.

the car junkie daily magazine.

.

Regular Car Reviews Get To Drive A 1974 Plymouth Scamp And He Refers To It As Chrysler’s Low-Water Mark…What?


Regular Car Reviews Get To Drive A 1974 Plymouth Scamp And He Refers To It As Chrysler’s Low-Water Mark…What?

I’m not a Mopar fanboy. Let’s get that straight now. And I’m certainly not a big fan of A-bodies. I’ve always thought that they were nothing more than basic transportation that somehow became classic due to their unwillingness to die. If it came with a big-block, fine. If it was a factory Hemi car, or a 340 Duster/Demon, alright, cool. But the standard, run-of-the-mill Dart and Valiant, meh. They just don’t do it for me. But there is one thing about these cars that does endear: if rust didn’t eat them alive, then you had a fairly stable platform to work on…as you should with an underpinning that dated back to 1960. But Mr. Regular takes aim at this particular 1974 Plymouth with what seems a darkened glare. Is it really a Scamp? Here, I agree, something doesn’t seem right about a four-door Scamp, and again, I’ll agree that it is possibly a factory freak, because who would fake a Scamp? But he considers this Chrysler Corporation’s “low water mark”. Oh, no, friend…did you forget the 1980 Dodge Aspen? THAT was Chrysler’s low-water mark. That was the era of buyouts, the end of any real profitable car out of Chrysler before the K-car. That was even post-Cordoba success. By contrast, the 1974 Scamp you have here looks like a dream.


  • Share This
  • Pinterest
  • 0

3 thoughts on “Regular Car Reviews Get To Drive A 1974 Plymouth Scamp And He Refers To It As Chrysler’s Low-Water Mark…What?

  1. Matt Cramer

    I can see where he’s coming from – the 426 Hemi was dead, styling was getting a lot clunkier, power was down from emissions rules, quality control wasn’t getting any better, and there wasn’t anything you could point to as being better than in 1970. It wasn’t THE low water mark yet, but the tide was definitely flowing out in 1974.

Comments are closed.