Challenger T/A and 'Cuda AAR mandatory mileage

[ECS]

If I may add my   though....I think most of us have no problem believing a handful of T/As were ordered to be driven a few hundred miles before they were sold for whatever reason. I don't think most of us ever doubted that part of your arguement, with or without documentation. But, I have to agree with held1823, after following this thread from the beginning I thought you were saying that EVERY AAR and T/A were ordered to be driven all these miles...are you saying that is NOT what you are debating??

Hi Rich,
If you go back to the comment I made that started this ordeal I plainly stated that I had no idea or opinion about the comments made by Ralph Wiedner.  I simply relayed his recollections, only to be mocked and told that the Chrysler DOM's (also personal Friends) were mis-informed, lying or senile due to their age.  After the following statement was made from another member on July 6th: "....and still no documentation beyond four anecdotal references which could not be mathematically possible to be true...",  I decided to investigate this AAR & T/A mileage ordeal further.  

Dave Stuart located the Document I posted today because I asked him to find related information after I posted this comment on July 6th: "I talked with Dave Stuart tonight and he was not working for Chrysler during the time that Tom's Father, Ralph Wiedner or Bernard Klein was working there in 1970.  He started for Chrysler in 1986 or 1987.  He remembered similar situations with the Shelby vehicles that he WAS specifically involved with.  All of these guys have a tremendous inventory of Corporate Bulletins and Literature.  We are reaching out to as many guys from the past to locate any information surrounding this scenario.  If it is out there, they will find it."  

AGAIN, I was only conveying the information given to me by the guys who did this for a living back in the day.  Even my personal contacts at Chrysler (today) continue to confirm this data.  Below is the interview with Ralph Weidner who was the top Zone Sales Manager for Chrysler in 1970.  He said it was "all" Trans Am vehicles.  Dave Stuart provided proof that Chrysler DID drive their Corporate Sales Bank cars many miles over short periods of time.  I'm just waiting for the nay sayers to offer some factual documentation other than their typed words.  Maybe they can provide an interview with a past Chrysler Executive or a Chrysler Document stating the contrary.  I doubt it though.  The hypocrites seem to demand what they themselves are not willing to provide.  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iwd4aZ19H_c

[ECS]

while this is akin to arguing.....

Why not try this little exercise held1823!  Go get a box and fill it with rocks.  After doing that, set it on your kitchen table and proceed to argue with the box of rocks.  Don't be surprised after performing this exercise if you find that you have met your intellectual match!

[69CoronetRT]

The original topic was whether or not Chrysler was willing to mandate miles (AAR & T/A's) on a vehicle to get it on the road (for whatever reason) and now you guys want to argue hypotheticals based on your limited, unsubstantiated knowledge. 

You don't know why this car had 1600 miles put on it and neither does anyone else. 

True and no document has been posted supporting that theory.

True. It also does not support the first assertion.

[ECS]

True and no document has been posted supporting that theory.

So by all means post some documentation to support your position!  Prove these Chrysler Executives wrong.

[Ghoste]

That clearly proves that Chrysler drove that convertible 1600 miles.  It also proves that it could be done.  What it hasn't proven is that ALL TA's and AAR's were mandated to be driven 500 miles as part of their homologation requirement prior to delivery.  That is the documentation I have wanted to see.  I guess if wanting to see that means I am digging a hole then so be it.

[Ghoste]

From the beginning I have only wanted to see some evidence that TA's and AAR's were ALL mandated to be driven 500 miles prior to delivery.  At this point I'd be happy to see something in writing demanding that only one them was to have it done.  I've asked for some evidence that it was requred and apparently the response to that is that I provide proof that it wasn't.  I really just want to have some credible factual information on a particular car that I am a fan of. That's it, nothing else.  I have no interest in engaging in a pointless back and forth that somehow feels akin to a sandlot match of 7 year olds screaming "I can throw the furthest, no I can, no I can, prove it, no you prove it, no you, no you, no you, no you, no you, no you... ad infinitum.
Worse yet, I still keep getting sucked in.  Perhaps its a quicksand lot?


 

[Tom Q]

I am not going to take the time to read  and post the FIA homologation documents for the mopar trans am cars to educate the uneducated to settle an argument based on bad information on the internet esp here. The same info I have is out there so go get it and read it for yourself.  If you want my FIA copy of the document  send me $100.00 and you can be king.

[moparstuart]

While i love a good debate on here , this is really an argument for car guys discussion Or even better yet got get flamed  over on cuda challenger .com  . Lets get back to aerocars

[Ghoste]

Thank you Tom, I started looking based on your earlier post.  So far I haven't found it but I am still looking.

[Ghoste]

Tried to steer it over there when it first began but all I succeeded in doing was spreading it.  I'm sure it will come to an accepted conclusion at some point that centers on the cars.

[BS27ROB]

While i love a good debate on here , this is really an argument for car guys discussion Or even better yet got get flamed  :flame:over on cuda challenger .com  . Lets get back to aerocars

I agree, seems way off topic to the original post.

