• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

about That car....

our first great reply,TY.


but,as you know,if someone makes themselves believe something long enough,they can then tell you a story without any hesitation and convince You,because hey they have convinced themselves.

I too am a very inquisitive person who considers them-self to be a Cynic. I've considered and asked why Mr. Johnson would have written such a Story. He didn't have anything to gain from it, was not paid to write it and it certainly did not cause an "uproar" in the Automotive World until I became part of the scenario! So I have to ask, when did Mr. Johnson's Story become a fantasy? Was it before or after I became involved?
 
Got this email yesterday. Interesting observation and reasoning.

The 4-door Barracuda story was a lie. It was really stupid. People fact check stuff these days, and many people who worked at Chrysler in 1969 are still alive so you have to wonder why he thought he could get this story past the guys who actually worked there.

First of all, there was never a 1970 Barracuda 4-Door model sanctioned, commissioned, designed, or built by Chrysler Corporation. No Chrysler built 1970 Barracuda 4-door has ever existed on this planet in any shape, form, not even as hologram.

There could have been a somewhat similar vehicle, representing a "similar shape" as maybe, perhaps, a four door Barracuda, that could have been mis-identified as such. The only car at that time, that could possibly this description would be the 1971 Satellite 4-door sedan - in some early form of prototype development or a crude roadable buck. Remember this was the fall of 1969, less than a year before 1971 production, and several months before the first pilot cars.


I've also been working on ECS/Roger Johnson's "loading dock" story that states the car sat outside for two days, in a general area for everyone to see. Yet nobody else at Chrysler remembers seeing it. This gives more credibility to the fact of a 1971 Satellite 4-door sedan in the later stages of development. Not too many people would consider something like majorly important, especially given the fact this was the engineering complex. But it could be important to some inter-company mail-delivery person, who's route normally would not give them access to restricted areas. For such a person, the first glimpse of a new 1971 body style would probably could be interesting.


Here's one of Roger Johnson Quotes":


"The car I saw was a red 4-door hardtop Barracuda. It sat on a concrete platform behind one of the main office buildings in the center of Chrysler’s Highland Park facility. This was a spot where odd cars showed up routinely, so I always looked for them".


That part may have been true. Chrysler routinely purchased competitive make cars for teardown analysis and review. These cars were disassembled for assembly method studies and component testing... and then completely measured from tip to tail. Even the curvature of the glass and sheet metal was recorded...but that's another story. It does however explain this quote from Roger Johnson.


"I walked through this area of the complex twice every day. I have seen a new Corvette up there, a 1970 Datsun 240Z and even a Mercury Capri of the same year" "Naturally when a 4-door E-body showed up, it caught my eye. It sat in the same spot for at least 2 days, more likely three"


Well that could be a possibility. Its logical that a prototype model, especially an (all new for 1971 design) could've been parked in the same area for completive testing - even in rough form. The 1971 Plymouth Satellite shares some similar proportions to the E-body, and like I said, in rough form, could be slightly confused as a Barracuda. Just a hypothesis here....but there's an outside chance, it could have actually worn a 1970 Barracuda grille - IF- it was being used as a roadable buck (in some form or fashion). It might likely be cobbled up to fit the fender and hood opening, but it's a possible scenario in late 1969, many months before the start of production, that a 1971 grille would simply not yet be available.


Roger Johnson states "The Barracuda appeared to be drivable from my view of about fifty feet away. But, it may have just been a body-buck. On the other hand, it was wearing regular Barracuda wheels and normal size tires. I realize they never produced such a car. I always figured it was just an experiment in concepts"


There's no chance, not even remotely possible, that this "thing" Roger Johnson claims he saw was a clay mock up (or body buck), or whatever he thinks it was. A clay buck would never be placed outside in the environment for very long. They traveled on skids (remember they weighed an enormous amount) and the wheels, tires, and axles were just there for looks. They mostly traveled indoors and there's really no good reason for a clay buck to be outdoors unless they wanted to photograph it, or see it outside for some reason.


Since clay bucks didn't travel, there's really no reason for it to be on a "loading dock". This is more likely a very early roadable buck, or rough prototype 1971 Satellite 4-door.... like I said before.


Furthermore, no experimental car made from fiberglass or clay would be sitting outside for any prolonged amount of time to risk the chance of a rain shower or prolonged sun exposure. The clay room would have had its own loading docks (for supplies obviously), and this wasn't the place where roger Johnson described.


