There's no such thing as a "Y Body"

[Jack Meoff]

Okay now I'm confused......not hard to do.....
But....all the above diatribe states that the Cormagnum B's were 115" wheelbase
But the 79's were 118.5"......is this true?

 

[Jack Meoff]

Apparently Chrysler contradicts itself from time to time.
I just pulled this quote from the Cordoba page at allpar.


http://www.allpar.com/model/cordoba.html


"The last B-body Cordoba rolled off the lines in 1979. In 1980, the name was moved to the smaller (112.7 inch wheelbase) Volare/Aspen/Diplomat F/J/M body. The length was slashed to 210 inches, and weight cut by 400 pounds; but it remained roomy, and claimed more legroom and rear hip room than in 1979. As with the Volare, Aspen, and Diplomat, the new Cordoba had a transverse torsion-bar front suspension rather than the traditional torsion bar layout."

According to this....the 79 is indeed a B body.

 

[Jack Meoff]

Ok, I worked on these cars when they were new. I've owned a couple, including a 79. So...somebody please explain to me, specifically, what these "differences under the skin" are, and how the 79 wheelbase is longer than the 75-78 models.

I would think given the latest that I got from allpar that we can say the 79's were indeed B bodies......

By the way...never got to say welcome aboard!!
Great handle....

 

[Mr C]

Anyone have Galen Goviers 75-80 book? Look there- allpar has a lot of disprepancies..

As for differences between 78 and 79s- as I mentioned the differences are under the skin- try putting a 78 heater core in a 79 and get back to me on how they are the same. I have lived this in restoring my 79 doba- there are lots of little differences when you tear them down past the surface.

 

[Jack Meoff]

Anyone have Galen Goviers 75-80 book? Look there- allpar has a lot of disprepancies..

As for differences between 78 and 79s- as I mentioned the differences are under the skin- try putting a 78 heater core in a 79 and get back to me on how they are the same. I have lived this in restoring my 79 doba- there are lots of little differences when you tear them down past the surface.

First of all...welcome aboard Mr. C

Second...

Can you elaborate so we can clear up this mystery?
Also.....is the wheelbase indeed longer?

 

[Jack Meoff]

Okay I'm starting to feel like a ping pong ball.....
This is from Galen Govier's book.....

 

[Mr.Lopar]

I think that book is wrong as the 79 magnum/cordobas are B-bodies, and the 80 cordoba/Mirada is a J-body

 

[Jack Meoff]

I think that book is wrong as the 79 magnum/cordobas are B-bodies, and the 80 cordoba/Mirada is a J-body

Everything I've read is a contradiction.
As far as I've ever known the most accurate info available is Govier.
He lists it as an R body.

Other than that if somebody has a 79 drop a tape measure on the wheelbase
If it's 118.5" it's an R.

 

[Jack Meoff]

Okay....I flew in an email to Ehrenberg.
I want to see what he says.
If Govier says it's an R and Ehrenberg says the same then that's what I'm going with.
I'll let you know when I hear back.....

 

[NoCar340]

I do not consider Govier nearly the authority I once did. He "certifies" rebodies and even helps those with enough coin get fake data tags, etc. There's an M3-coded '70 Challenger T/A 50 miles from here. Problem is, the car is a rebody and the original was B3 with a blue interior. I have photos of the wrecked original car as well as the "Galen blessed" supposed restoration. The data tags on the car are a complete fabrication to the tastes of the owner, and a friend of mine famously busted the guy on Moparts about 10 years ago.

 

[Jack Meoff]

Okay...
I myself believe Rick Ehrenberg to be the Mopar authority
This is what he said.......

"They are most assuredly B-bodies. The ONLY R-body cars were:

Plymouth Gran Fury, 1980-‘81

Dodge St. Regis, 1979-‘81

Chrysler Newport, 1979-‘81

Chrysler New Yorker, 1979-‘81

Having said that, note this: While the body shells are totally different between the two lines, the basic platforms are virtually identical.

Rick"

As far as I'm concerned from this point forward
They ARE B bodies.

 

[Jack Meoff]

I do not consider Govier nearly the authority I once did. He "certifies" rebodies and even helps those with enough coin get fake data tags, etc. There's an M3-coded '70 Challenger T/A 50 miles from here. Problem is, the car is a rebody and the original was B3 with a blue interior. I have photos of the wrecked original car as well as the "Galen blessed" supposed restoration. The data tags on the car are a complete fabrication to the tastes of the owner, and a friend of mine famously busted the guy on Moparts about 10 years ago.

I guess Mr. Govier is not the end all is he?
I do however believe Rick Ehrenberg to be.
If he says they're B's that's good enough for me.

For the record guys it's not that I didn't believe anyone in particular
I was just looking for a concrete undisputable answer.
And I found it.
Case closed.

 

[NoCar340]

VCR and I were right. So nyah. :icon_biggrin:

 

[Jack Meoff]

VCR and I were right. So nyah. :icon_biggrin:

And Mr. Lopar too. :laughing6:

 

[ramenth]

VCR and I were right. So nyah. :icon_biggrin:

Never doubted that. Allpar is crap for reference a lot of time and Govier's book saying the '80 is an R shows him to be full of shit as the J-body Cordoba started in '80. As we all know.

 

[69Coronetrt]

If it's 118.5" it's an R.

From the data book

 

[Jack Meoff]

Never doubted that. Allpar is crap for reference a lot of time and Govier's book saying the '80 is an R shows him to be full of shit as the J-body Cordoba started in '80. As we all know.

That's becoming very apparent.
It's funny how many people take this guy's word as gospel.
Like I said....I just wanted something concrete to put the debate to bed.
And hopefully you agree Robert that Ehrenberg knows his shit.
I figured I could use that as the concrete I was looking for.

