Advertising Last completed movie pages
1965 Chrysler Valiant [AP6] Comments about this vehicle| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
◊ 2006-01-22 19:33 |
Chrysler Valiant from the looks of it. |
|
◊ 2006-01-25 09:46 |
If it's aussie car, it's just Valiant. |
|
◊ 2006-01-25 09:47 |
I guess it has also a model name? |
|
◊ 2006-01-25 12:19 |
In Australia, there were Pacer, Safari and Regal. This is an AP5 (Australian Production 5) Regal, judging from the medallion on the front wing which Pacers and Safaris lack. Hence, this is a 1963 Valiant Regal AP5. |
|
◊ 2006-02-06 16:14 |
Hi guys.. That is most definitely NOT an AP5 Valiant. It`s a 1965/66 AP6 Chrysler Valiant and NOT even a Regal, just a base model standard sedan. The AP5's didn`t have the trim and emblem on the front panels (although they did have the shape 'IN' the panel itself) The AP6 had that trim and badge and only on the Standard models. The AP6 Regals had a wider, straight strip of trim that ran along the bottoms of the doors. Hope this helps Regards Matt Roper (OLDVAL) www.chargerclubofwa.asn.au -- Last edit: 2006-02-06 16:15:11 |
|
◊ 2006-02-06 16:20 |
Hi, Thanks for the info .gif ":)") It should be listed under Chrysler make rather than Valiant make then? (with Valiant only as model?) -- Last edit: 2006-02-06 16:20:37 |
|
◊ 2006-02-06 17:09 |
yep Chrysler was the 'make' and Valiant was the 'model' - just the designations for each year are different, although most people DO just refer to them as Valiants ie: 1966 VC Valiant 'R' Series January 1962 'S' Series March 1962 AP5 May 1963 AP6 March 1965 VC March 1966 VE October 1967 VF March 1969 VG August 1970 VH June 1971 VJ May 1973 VK October 1975 CL October 1976 CM September 1978 |
|
◊ 2006-02-06 17:21 |
We have currently three cars listed as Valiant make: /vehicles_make-valiant.html should we list them as Chryler Valiant? Or are some of these really of a "Valiant" make? |
|
◊ 2006-02-06 22:58 |
Well, but we also can consider Dodge and Plymouth as Chrysler's models! And we have same models of cars, listed as Chrysler Imperial, and as Imperial! |
|
◊ 2006-02-06 23:02 |
www.allpar.com considers Valiant as "make" As for Valiant Charger and Valiant VH featured in Mad Max 2, see http://www.aussiecoupes.com -- Last edit: 2006-02-06 23:03:39 |
|
◊ 2006-02-06 23:06 |
Well, no, there is a difference between the company and the commercial make. E.g. the current Mini are made by BMW but not sold under BMW make. For Imperial, it depends on the year: at some time they were sold as Chrysler, and at other times they were sold as Imperial make. -- Last edit: 2006-02-06 23:06:31 |
|
◊ 2006-02-06 23:24 |
/vehicle_11821-Chrysler-Imperial-1972.html As I remember, '69-'73 Imperials were last Imperials as Imperials! |
|
◊ 2006-02-06 23:32 |
As I can suggest,Valiant was a brand of Chrysler Australia . |
|
◊ 2006-02-07 00:26 |
So what is the model name of this one, if Valiant is the make? |
|
◊ 2006-02-07 01:02 |
...but there really was cars,built under Chrysler name. In series names, V stays for Valiant, C stays for Chrysler. Unfortunately, this one don't fit this designations. |
|
◊ 2006-02-07 06:16 |
All Australian Mopars (whether they were Valiants, Chargers, Hardtops or even late 70s Lancers) were all made by Chrysler. So CHRYSLER is the MAKE.. All of these cars have 'By Chrysler' badges on them. -- Last edit: 2006-02-07 06:16:50 |
|
◊ 2006-02-07 11:36 |
"by Chrysler" means that they built it, not that it was used as the "make" ("marque"). Dacia Logan also has a By Renault badge, but it is sold under the Dacia make. |
|
◊ 2006-02-08 02:16 |
alright then why don`t we just call them Aston Martin Valiants then, or maybe Lada Valiants?? Are you all saying that an HQ Kingswood is made by Kingswood? Not Holden?? It`s a Holden Kingswood (factory model designation - HQ).. Just as the Valiant in question is a Chrysler Valiant (factory model designation - AP6) If you like can dig out all my Valiant rego papers where they state MAKE: CHRYSLER MODEL: VALIANT -- Last edit: 2006-02-08 02:18:22 |
|
◊ 2006-02-08 10:32 |
 I think that you did not understood me. In my example, Dacia Logan "by Renault" there is a vehicle make called Dacia ( www.dacia.ro ) and Renault is the group. Like Chrysler is the group that produces Dodge, Plymouth, and few others. I did not say that Valiant was a make or was not, I just gave example of cases where the group name is used together with another make. -- Last edit: 2006-02-08 10:32:49 |
|
◊ 2006-02-13 09:05 |
I confused even more! In that case, what's a thing is Valiant Charger? Chrysler Valiant Charger? And Valiant Regal is a Chrysler Valiant Regal? |
