So just how good was the A-Body back in its day?

-

MRGTX

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2007
Messages
2,198
Reaction score
728
Location
CT, USA
I was born a couple years after the last Dart rolled off the assembly line but all of my life I have loved these cars, knew I wanted to own one by the time I was about 8 years old...and just assumed that they were the best of their breed....but is that right?

As I understood it, the A-body cars (and that covers a lot of ground, obviously) were superior to the competition by most measures- better 6 cylinder engines (with astounding reliability), better top of the line small block V8 engines, generally lighter than the competition (Duster 340; ~3200lbs, Nova SS 350; 3400lbs) excellent weight transfer and had generally superior suspension (by most measures)...and though it's subjective, they looked better too. :D

Granted, with the exception of Barracudas, some convertibles, etc, these were budget cars..but how were they regarded in their day? I assume that Novas and Mavericks, etc. sold better...but was that simply a branding issue?

Did any of you guys buy them new? How did you make your decision?

Any insight regarding the Abody's place in history would be very welcome.
 
The Valiant and Dart were always rated the best in Consumer Reports compared to their competition.
 
The only bad about them was that they suffered from traction problems. The only other bad thing was if you were lined up against one and did not have an A body youself!
 
I never payed much attention to the Darts, too many GTX, Roadrunners, Superbee, 'Cuda, Challengers, Demon, Duster, GTO, Firebird,
Chevelle, Camero, Mustang, Torinos with giant motors to mess with
small block mostly passenger cars.
Olds and Buick made monsters to.
 
I never payed much attention to the Darts, too many GTX, Roadrunners, Superbee, 'Cuda, Challengers, Demon, Duster, GTO, Firebird,
Chevelle, Camero, Mustang, Torinos with giant motors to mess with
small block mostly passenger cars.
Olds and Buick made monsters to.

Psst: Demons and Dusters are Abodies as are some "'Cudas" (1969 440 cars).... ;)

...but I think this is a good point here. All things being equal and if I had my pick of any muscle car, I'm not sure I would have ended up with an A-Body either. These cars shine in that they have incredible performance potential while being accessible. They were cheap(er) cars. So...as a straight up performance car, they're not really going to compare favorably with a 440+6 Roadrunner or a 454 Chevelle... but IIRC, a 340 Duster was about 1/3 cheaper than a Chevelle SS and much more economical to own and probably wouldn't have been cross-shopped.

On the other hand, in 2012, if someone was looking to make the fastest street machine possible out of a classic body, I'm pretty sure that Mopar A-Bodies would be a vastly superior choice than an intermediate from any brand...but that's a different conversation. :)
 
The only bad about them was that they suffered from traction problems. The only other bad thing was if you were lined up against one and did not have an A body youself!

Is that right? I had always heard that they had better weight transfer, staggered springs that reduced wheel hop (where Ferds and Chevys needed traction bars), and with Dusters/Demons, they could swallow relatively large rear tires...
...so which cars had better traction in this class?
 
There was a 68 Barracuda in my home town that was one of the fastest cars around back in the day. It was a 383 4 speed car and it was wicked. Mind you it was not quite stock! That car surprised a lot of guys that thought they had a quick car. That was also back in the dark age before nitrous, turbos or blowers were popular.
 
I am old enough to have my first new car a Duster 340 which was rally red with white buckets. My car came with KH disc brakes and 3.91 gears and TF transmission. The E70 tires did lack a little in the traction and when I got Cragars I put 60's on the back which helped. The 340 Darts and Dusters were hard to beat and could head to head beat any showroom Nova and also give some BB cars a good run. I loved that car and wish I could have it back. This car was $3100 out the door.
 
A buddy of mine always likes to tell Me about how He would duck down so no one would see him riding to school in the family Dart. And honestly that's about how I felt about them up until the time I got My Dodge Demon. Before that it was all B and E body's for Me. But once I drove that A body and discovered how sturdy and responsive it felt compared to the barges I had been piloting before I was hooked. We have to remember sometimes that 'cept for the barracuda's and 340 Darts most of the A-body's built were targeted at the economically inclined consumer. They may have been considered the prious crowd back in the day.
 
Back in the day if you seen a mail or news paper carrier around in the country (1964 to 1970) the low end Valiant a Dart was used more then
most any car from what I have seen myself :coffee2: and heard stories by many.. How many Valiants and Darts did you see on USAF bases and Army, Marine bases ? Allot :glasses7:
JMO.. These great cars was driven hard and in/on the worst conditions
and just kept going and parts would interchange..... how many starters do you think they made for a small block ford !! Allot! and at lest 3 or 4 different ones!! That was a pain!... How many rear axles have you seen walk out of a chevy rear end ? me in person on the HWY well over 4.
I would rather be stranded with a bad starter in a mopar then I would any other make... or even ignition... Just my thoughrs on this.
 
