In 1961, Plymouth offered its first new model in six years without tailfins. While it wasn’t a great success in the showrooms, the lack of fins probably wasn’t a factor.
“The Times They Are a Changin’,” Bob Dylan wrote, and from that day forward, lazy journalists like ourselves have reached for that all-too-handy line to point to the turbulent change of the early ’60s. And yes, the Motor City was undergoing its own rapid transformation. Tailfins, a major trend of the ”50s and a signature feature of Virgil Exner’s Forward Look at the Chrysler Corporation, were now out of style. So at the Plymouth division for 1961 the Forward Look was shorn of its fins, and in their place was a flat, broad expanse of rear deck and a pair of bolt-on bullet tail lamps, nicknamed “flashlights” by the stylists.
But up front, the familiar Forward Look styling elements were still very much in evidence, including an almost menacing headlamp treatment and a grille the prolific historical writer RIchard Langworth described as “frightening.” As we often note, vehicle design is a highly subjective topic, so there will always be a wide range of opinions for and against. However, in the case of the 1961 Plymouth, the views tend to congregate at the negative end of the spectrum. But Langworth did add, “Those who condemn the package because of one unfortunate design aspect haven’t given the poor thing a fair chance.”
While the exterior sheet metal was a departure, underneath was the same Unibody platform the Chrysler Corporation introduced in 1960. (It was Chrysler that invented the term “Unibody.”) This was a sort of hybrid construction that utilized a front stub frame so that existing components, including the torsion bar front suspension, could be continued, and the automaker’s manufacturing processes as well. For corrosion resistance, a well-publicized problem on the ’57-’59 products, an intensive, multi-stage chemical dipping and coating process was developed for the Unibody. With hindsight we know that the effort was only moderately successful.
As usual at Plymouth, the engine choices for 1961 were plentiful. They included the 225 cubic-inch Slant 6 introduced one year earlier, the 318 CID A-series poly-head V8 in two flavors, and the 361, 383, and 413 CID B-series V8s (the 413 in limited applications). The 383 (330 hp) and 413 (375 hp) versions featured Plymouth’s Sonoramic intake system with tuned-length runners that sprawled across the engine room. (See our feature here.) There was also a rare “short-ram” setup (actually, the intake runners were the same external length) that boosted the output to 400 hp.
The finless Forward Look for ’61 can’t be called a success as the sales volume at Plymouth continued to slip away to not quite 350,000 cars. This was the year, famously, in which the brand lost its perennial third place in U.S. sales to lowly Rambler. And while the styling is often singled out for blame, the truth is the corporation was bathing in troubles at the time. Though the base model Savoy was the best seller among the full-sized Plymouths, the compact Valiant actually accounted for 40 percent of the division’s volume. Chrysler responded with a smaller, totally redesigned Plymouth for 1962, but sales wouldn’t recover for several more years.
How could Virgil Exner go from the beauties of 1957 to the mess of 60-62?One reason: He suffered a major heart attack in 1957 and from then on was in and out of the studios. In this leadership vacuum, competing ideas generated and were incorporated, even if they conflicted. That would explain cars with little continuity and gidgets and gadgets pasted on. Exner was finally made a consultant in ’62 to preserve his pension, while ex-Ford veteran Elwood Engel (’61 Lincoln) took the reins, and brought the 1965 models back to design sanity.
I have come to like the ’61 Plymouth styling much more in my advanced age than I did in my youth; perhaps it could be my failing eyesight, but no. I do actually like them more now than I did then – probably precisely because of their odd appearance. But I question whether the 413 was offered in the Plymouth in ’61, because that engine, in a lighter car (Plymouth), would be a more potent package than the 300G, Chryco’s halo car.
For example, we know how fiercely GM has protected Corvette’s image throughout the years.
Chrysler Corporation was in turmoil during the 1960s, and it wasn’t all in the styling studios. The leadership vacuum extended into the corporate offices, too. Plymouth and DeSoto merged into one division in 1959, while Valiant was folded in during mid-year 1960. All that, while Chrysler was extending downward with what was to become the 1961 Newport and Dodge was pushing upward with their Polaras…and DeSoto was gone within months of the 1961 introduction. Most interesting that 1961 Chrysler sales improved, while Dodge and Plymouth sales began to crater…
Ugly car festooned with ugly chrome accents. Ugly in front, ugly in back, ugly from the sides. Actually visually offensive. The ’61 Dodge was slightly less ugly, but still wretched.
The grill of the car looks like some body took too many pills while sketching it out, but then, the grills of MANY of todays cars are just a hideous.
One of my favorite cars, precisely because of the front end styling. To me, it comes in just ahead of the 1970 Coronet family for the “angriest car face ever” title. The 1961 Fury, equipped with a SonoRamic Commando, is the car Stephen King should have used for Christine. Of course, no one would have believed that the front end was actually manufactured that way and wasn’t just movie trickery to make the car look angry and sinister, and finding a half dozen ’61 Furies in solid enough condition to build the hero car and stunt car would have required a nationwide hunt, but just imagine the open hood scenes in the garage with a SonoRamic Commando shining under those garage lights instead of that Golden Commando
my dad had a beater example when I was about 2 years old, it’s the first car that I remember taking a notice in, probably because even as toddler I realized it was crazy looking, it also had a squarish steering wheel with glitter in it, just nuts
It’s hideous…..but I can’t look away
Engineering found out the hard way that the 1961 Plymouth’s lack of the 1960 tail fin stabilizers caused severe instability and aerodynamic lift on the high banks of Daytona, with lap speeds rising to over 155 mph that year. During the qualifying races, King Richard was launched over the guardrail in the first event, escaping with minor injuries despite the crash ripping the engine completely out of his car. In the next race that day, his father Lee Petty suffered a spectacular horrific, career-ending crash over the same wall that also threw his engine from the chassis and left him hospitalized for months.
These dangerous aerodynamic wake-up calls forced Chrysler to study aero again just like the Airflow days, leading to smaller car bodies and ultimately the 1970 PLYMOUTH 426 HEMI Superbird to conquer NASCAR for good…
Car 54 where are you? Most of us older folks remember that wonderful TV classic starring Joe Ross( Ooo, Ooo) Al Lewis, and Fred Gwynne( Herman Munster) in 1961, and was the 1st comical view of law enforcement. The producers must have wanted the most outlandish car at the time, the ’61 Plymouth fit the bill. Truth be known, the ’61 Plymouth was used in many commercial applications. In the mid 60s, the old man had a ’61 Plymouth wagon that pulled our camper. It always looked angry to me.
“Lost it’s 3rd place to “LOWLY” Rambler”,,,that’s a jab below the belt, MCG, as we were very proud of that fact in Wisconsin, and for good reason. Chrysler had some of the worst build quality at the time. Doors and trunks would pop open on large bumps. Rambler, on the other hand, was at it’s zenith in manufacturing. If anyone was “LOWLY”, it was the poor Studebaker.
To complete the initial line,,,”You better start swimming or you’ll sink like a stone, ’cause these times they are a changin'”,,
toyota apparently likes the grille styling as they have been using a variation of it for over a decade on their most overpriced models
IMHO 60-62 Plymouths are so ugly, they’re awesome. Kind of like a Citroen Ami. Some cars break through ugly and come out the other side.