|
◊ 2006-02-13 10:39 |
/vehicle_11821-Chrysler-Imperial-1972.html As I remember, '69-'73 Imperials were last Imperials as Imperials! [/quote] Imperials were sold as a seperate make from 1955 onwards, NEVER to be Chryslers again. Before that, they were ALWAYS Chrysler-Imperials. The name Imperial was dropped briefly for model year 1976, but the car was still with us, called Chrysler New Yorker Brougham, albeit some Imperial standard features (e.g. automatic climate control) were now extra cost options and four-wheel disc brakes were no longer available. It lasted until 1977. Imperial was then revived in 1981 for a personal luxury coupe built from the Cordoba/Mirada platform until 1983. The name hasn't been used since, but it is intended to be given to a Viper V10 powered sedan destined to appear for 2007. For more info about Imperials, please visit my website at www.heavenlyhearses.com |
|
◊ 2006-02-13 17:27 |
/vehicle_11821-Chrysler-Imperial-1972.html As I remember, '69-'73 Imperials were last Imperials as Imperials! [/quote] Imperials were sold as a seperate make from 1955 onwards, NEVER to be Chryslers again. Before that, they were ALWAYS Chrysler-Imperials. The name Imperial was dropped briefly for model year 1976, but the car was still with us, called Chrysler New Yorker Brougham, albeit some Imperial standard features (e.g. automatic climate control) were now extra cost options and four-wheel disc brakes were no longer available. It lasted until 1977. Imperial was then revived in 1981 for a personal luxury coupe built from the Cordoba/Mirada platform until 1983. The name hasn't been used since, but it is intended to be given to a Viper V10 powered sedan destined to appear for 2007. For more info about Imperials, please visit my website at www.heavenlyhearses.com [/quote] Uhh, there was the Chrysler Imperial in the early 90's, which was based on an extended K-car platform (and, yes, it was a Chrysler: http://www.imperialclub.com/Yr/1990/poster/index.htm) |
|
◊ 2006-02-14 08:45 |
I alrady was there, but mainly on page about late '50 Imperials... Anyway now main question is Valiant. |
|
◊ 2006-02-14 10:52 |
I have no idea about Valiant in Australia. In the US, Valiant was a seperate make when introduced as a 1960 model in autumn 1959. It then became a Plymouth for the following year and henceforth (which left Dodge dealers without a compact, so the Lancer variant of the Valiant was introduced as a Dodge, btw.). The 'Plymouth' scripts on the 1961 US models are a possibility to immediately tell them apart from the 1960 models, which had 'Valiant' badges only. Plymouth, Dodge, DeSoto, Chrysler and Imperial were/are all seperate makes in the Chrysler emporium, like Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, Oldsmobile and Pontiac were/are for GM and Ford, Mercury and Lincoln are for FoMoCo. Nobody fails to accept that the GM and Ford divisions are seperate makes, but in Chrysler's case, there is always debate. This has several reasons: Chrysler Corporation itsself failed to make a clear distinction between its makes in export markets, often marketing them as Chryslers, despite they were Plymouths (e.g. the Voyager) or Dodges (e.g. the Viper). The biggest mistake ever made by Chrysler was to choose a model designation of a well appointed Chrysler (Imperial) as the moniker of an entirely new make in the luxury car field. It never took hold in the public and Imperials are to this day referred to as Chrysler-Imperials by many people to whom it in turn would never occur to call a Lincoln 'Ford-Lincoln'. In reality, the Chrysler divisions are distinct makes, often in fierce competition with each other for market share. Back to Valiants: In the US, they were Plymouth Valiants from 1961 onwards. In Australia, there was no Plymouth division, so they were built by Chrysler Australia. But I have never heard anyone call them Chrysler Valiants there. Like I have never heard anybody call a French Simca 'Chrysler-Simca'. Do the Australian Valiants have the name 'Chrysler' spelled out anywhere on the cars themselves? |
|
◊ 2006-02-15 08:19 |
I also know, that there were cars mentioned as Valiant Charger, Valiant Pacer,Valiant Regal,Valiant Drifter etc...I doubt,that they all were make-Chrysler, model-Valiant. I don't see any reason to call they Valiants,if they were Chryslers. |
|
◊ 2006-05-23 19:53 |
Valiant is australia's chrysler in those days. Just another branch off the tree. They don't get called Chrysler Valiants. They're just Valiants... |
|
◊ 2006-05-23 20:11 |
And which model then? |
|
◊ 2006-07-03 06:44 |