[held1823]

i freely admit to engaging in a pointless debate with mr. walden solely out of boredom this weekend, and agree the train has definitely left the original destination tracks. that said, i doubt that anyone not entirely new to this forum expected to see this particular thread return to its intended course. if wrong, i offer my apology for helping to derail it.

i am somewhat surprised the topic hasn't been moved to the other section (or worse), but seeing as i'm an aero section snob, i'm glad it hasn't been relocated. as a courtesy to others (read- i have vehicle maintenance to attend to, thus alleviating my boredom), i will withdraw from the fray. i'm certain things will be left in capable hands. i will add this commentary, from a dealer principle who sent me this reply today.

We only sold two AAR's; one yellow (Lemon Twist) and the other Autumn Bronze. I don't remember anything about having to put miles on anything before delivery. However, I think some of the AAR's (and T/A's) remained unsold in Zone inventory and were put into Company Car service. They would've had to been driven a couple of hundred miles before being offered to dealers at a discount. Cars like this weren't really desireable "drivers", so the minimum number of miles would be put on them. Although desireable today, back then cars like this and the Super Birds were hard to sell. A standard 340 Cuda probably had a waiting list in 1970, while the zones had to force the limited units on the dealers.

in closing, i will add these two thoughts. playing the role of innocent (or misunderstood) victim, time and time again, will not earn one any respect which they may feel entitled to. secondly, were i a business owner, i would certainly care what potential customers thought of me, and not let my actions continually dictate things in a negative light.

Wow!  The hypocrisy and selective oversights around here are amazing!  Where was your supportive demeanor when I was being pelted with "civil" comments such as the ones below...

Let me make myself perfectly clear....  It's not a popularity contest and I couldn't care less what you or anyone else thinks of me.

[Beep Beep Dave]

What happened to this DarrlyG guy who started all of this? And now why are we are talking about AAR's and T/A's?
Throw in some convertible R/T documentation and it all becomes as clear as mud.
Where is the connection to the red and white Daytona???

I like the factory memo's and factory documentation as much as anyone. There sure is some interesting stuff out there floating round. I think it is great when it becomes public for all to see. ( and discuss )
And there are websites out there to make it available for now and the future, both for the guys who have been into Mopars forever and the newbies alike.

This is a discussion board after all, I know I am slow but I didn't see the scoreboard around here to monitor who was winning or more right   Since when aren't people allowed to voice their opinions?


But now that the trap is set, lets see how many we have caught

Dave

[Redbird]

I don't get what this has to do with the topic of were Superbirds converted to Road Runners when new.

BTW FWIW I reject the original phrasing of the topic line. How could something be converted back to something it wasn't. If it started out on the line as a Superbird, that is what it is.

As for the warranty paperwork shown and the discussion on AAR's and TA's, when I read the contract posted it says to me that the "vehicle originally placed in service by a user not considered a registered owner" "the subsequent retail purchaser gets the unexpired portion of the CCCC warranty ...." I can't read the date on the top (10-68?) But it seems like a standard Chrysler Form the legal department wrote up to cover a multitude of circumstances. For instance the wife of one of the members of the board of directors using a car for a week to tell her spouse what she thinks, one of the styling managers using a car for a month, kids of a plant manager using a car for prom. After which Chrysler sold the car to someone else who was then considered "a registered owner".

People using a whole fleet of identical cars to put mileage on them is so far a wonderful story. I don't see anything in writing so far to back it up or suggest it is anything than another urban myth. I know some people say cars were used...... and miles put on, but I also remember Les Bowman said there were 3 Superbird convertibles too and he saw one in the right time frame and he knew what a Superbird was from day one, still waiting for those. Moreover, given that AAR's and TA's were collected from day one and many folks kept all the original paperwork they got from day one, It would seem there would be hundreds of the "regestered owner" forms tucked away in original owners manuals. Are there? My suggestion is to bring it to a challenger/cuda site.

[ECS]

........were i a business owner, i would certainly care what potential customers thought of me, and not let my actions continually dictate things in a negative light.

I have come to the realization that no matter what I do or say, some of you enjoy being contrary for the sake of being contrary.  If I say black, you say white.  If it wasn't my demeanor that bothered you, it would be the way I comb my hair, the color shirt that I wear or any other excuse that masks the real issue you have with me.  I will never compromise who I am in order to manipulate someone's attitude so they will spend money on my products.  That would make me nothing more than a low life prostitute.  If you don't like me, the information I provide, my projects or what I say........TOUGH!  I do not care!!!!  If phony, obligating, non-business factors are the reasons that you (or anyone else) patrons my Company, then I don't want your business!  If you want the Best products for your restoration needs, then ECS will absolutely accommodate and graciously serve that objective.  

