When did the real nomemclature for "B" bodies start

[j-c-c-62]

Specifically, I was under the impression the 1962 now named B bodies, were NOT called B bodies, until the 1963 B body's properly named arrived and the very similar 1962's where then "back named" after awhile.

Do I have this right?

Not sure this is hugely important, but it was very rare in 67? to hear/read anywhere a 1962 Dart/Polara called a B body.

 

[Budnicks]

Wikipedia says it was 1962, not that they are correct
not sure it was actually recognised to the buying public as a B-body,
I was 3 y/o

AllPar says it was 1962

Some thoughts on the B-body

www.allpar.com

wasn't the 61 Dart (fugly f--ker) supposed to be a midsize,
wouldn't that be a B-Body too ?

(61-62 is when 'the B-body midsize' platform was started,
the midsize 5 platform so popular today from Plymouth (or Dodge) B-body,
the Belvedere/s, Satellite, Sport Satellite, GTX, Road Runner, a lil' later 1968
they certainly had B-bodies way before 1968, it was 1961(?) or 1962)

Maybe go check www.AllPar.com or www.MyMoPar.com too,
it may go deeper into it

 

[WileERobby]

Not sure I understand your question. The nomenclature begins when the particular platform of assembly of the auto, starts. Just as 1979 was the last year of the "B" body platform production.

 

[SteveSS]

In that ad, I knew Imperial was considered its own brand but not Valiant.

 

[33 IMP]

My theory is that b-bodies started in 62. Cause 61s were a full frame car, and 62-up were unibodies.


And I think Valiant was a separate brand in 1960, by 61 I think it was a plymouth valiant.

 

[j-c-c-62]

Not sure I understand your question. The nomenclature begins when the particular platform of assembly of the auto, starts. Just as 1979 was the last year of the "B" body platform production.

My point, they were NOT called "B" bodies in 1962. The 1963 were called "B" bodies, and since they shared basically the same platforms, they back named the 1962's "B" bodies.

Not sure I agree there were any "B" bodies in 1961, nor that any shared a platform.
I admit this is borderline minutia, but still a relevant fact. I remember in HS with my 62 Polara trying to source headers, and since the car is a Dart chassis, nobody in the aftermarket would call the car a B body, which was in it's DNA, everything in 1963 was obvious. I was a HS kid and arguing with the "experts" was pointless back then.

 

[Photon440]

My theory is that b-bodies started in 62. Cause 61s were a full frame car, and 62-up were unibodies.


And I think Valiant was a separate brand in 1960, by 61 I think it was a plymouth valiant.

Most Chrysler products were based on a unibody in 1960, by 1961 only the Imperial still used a frame.

 

[RemCharger]

But does anyone know why the new big chryslers had a removable front stub and front end instead of a full unibody?

 

[j-c-c-62]

But does anyone know why the new big chryslers had a removable front stub and front end instead of a full unibody?

My guess, the technology had not advanced enough to take that step, and simplicity of using an existing proven front end design delayed a full unibody C at that time.

Also, I don't believe unibody alone defines a 'b" body, more design, target size and interchangeability of chassis parts in a unibody gives us a "B" body, and why a 61 Dart falls outside the B nomenclature.

PS, My dad had a 300F when I was in HS, what a great car.

 

[WileERobby]

My point, they were NOT called "B" bodies in 1962. The 1963 were called "B" bodies, and since they shared basically the same platforms, they back named the 1962's "B" bodies.

I guess it would come down to what the "factories" referred them as. I don't recall back in the day referring to A, B, or C, body, it was compact line, midsize line, and fullsize line. Dart/Valiants- compact, Coronet/Belvedere-midsize, Fury/Newport-fullsize... we never called the models by their platform letter designation. But hey... what's my memory ? I only remember dying my white converse or prokeds sneakers whatever color suited me then... red, green, blue !

 

[Cranky]

I was a HS kid and arguing with the "experts" was pointless back then.

I know the feeling. One day at a Sears 'shop' to get my car inspected and the guy said my 13" steering wasn't legal and tried to tell him it was. This was before I knew about the 'books' telling was and wasn't legal. All inspection stations are suppose to have that. Anyways, about the time I was about to leave, a DPS cop drove up and went over to him and told him what was going on. He went over to my car which was pretty nice for a teen lol and looked it and told the inspector to put a stick on the car after asking him if everything else was good. It was win!

 

[RemCharger]

My guess, the technology had not advanced enough to take that step, and simplicity of using an existing proven front end design delayed a full unibody C at that time.

Also, I don't believe unibody alone defines a 'b" body, more design, target size and interchangeability of chassis parts in a unibody gives us a "B" body, and why a 61 Dart falls outside the B nomenclature.

PS, My dad had a 300F when I was in HS, what a great car.

The cars were too long to turn the corner when they were setting up the line.

 

[khryslerkid]

1962 has always been called a "B" body. It was a down sized model from the '60-'61s. Different in almost every way from the previous years.

 

[j-c-c-62]

1962 has always been called a "B" body. It was a down sized model from the '60-'61s. Different in almost every way from the previous years.

We disagree on the "always".

Do you have personal history pertaining to what the car was always referred to from the first day the cars were first built?

 

[khryslerkid]

We disagree on the "always".

Do you have personal history pertaining to what the car was always referred to from the first day the cars were first built?

When were they not called a B body? Were they called something different?

 

[j-c-c-62]

1962

 

[khryslerkid]

1962

I know what you're getting at. This is the best I can do. I've heard this conversation many years ago. Where this information came from, idk.

MOPAR BODY TYPES (v. 02.10.98)
Compiled by Ed Hennessy, [email protected]

B Body--1962-1979.
(Note: although this chassis debuted in 1962, Chrysler's practice of naming chassis by letter did not begin until 1964-65.)

http://www.teamchicago.com/Imperial/moparbdy.htm

And a discussion about the use of letters...
Viewing a thread - Body Styles ?

 

[j-c-c-62]

I know what you're getting at. This is the best I can do. I've heard this conversation many years ago. Where this information came from, idk.

MOPAR BODY TYPES (v. 02.10.98)
Compiled by Ed Hennessy, [email protected]

B Body--1962-1979.
(Note: although this chassis debuted in 1962, Chrysler's practice of naming chassis by letter did not begin until 1964-65.)

http://www.teamchicago.com/Imperial/moparbdy.htm

And a discussion about the use of letters...
Viewing a thread - Body Styles ?

Thank you, your contribution above pretty wraps up my thinking on the matter even though its unsupported.

Its easy to understand why in 1962 they did not start out calling the Dart a "B" body, as with the prior normal and often year to year chassis changes, nobody could foresee this chassis would be around for a number of years with similar DNA, until as mentioned, 1964?

 

[1967coronet]

B or not , I would not mind having a 61 dart to build,
Some pretty cool body lines , jmho.