And 69Coronet has submitted his own undeniable proof.
Thank you for that Sir....

 

[ramenth]

That's becoming very apparent.
It's funny how many people take this guy's word as gospel.
Like I said....I just wanted something concrete to put the debate to bed.
And hopefully you agree Robert that Ehrenberg knows his shit.
I figured I could use that as the concrete I was looking for.

And 69Coronet has submitted his own undeniable proof.
Thank you for that Sir....

Ehrenberg has been known for his misses, too. He keeps repeating over and over again the idea you can't use F-, M-, and J-body spindles on the older cars for an easy disk upgrade. He's wrong and has been proven wrong on it. But he is dispensing advice through the pages of a magazine and has to take liability into account. Someone sticks the spindles on an older body style and screws it up, guess who's getting sued?

There are things that I wish people would listen to him on more as it's proven time and again. No green bearings in 8.75 rears. Green bearings suck even in front wheel drive, where they're used the most. There's a reason even the top of the line parts houses will only warranty them for three years from time of purchase. That's because they suck for the usage. Want to go disk on an 8.75? Better to have the axle ends resized for Ford's roller bearings.

 

[NoCar340]

Ehrenberg's concern with the FMJ spindles isn't without some valid points. Yes, they bolt in and work without issue for 99% of applications, however they are in fact taller than the recommended '73-'76 A-body/'73-'74 E-body spindles. That does upset the excellent geometry of the Chrysler front end somewhat, which I would only expect to be an issue in extreme hard driving situations such as road racing, autocross, and me on a lonely back road with better curves than Marilyn Monroe. The other concern comes directly from that change in geometry: simply put, you are now imparting stresses on the parts for which they were never designed. Will they actually break? Well, I don't claim to know. I have seen one instance on a hard-driven '72 Scamp where yes, it did snap the upper ball joint--exactly his main point of concern--but short of a metallurgical diagnosis I don't know if it was the disc brake swap or simply a defective ball joint. I also know of several other cars with the FMJ parts that have not had any problem, but at the same time they were/are not driven in the manner of that Scamp, either.

I know others have "proven him wrong" but I've not seen what I consider conclusive from an engineering standpoint. Running the suspension from full compression to full jounce with a floor jack is one thing; mathematical assessments of multiple stresses in several directions on a particular metal alloy is quite another thing entirely. So, I'll do it the "factory engineered" way myself. I've found the limitations of way too many parts over the years, sometimes with rather spectacular results.

I'm 100% with you (and him) on both the Green bearings and the rear disc brakes, though. In fact, I've been preaching the same thing for years about the Green bearings. There's more than one way to skin a cat when it comes to the rear disc conversion, though. Still, for the virtually undetectable difference they make in actual braking and the fact that I don't care what you see through the openings of my rear wheels, I don't consider the time and expense involved in such a conversion worthwhile. People who claim they got vast improvements by switching out their drums for discs universally had neglected, misadjusted, or unlubricated drum setups in the first place. If the drums are adjusted and maintained correctly, you'll not likely see much if any improvement by spending all that money to swap to rotors.

 

[ramenth]

Ehrenberg's concern with the FMJ spindles isn't without some valid points. Yes, they bolt in and work without issue for 99% of applications, however they are in fact taller than the recommended '73-'76 A-body/'73-'74 E-body spindles. That does upset the excellent geometry of the Chrysler front end somewhat, which I would only expect to be an issue in extreme hard driving situations such as road racing, autocross, and me on a lonely back road with better curves than Marilyn Monroe. The other concern comes directly from that change in geometry: simply put, you are now imparting stresses on the parts for which they were never designed. Will they actually break? Well, I don't claim to know. I have seen one instance on a hard-driven '72 Scamp where yes, it did snap the upper ball joint--exactly his main point of concern--but short of a metallurgical diagnosis I don't know if it was the disc brake swap or simply a defective ball joint. I also know of several other cars with the FMJ parts that have not had any problem, but at the same time they were/are not driven in the manner of that Scamp, either.

I know others have "proven him wrong" but I've not seen what I consider conclusive from an engineering standpoint. Running the suspension from full compression to full jounce with a floor jack is one thing; mathematical assessments of multiple stresses in several directions on a particular metal alloy is quite another thing entirely. So, I'll do it the "factory engineered" way myself. I've found the limitations of way too many parts over the years, sometimes with rather spectacular results.

A debate that has gone on since the beginning of time when the F-body first hit the street. He's right in his points from an engineering standpoint. A lot of time, though, as anyone who's worked on a car will tell you, the engineers don't always get it right.

I'm 100% with you (and him) on both the Green bearings and the rear disc brakes, though. In fact, I've been preaching the same thing for years about the Green bearings. There's more than one way to skin a cat when it comes to the rear disc conversion, though. Still, for the virtually undetectable difference they make in actual braking and the fact that I don't care what you see through the openings of my rear wheels, I don't consider the time and expense involved in such a conversion worthwhile. People who claim they got vast improvements by switching out their drums for discs universally had neglected, misadjusted, or unlubricated drum setups in the first place. If the drums are adjusted and maintained correctly, you'll not likely see much if any improvement by spending all that money to swap to rotors.

The only thing rear disks offer over drums is unsprung weight and aren't as prone to brake fade. I've long been an advocate of just staying with drum brakes, large drum brakes on the ass for a lot of street driven cars, so you won't get any disagreement from me on that one. I've replaced a lot of prematurely worn front pads because of what you've said about rear drums: universally neglected. One of the reasons I always offered a brake adjustment with every oil change, unless it was an external adjustment, (reaching through the backing plates with a spoon) then I just went ahead and did it.