Roger Johnson saw a 1971 Plymouth Satellite 4-Door Sedan. Period.
 
so much drama

Drama Queen Popcorn watching all the drama.jpg
 
Roger Johnson saw a 1971 Plymouth Satellite 4-Door Sedan. Period.

So when did you personally speak to him or is your opinion based solely on your limited knowledge of the topic? I have spoken with Roger Johnson and he said without any doubt whatsoever that he saw a red 4 Door Barracuda at the Chrysler Headquarters. We certainly don't need another person offering their unsubstantiated view about the statements of a Man they've never spoken with.
 
well,like i said,
he very possibly could have talked himself into seeing a " barracuda " esp considering that a satellite wasnt exactly anything special to remember.
theres also the possibility he did see the satellite,
but as this member has suggested with diff grills carved in it?
that would explain why he thought it was a barracuda to begin with.

now,im going to add my own prior experience with cars that werent made.

eons ago,when i had just transferred to Bragg,i saw a convertible charger driving over by pope air force base.
i almost broke my neck looking and couldnt get turned around in time to chase him down.
i told this story for Many years,even tho i was scolded and mocked and assured there were no vertible chargers.
it wasnt until i ran into the fella who recreated the diamonte?? no,the white charger show car,i think his name was Jim?
we were talking about chargers i mentioned the vertible and to my Astonishment!
he knew where the car came from a couple of the former owners and indeed,it was a custom job/bodyshop.
this car existed.

so,yes! there was a vertible charger,but No,it wasnt a factory made car :)
 
It should have a Missouri assembled vehicle title and ID tag. Fake ID/VIN tags are a felony in Mi. If Chrysler is allowing this, then anyone should be able to make a non-produced car with phony identification....without any questioning of legitimacy. I know a guy who claims to have seen a 71 Charger convertible at the Hamtramck facility. It had a turbine engine. I say someone should build it.

It's a high quality build of a possible prototype. It should not be legitimized by the ability of having Chrysler licensing rights for other parts.

******************************************************************

this is a question ive asked already...
how exactly did you acquire a title documents and a vin plate for a car thats not even finished nor inspected by the state dmv??
even if you say,this is a fake~ vin plate,its attached to a motor vehicle,yes,no?
 
now,im going to add my own prior experience with cars that werent made.

Unlike some of you here, I have never added, taken away or rationalized about the things told by Individuals mentioned. Rather than continuing to hypothesize about what Head Designers or the Top Brass of a Company knew or felt about their Concept Cars, read the words of those who were involved. I know that this is information pertains to General Motors but the premise would be similar for any of the Automobile Manufacturers. You can see the specific data highlighted in the yellow boxes.

1.jpg


2.jpg
 
im not sure what gm cars have to do with ma mopar??
this is not exactly what id toss out there as proof,no offense.

edit:read the words of those who were involved.

well,you can do exactly that,
just reread the designer guys posts who worked at ma mopar.
 
It should have a Missouri assembled vehicle title and ID tag. Fake ID/VIN tags are a felony in Mi. If Chrysler is allowing this

This is exactly why I didn't want to discuss the VIN information which is no one's business but mine. You guys start dreaming up falsehoods based on whatever incorrect knowledge you think is correct and repeat it as if you know what's actually taking place. You're wrong about the "Missouri" Title and wrong about Chrysler allowing or being involved. They have no involvement with what is being built.
 
im not sure what gm cars have to do with ma mopar??
this is not exactly what id toss out there as proof,no offense.

You obviously did not read the introduction to those pictures. If you can't follow what I post and choose to change and alter my comments, then I'm done discussing it. I don't have the time or desire to constantly correct you about what's been stated a thousand times before. Have a great day!
 
This is exactly why I didn't want to discuss the VIN information which is no one's business but mine. You guys start dreaming up falsehoods based on whatever incorrect knowledge you think is correct and repeat it as if you know what's actually taking place. You're wrong about the "Missouri" Title and wrong about Chrysler allowing or being involved. They have no involvement with what is being built.

Jeez, I leave for a couple hours thinking that everything is cool and now were almost back to square one. I can understand that Chrysler has no involvement with your car, but do we assume correctly that also includes the fabricated VIN numbers and the body stamps?
 