A bodies were overlooked.It was a different time A's were compacts B's were the performance giants.I had a 383 four speed roadrunner then one of the guy's brought out a 427 Nova and another brought a Cobra Jet Mustang,so I went into Akins Motors and Duard brought out his Special Order books.Filled out the paper work made the deal then found out I was too late to get a 69 cuda.Jim-the salesman caught me in town and told me that someone in Kansas refused a Gold and Black one and if I wanted it I would have to go get it.They didn't want to ship it to Houston and get it refused again.Long story short got the car put the widest Wide Ovals on it I could find but never got it to hook until Radials came out.
 
Growing up in the 60's, magazines like Popular Mechanics and Mechanix Illustrated (Tom McCahill) would do comparisons between the different brands. Say a 6 cyl Valiant vs. 6 cyl Nova vs. 6 cyl Falcon, and of course a similar Rambler. I would alway read the article hoping to see the Mopar win in the end. You can probably find some of these on the Net.

Chrysler was known for their engineering and I think it shows up in the cars they built. In my opinion, it just seemed that they never took the cheapest way out, but put a few extra $ in their parts to make the car better. First with putting alternators on the 60 Valiants and of course the Torqueflites were a better tranny than any of the others. Things like superior, more costly, cast iron in their engines, forged roatating engine parts, use of aluminum-especially die cast parts, better timing chain sets, shaft mounted rockers, FULL instrumentation, and better suspensions than the competition that really worked. Companies like GM seemed to care more about the bottom line. The mono leafs used in the novas and camaros were terrible compared to the Mopar rear springs which are more sophisticated than people give them credit for. The front half is pretty much a built-in traction bar. Look at what a poor schmuck has to do to make a 60's mustang front suspension work correctly. That goofy front coil spring above the upper control arm is just wrong and the gemetry is bad. I always say a chebby was built for the lowest common denominator. And back in the day, those chebby guys always had to replace the press-in rocker studs with screw-ins when adding a heavier valve spring and throwing on some kind of rear traction device. Occasionally, I work on brand X vintage cars now, and I honestly can't help but feel sorry for the owners because the Mopars are better in so many subtle ways.

But some of the things I didn't like on the Mopars were the skinny wheels and tires that were tucked well inside the body lines. Too bad they didn't have the money to convert to the BBP for the 67 A bodies. The small pattern was safe enough alright, but it limited the after market wheel selection for sure.

One more thing, back then Mopar had just under 50% of the cop car market country-wide.

Just my opinions.
 
Here's my personal experience:
My 1st Mopar was a '69 340 Swinger that I bought used in November 1969. It was just a couple of months old but the owner was going into the Navy and his parents wouldn't keep the payments up for him. I paid $2500 for it. Beautiful car, Charger Red with a white butt stripe, and Cragars already on it.
All my friends had either Chevys or Fords and laughed at my Dart - until they couldn't keep up with the 340 and then their tune changed.
One of my friends in college had an early Barracuda and went to test drive the 340 when it first came out a year or so earlier. Came back to school the next day and described it as a "Jr. Varsity Hemi".
I lived not too far from Whittier Blvd. here in SoCal at the time and regularly cruised it on Friday and Saturday nights and loved beating up on big-block Chevelles with my small-block Dart. It was lighter and quicker from the start and could walk away from them from a stoplight - and street races didn't last for a full quarter mile so the big-blocks didn't get a chance to get into their horsepower advantage.
Also used to run G/PureStock class at OCIR on weekends and did well both in class and in brackets. One of my early races was against a '68 Roadrunner who was also running the same class but with a couple of "cheat" things that Tech hadn't caught. We both ended up in the final round that night. Before the race he came over, looked my Dart over and sneered, "It's not even going to be close."
I got him off the light and could see him creeping up on me as got close to the finish line - didn't see either win light flash as we went by. It wasn't until I picked up my slip with the "WIN" stamped on it that I knew I'd beat him.
We were pitted fairly close to each other and he had to drive by to get to his pit. As he was coming by my wife stepped out in front of him to stop him, walked up to his open window and said, "You're right, it wasn't even close".
Best time I ran in G/PureStock was 14.28 @ 98 mph. 3.23 open rearend, no headers, just a good tune. -
I've been in love with A-bodies ever since.
As far as engineering, my '69 340 had a forged steel crank, floating wrist pins, and shaft-mounted rockers from the factory. It was really easy to add a dual-point distributor and forged adjustable rocker arms - other factory parts easily found at the salvage yards. The 727 Torqueflite behind it was the best automatic trans at the time and the 8.75 rearend was almost bulletproof behind a smallblock. Throw an adjustable pinion snubber on the rearend and you didn't need any of the multiple add-on traction aids needed by the Chevys and Fords of the day. And Chrysler's factory race parts program was top-of-the-line.
 
