! I liked this car, and put a lot of work into it. During the time that I owned it, it was very well maintained.

Oil changed every 2,000 miles; carburetor rebuilt; new plugs and wires; installed Mopar Performance electronic ignition kit, which included new distributor, ballast resistor, electronic control module, and voltage regulator, flushed the coolant, changed the transmission fluid and filter.

So, I really take offense to the suggestion that I did not maintain it and then complained unjustifiably. When I was done with it, it ran better than it probably ever had, and the guy who sold it to me was totally green with envy that I had it running so well.

With that said, there were some real weak points to this car, and there is no denying it, even from someone who loves Mopars, such as myself.

First, the heater was terrible.

Second, the headlight switch developing a short circuit ---that's a design problem, not a maintenance problem.

Third, the way it ran so doggy (and not the usual Mopar stalling at the first corner, I mean doggy!) until it warmed up -- I've never seen that on another car.

Fourth, the solder on the voltage gauge posts loosening up and making a short in the starting circuit -- that is also something I never experienced on any other vehicle, including my '64, '71, '73, '75, and '85 Mopars.

Fifth, the way it ate starters. And that isn't mentioning the sagged leaf springs that were going through the trunk, or the leaking gas tank at the sprung seam.

Don't get me wrong, I had fun with the car and really liked it, and it was in bad shape when I got it, but it needed a lot to bring it back to being a dependable driver.

Thanks to me, it stayed out of the junkyard for another couple of years. I was sad to see it go. But, it had enough little things that kept it from ever being anything more than a daily work car and winter car, if you look at it objectively.

Also, my friend had a '68 Newport and had the same problem with eating mechanical voltage regulators and not starting because of loose voltage gauge posts. Though I love Mopars, I'm not going to get starry-eyed and make out like it was better than it really was.

18th Feb 2009, 14:36

I wonder if his '67 Newport headlight switch was like the one on the same year Imperial: a toggle-type.

I had the same problems: headlight circuitry over-heating, eventually shutting down the headlights... especially on the freeway and/or when using high beams. Go ahead: try to find a new one for sale, anywhere.

To be sure, this is a design or execution-of-design --- NOT a maintenance problem.

I, too, went through a lot of ignition points with '64, '65, and '66 Imperials. My '66 Lincoln would regularly go 30K miles before needed new points, to make a comparison.

But while 60s Lincoln engines are the best, Lincolns cost much more to maintain than either Cads or big Mopars.

Actually, I found that the biggest problem with big Mopars... is every single one became an "oil burner" after 125,000 miles. And when I used to go to Mopar shows, most of the discussions centered around engine rebuilding. Pathetic.

It's a good thing that they usually come cheap.

1967 Chrysler Newport 4 door 383 from North America

Year of manufacture1967
First year of ownership1996
Most recent year of ownership2002
Engine and transmission 383 Automatic
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 4 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.8 / 10
Distance when acquired73000 miles
Most recent distance146000 miles
Previous carChevrolet Monte Carlo

Summary:

An extremely underrated bargain collectable!

Faults:

My only chronic problem has been intermittent wiper motor trouble.

I had a lot of trouble with the factory Bendix-Stromberg carburetors, so I retrofitted a comparable Holley model, with no problems since.

General Comments:

This car performs amazingly well for a non-garaged, all-original everyday driver. I have no reservations about routinely taking this car on trips over 1,000 miles from home.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 13th April, 2002

Average review marks: 7.2 / 10, based on 8 reviews