Jeez, I leave for a couple hours thinking that everything is cool and now were almost back to square one. I can understand that Chrysler has no involvement with your car, but do we assume correctly that also includes the fabricated VIN numbers and the body stamps?

What part of "no involvement" do you not understand?
 
just reread the designer guys posts who worked at ma mopar.

I did and just like the people in the GM commentaries, they stated the exact same thing.....that they didn't know what was taking place. It's kind of hard to verify or comment about something you are not aware of isn't it?
 
I didn't write any of that letter I received as an email.

I got it the other day from someone I don't even know.
But, I can see the guys reasoning how a mail boy could see
an early mock-up prototype of a 1971 b body 4 dr. and think it was a cuda 4 dr.
 
This is exactly why I didn't want to discuss the VIN information which is no one's business but mine. You guys start dreaming up falsehoods based on whatever incorrect knowledge you think is correct and repeat it as if you know what's actually taking place. You're wrong about the "Missouri" Title and wrong about Chrysler allowing or being involved. They have no involvement with what is being built.
i was merely quoting/btw the quotes symbol missing in advanced settings?/
the fella.
if you read the part Below that part,you would have seen my thoughts.
and,tbh very blunt here,
it wasnt us who posted pics of that vin,nor the paperwork,etc etc.
it was you.
that pretty much opened the door for that discussion,
i hope you realize this.

now,can we return to discussing how you got documents and vin tags for a vehicle that hasnt been inspected by the state dmv??
 
But, I can see the guys reasoning how a mail boy could see

There's no need to interpret his "reasoning" for him. He was a "mail boy" because he was going for his Maters in Automotive Journalism and being a "mail boy" was a deliberate move that gave him access to every area of the Chrysler Headquarters. If you had any real knowledge about the Man (other than your limited hypothetical views and erroneous opinions) you'd know that to be fact.
 
it wasnt us who posted pics of that vin,nor the paperwork,etc etc.
it was you.

Then why don't you sit back and let me tell you what's going on with my project instead of the other way around?
 
There's no need to interpret his "reasoning" for him. He was a "mail boy" because he was going for his Maters in Automotive Journalism and being a "mail boy" was a deliberate move that gave him access to every area of the Chrysler Headquarters. If you had any real knowledge about the Man (other than your limited hypothetical views and erroneous opinions) you'd know that to be fact.
i just dont understand you.
you are pinning all this hoopla and story on this one Young mail clerk,
when everyone else who was even remotely connected to design has said there was NEVER a 4 door cuda!!

i mean really,cmon,lets be adults here okay?
one guys memory,versus All the others who said it never happened?
and this suddenly " finding " more people who says there were 4 doors made of every 2 door?
nah,sorry but i cannot swallow That story Either.
again,no offense,but this is logical thinking and the whole story stinks.

Then why don't you sit back and let me tell you what's going on with my project instead of the other way around?
in case youve missed it,
the Entire point of this thread was to move the toxic off your Build thread.
to get all the bashing off it and let them say it here instead.
i actually did this for You as much as i did it for Them,okay?

i Am watching your Project its an Excellent inspiring build.
 
What part of "no involvement" do you not understand?

So Chrysler has no knowledge of your VIN plate that is in question, and do they not care about anyone manufacturing VINs out of thin air? I'm not trying to trip you up; I'm just curious as to how that VIN came into being? Because if Chrysler doesn't care about repopped VINs that's not saying much about them.
 
So Chrysler has no knowledge of your VIN plate that is in question, and do they not care about anyone manufacturing VINs out of thin air? I'm not trying to trip you up; I'm just curious as to how that VIN came into being? Because if Chrysler doesn't care about repopped VINs that's not saying much about them.

You'll have to ask Chrysler how they feel. I've already said NUMEROUS times that I had a conference call with them when an "anonymous" caller had lied about the realm of what we were doing. They claimed to have had ALL the pictures forwarded to them (including the "VIN plate") and like any other normal & rationale entity looking at the scenario for what it is, they didn't seem too concerned about a non-existent, impossible number. That's all I can tell you so I guess you'll have to select a different topic to continue trying to catch me in a "GOTCHA" moment. (lol) Don't be too upset if you can't however. I have nothing to hide and do not embellish the truth.
 
Auto Transport Service
Back
Top