A buddy of mine always likes to tell Me about how He would duck down so no one would see him riding to school in the family Dart. And honestly that's about how I felt about them up until the time I got My Dodge Demon. Before that it was all B and E body's for Me. But once I drove that A body and discovered how sturdy and responsive it felt compared to the barges I had been piloting before I was hooked. We have to remember sometimes that 'cept for the barracuda's and 340 Darts most of the A-body's built were targeted at the economically inclined consumer. They may have been considered the prious crowd back in the day.


Very true. I get a lot of people asking (even old timers) why I put them scoops on a Dart. When I tell them it came that way they say. I always thought of the Dart as a economy car. Now most of them say they think they were/are good cars that run forever but some just don't think or remember them being performance oriented.
 
Besides loving A bodies I am also a BIG fan of drag racing. Look at what has always ruled in super stock racing- an A body with a hemi. So when you put our biggest motor in a nice light platform no one else can compete- enough said!!
 
Besides loving A bodies I am also a BIG fan of drag racing. Look at what has always ruled in super stock racing- an A body with a hemi. So when you put our biggest motor in a nice light platform no one else can compete- enough said!!

same here , the 68 LO23 and BO29 SS cars are my all time favorite A's
 

Attachments

  • ss48.jpg
    131.6 KB · Views: 1,548
  • ss36.jpg
    122.9 KB · Views: 1,559
I ordered a 71 340 Demon when I was a senior in high school and to tell you the truth I haven't a clue why I picked the Demon.The car before that was a 67 Nova 283 bench seat 4 speed white with blue cloth interior that's one car I wish I still had
 
Back when I was a kid two guys in town had 69 Darts. 1 340 Swinger 4 speed the other was a GTS 340 Auto. Guy's would come from other towns with Big block Nova's, 383 Road Runners ect...These guys never got beat by anyone. These cars left the biggest impression on me that I will never forget.
 
The young Jerry Brown drove a Plymouth (B body) when Johnny Carson called him "Gov Moonbeam". I read that the CA state motor pool was mostly Mopars only they met the clean air standards.

Mopars were known for better engineering. The cheapest go-fast toy was a Camaro. They didn't last, partly due to the dumb kids who drove them. Seems every time they stop a druggie on Cops, they are in a 70-80's Camaro with fast food trash covering the back seat.

I also didn't notice Darts and Valiants back then, probably because they were the Honda Accord of the day. I remember us kids staring at train car loads of new Road-Runners and Super Bees passing by as our school bus waited. Nothing like a rear wing to get you noticed.
 
I was born a couple years after the last Dart rolled off the assembly line but all of my life I have loved these cars, knew I wanted to own one by the time I was about 8 years old...and just assumed that they were the best of their breed....but is that right?

As I understood it, the A-body cars (and that covers a lot of ground, obviously) were superior to the competition by most measures- better 6 cylinder engines (with astounding reliability), better top of the line small block V8 engines, generally lighter than the competition (Duster 340; ~3200lbs, Nova SS 350; 3400lbs) excellent weight transfer and had generally superior suspension (by most measures)...and though it's subjective, they looked better too. :D

Granted, with the exception of Barracudas, some convertibles, etc, these were budget cars..but how were they regarded in their day? I assume that Novas and Mavericks, etc. sold better...but was that simply a branding issue?

Did any of you guys buy them new? How did you make your decision?

Any insight regarding the Abody's place in history would be very welcome.



The A bodys were really good street racers and as I remember it, a 340 '68 or '69 Dart was about 2-3 tenths faster (quicker) in the quarter than a '69 383 Road Runner.

That was a surprise to me because Mopar's advertising always was heavy on touting the 383 RR as a quick piece for the money. The A Body 340's had it beat by several car-lengths in showroom form, and were cheaper.

I am an old guy, and was working as the Stocker tech guy at the local drag strip from 1960-1968, so I well remember how these cars ran.

The only intermediates that gave the 340 cars much grief were the 350 horsepower '66 Nova 327s (which were a 1-year-only car) and the 390cid Rambler "Scrambler" 4-speed cars.

