Did Chrysler ever make good cars? I like their 70's muscle

>>15873802
>1950's
The 300 letter cars were amazing. Chevy simply couldn't compete with that amount of luxury.

>1960's
Mopar ruled NASCAR and dragstrip alike.

>1970's
>Muscle car golden age
Nope. Emissions happened. Everything sucked back then.

>2010's
Hellcats and Vipers.

>>15873802
>70s
>muscle car golden age

You obviously don't know shit about shit

File: 18riuf95fe8s5jpg[1].jpg (91KB, 800x535px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 800x535px

>1980s
DAYYYTONNNNAAAAAAAAAAAA

>>15873802
>GM was making more reliable muscle at the same time.
I like where this is going.
>1950's= Anything but Chev=Garbage
And you ruined it
>2010's= GM starts getting it's shit together
My nigga.

>>15873915
Also consider: Chrysler/Mitsubishi stuff, K-cars, and TURBO CARAVANS

>>15873802
Up until the 1957 models that were rushed into production, chryslers were considered some of the best made cars in the world. There's no comparison in build quality between a 40's Chrysler and Ford/GM for example.

>>15873802
its pretty unfortunate for their recent cars (within the last decade) they tried getting their shit together and recreating things like the dart and redesigning the 200 so it wasn't complete shit and still failed, and now FCA is trying to only appeal to crossover/SUV markets

AA Platform
K Platform/derivatives without Mitsubishi engines
Minivans

>>15873802
>1950's= Anything but Chev=Garbage
lmao.
Chrysler 300 was literally the fastest kid on the block, First gen Hemis ayy.

>1960's= The Jeep golden age
No, second gen Hemi golden age. Hemi dominated Nascar which previously attempted to ban it.

>1970's= Muscle golden age, but Ford was doing it best.
The muscle car was on life support by 1974.
Anyway Ford wasn't doing shit.
70-74 Mustangs are the most dislike after Mustang II.
80's onward, okay you have a point.

>>15874263
>Up until the 1957 models
This, 1957 models year was just a stop-gap until the radical redesigns of Forward Look could be put into production.