Yes (Nightrider), they had 'By Chrysler' in various locations on them, generally on rear & low on the sides as well as in the interiors. (? glove box, steering wheel, pedals, ? ..) Also I think wheels & wheels trims had Chrysler on them - generally more noticeable on later 70s models (Chargers on ?) NB Re the Make/Model debate, the delineation in Australia is rather vague - PS for Holden, it is actually GMH or General Motors Holden. The link at www.aussiecoupes.com/aussiemuscle.html probably does the most reasonable job of indicating the make as Chrysler/Valiant & Model as VF/VG/VH/CH/VJ/VK/CL Coupe/Pacer/Charger/etc - the Make/Model designation on Rego papers can & does vary widely within & from State to State also This particular Model was/is an AP6 sedan - we have a heftily modified one under construction gaining a 484c.i Keith Black Hemi with Twin Turbos Check http://moparsunday.com for lots more 'pretty' piccies |
|
◊ 2006-07-14 05:07 |
ALL Australian Valiants were Chrysler Valiants. All US Valiants were Plymouth Valiants except for 1960 models where Valiant was the make. As for other countries I believe New Zealand followed Australian model names as their Valiants were Australian exports. I don't know about European or South African models. If you follow your previous theory of listing cars as they were designated in the market where the film was made then all Australian Valiants should be listed as Chrysler for make and Valiant (followed by model letter eg AP6) as model. Regal was a trim line, and Safari designated a wagon. The only Valiants that should be listed as Make - Valiant are 1960 us models. If you want to get really confused the last of the Australian Valiants were built by Mitsubishi. Mitsubishi bought out Chryslers interests in Australia in 1980 and continued to manufacture Valiants as Chryslers until producton ended in 1981, therefore are they Mitsubishi Chrysler Valiants? No they are just Chrysler Valiants because they were never marked anywhere as Mistubishis except for the build plates which read Chrysler Valiant manufactured by Mitsubishi Australia under licence from Chrylser Corporation. They had no other badging or reference to Mitsubishi so they are Chryslers. -- Last edit: 2006-07-14 05:16:04 |
|
◊ 2006-07-14 05:19 |
This is absolutley correct for Australian models. |
|
◊ 2006-07-14 05:24 |
Back to Valiants: In the US, they were Plymouth Valiants from 1961 onwards. In Australia, there was no Plymouth division, so they were built by Chrysler Australia. But I have never heard anyone call them Chrysler Valiants there. Like I have never heard anybody call a French Simca 'Chrysler-Simca'. Do the Australian Valiants have the name 'Chrysler' spelled out anywhere on the cars themselves?[/quote] You may not hear them refered to as Chrysler Valiants because in Australia they are all Chrysler Valiants so it is like calling a Ford Falcon just a falcon. Everyone just knows automatically it is a Ford. And yes, most (not all) Australian Valiants have Chrysler on the somewhere, especially later ones on the build plates. |
|
◊ 2006-07-14 05:35 |
The Charger was a short wheelbase coupe version of the Valiant from 1972-77 therefore Chrysler Valiant Charger is correct. The Pacer was a sports version of the Valiant from 1968-1972 therefore Chrysler Valiant Pacer is correct. The Regal was the higher specification trim line offered from 1963-1981 therefore Chrysler Valiant Regal is correct. The Drifter was a special edition sports package available initially on panelvans and utes(pickups) from 1976-78 therefore Chrysler Valiant Drifter ute or van, and also there were 50 Charger Drifters built therefore Chrysler Valiant Charger Drifter There were also different specifications available in each model range within the Valiant and Valiant Charger range. A Charger came as a base model, an XL, a 770 and an R/T so you could say a Chrysler Valiant Charger (VH) R/T and still be right and then you can also add commonly added demoninations given by the public such as Chrysler Valiant Charger R/T E49 which meant it had the E49 engine code for racing with triple webers. |
|
◊ 2006-07-14 09:45 |
in conclusion? ... is this one a Valiant or Chrysler Valiant? |
|
◊ 2006-07-14 23:46 |
This is a 1965-66 Chrysler Valiant (AP6) |
|
◊ 2006-10-03 08:41 |
In some of previous shots we can see reflection of car's front in window. Too bad,it's wrecked. |
|
◊ 2008-05-10 15:37 |
Weird how much that Chrysler's rear quarter looks like a Ford Corsair... |
Add a comment Advertising Advertising
![1965 Chrysler Valiant [AP6]](i019392.jpg)
00:56:29 ![[*]](/res/star.png){kind=small}