The Chevys were a little lighter than the Darts, and had a good engine, although the carb was way too small. (585cfm Rochester.)

But they were faster.

NHRA classified them into A Stock where Bill (Grumpy) Jenkins campaigned one nationally, giving Jere Stahl (the header guy) fits with his A/S Street Hemi, B-Body, 4-speed car. I don't think Grumpy EVER actually outran Jere's Mopar, but he was very close. That's how fast those cars were... but, as I said, they were a one-year-only deal, so they weren't much of a factor on the street. In '68, Chevy used what was basically that same engine with a 750 Quadrajet in the Nova and they were fast, but a LOT heavier than the '66's. never saw one... that'ss how rare they were, while there were 340 cars everywhere.

The Mavericks never got anything more powerful than a 302 2-barrel, but the Nercury earlier ('65 and '66) Comets were avalable with a hi-po, solid-lifter version of a 289 in '65 and '66 (271 hp) and they ran good, but were still, no match foir a 340 in an A Body.

The only real challenges for the 340 A Body cars in '67-'71 were the 396 big block Novas and Camaros, and the 428 Cobra Jet Mustangs.

Both had monumental traction problems and had to deal with that on the street, particularly, but were both well-cammed, had high compression and lots of carburetion. They were fast, given a decent chassis setup.

What was needed was so simple, I can't imagine why Mopar didn't do it, but I imagine that the brass at Mopar didn't want the A Body cars ourtrunning everything else in the Pentastar lineup, but that's exactly what would have happened if they had only made a couple of changes:

They need to have made the 340 available in a '68-'69 Valiant 2-door sedan, installed W-2 heads on ALL 340s, bumped the compression to 11:1, and delivered all 340 cars with a set of Doug's headers in the trunk and installed the 1968 340 stick-shift cam across the board (it was a lot more radical.) The Z-28 Camaros had the tubing headers in the trunk for eother dealer installation or installation by the original buyer.

The driver's side 340 exhaust manifold, although a definite improvement over a 318 manifold, is horrible, It kills a bunch of power.

If they had offered a Valiant like that (or, a Dart) nobody else would have stood a snowball's chance in Hell of beating these cars. Not even the big block Novas or C.J.'s. (now, of course, you can build your own.):cheers:

The stock 340 heads were okay, but the reciprocating assembly of a 340 is a LOT heavier than a 327 Chevy's and a 302 Ford's, so they needed a way to get around the horsepower eating parasitic drag caused by that weight.

The W-2 motor with headers would have easily done that.

Big block Chevys and Mustangs would have just been a speck in the rear-view mirror!

Even as it was, there were damned few G.M. or Ford cars that would do much damage to a 340.

I put the complete powertrain out of a low-mileage '71 340 into a '64 Valiant 2-door sedan in 1972 as a street fighter; only car I ever owned that was never outrun! You gotta love a car that never lets you down... It was a dead heat for a 900 Kawasaki in the quarter on the street (yes, I drove it on the street with 7" M & H slicks and 4.56 Sure Grip,)

340s forever!!!! :cheers:
 
i love my little a body compared to a bigger boat. something about a high hp little car turns me on. but the ride is not as "comfy", nor can i fit all the family with the dog in it.

saying they are the "cheaper car" is a discussion in itself, look how many gm 350 parts there are for a lot cheaper.

going to car shows i love showing up in the rebel duster... ugly paint and hideous interior but youll never see my front lights hehe
 
I bought a used 69 Dart GTS 340 4 speed car back in 1972 or 73. The car was nice with buckets and console. The E70's didn't stand a chance since the rear was a 3.23 one legger. Eventually I rebult the motor and put a 4.10 suregrip in it. The car was fast.
 
Back when my dad was in high school or shortly there after, he had a 70 Chevrolet Malibu. He ordered special with the as gauges, bench seat, auto on the column, and the lt1 350 ;(370hp I think it was). Anyway, he loved that car and how fast it was, but his buddy had a 340 swinger that he could never keep up with! He always said, now matter how hard he tried that damn little swinger managed to run circles around him lol
 
For a non-racing/musclecar viewpoint, consider my dad who back in the 60's worked for "ma bell" before AT&T took them over. His job as a regional safety supervisor had him covering all of Washington, Oregon, and Idaho on a regular basis, so he drove ALOT of miles. At the time, the fleet cars were Novas, Falcons, and Valiants. Being over 6 feet tall, comfort was definitely a factor, and the Valiant was the most comfortable to drive long distances. But mostly he liked the Valiants because they were dead nuts reliable.
 
-
Back
Top