As I said before, it is not a personality contest for me.  I posted a video interview of a Chrysler Zone Manager from 1970 telling his story about this subject matter and you guys say it proves nothing!  Bernard Klien offered his recollection as a Chrysler Zone Manager from 1970 regarding this information and you guys say it proves nothing.  Tom Barcroft provides his personal experience as a 30 year Chrysler Executive and you guys say it proves nothing.  Dave Stuart who currently works as a 28 year Chrysler Executive verifies this information and you guys say it proves nothing.  I post a document which shows that there was an established Warranty program that proved new cars were driven many miles and placed into service as a "first registered" vehicle and it proves nothing.  Had the same data been provided by one of the fraternal members on this Forum, you guys would be thanking them for the valuable information!  It is obvious that the only thing that matters around here are the typed opinions from those (who never worked for the Chrysler Corporation) and are part of the accepted "Good old Boys Club".  All of these Chrysler Executives are wrong and you guys are 100% correct!

(Just a quick tidbit of applicable humor.)
A man was found drowned at the bottom of a lake.  He was wrapped in chains, wearing concrete boots, hands tied behind his back and a plastic bag covering his head.  He was disliked by the Sheriff and City Council Members in the Town where he lived.  When the Coroner asked the Sheriff what he should document as the cause for death for the man, the Sheriff answered, "This is positively, absolutely the clearest case of suicide I have ever seen."  

[ksquared]

........were i a business owner, i would certainly care what potential customers thought of me, and not let my actions continually dictate things in a negative light.

I have come to the realization that no matter what I do or say, some of you enjoy being contrary for the sake of being contrary.  If I say black, you say white.  If it wasn't my demeanor that bothered you, it would be the way I comb my hair, the color shirt that I wear or any other excuse that masks the real issue you have with me.  I will never compromise who I am in order to manipulate someone's attitude so they will spend money on my products.  That would make me nothing more than a low life prostitute.  If you don't like me, the information I provide, my projects or what I say........TOUGH!  I do not care!!!!  If phony, obligating, non-business factors are the reasons that you (or anyone else) patrons my Company, then I don't want your business!  If you want the Best products for your restoration needs, then ECS will absolutely accommodate and graciously serve that objective.  

As I said before, it is not a personality contest for me.  I posted a video interview of a Chrysler Zone Manager from 1970 telling his story about this subject matter and you guys say it proves nothing!  Bernard Klien offered his recollection as a Chrysler Zone Manager from 1970 regarding this information and you guys say it proves nothing.  Tom Barcroft provides his personal experience as a 30 year Chrysler Executive and you guys say it proves nothing.  Dave Stuart who currently works as a 28 year Chrysler Executive verifies this information and you guys say it proves nothing.  I post a document which shows that there was an established Warranty program that proved new cars were driven many miles and placed into service as a "first registered" vehicle and it proves nothing.  Had the same data been provided by one of the fraternal members on this Forum, you guys would be thanking them for the valuable information!  It is obvious that the only thing that matters around here are the typed opinions from those (who never worked for the Chrysler Corporation) and are part of the accepted "Good old Boys Club".  All of these Chrysler Executives are wrong and you guys are 100% correct!

Let me preface my remark by saying I pretty much don't know anybody here, only what I've occasionally read, and I wouldn't recognize ECS or hemigeno if they were standing next to me.  Now, if hemigeno was sitting in his Daytona, that's another story.

Unfortunately, it is all anecdotal evidence.  That doesn't mean it isn't true, it just means it can't be proven it is true.  But the logical debate here is, did every T/A and AAR have to be driven 500 mile, for whatever reason?  So, in order to prove the theory false, only one example needs to be found.

So, are there any original, or copies of original, titles to be found?  I thought the mileage at registration was recorded.  If one shows up with 20 miles, that's the end of the debate.  If ten show up with every one of them having 512 miles or so, that's more evidence for the debate.

[ECS]

If one shows up with 20 miles, that's the end of the debate.  If ten show up with every one of them having 512 miles or so, that's more evidence for the debate.

You must not have watched the video linked below.  I asked a similar question to Ralph Weidner (the top Zone Manager in the Country for Chrysler in 1970) and the answer to your hypothetical observation is discussed between the 3:20 & 4:20 mark of the video.  You either have to say the man is a liar, didn't know what his job entailed, is senile (as one member alluded to) or is a conspiracy theorist.  Or you can use some common sense and understand that these hunks of metal were not considered the "holy grail" that we have come to accept them as today.  They were cars that the Chrysler Corporate wanted to unload and would do whatever it took to get rid of them.  Believe it or not, Dave Stuart told me (yesterday) that many new cars are purposefully driven so they can be classified as a used car, dumped in the used car lot and/or auctioned off at a loss.  

I can assure you that if this "evidence" were presented in a Court of Law, the Chrysler Executives mentioned in this thread WOULD be considered expert witnesses and their "testimony" be documented as Fact.  Go figure!  


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iwd4aZ19H_c

[pettybird]

How many miles a day did he drive?  Since he seemed to look down upon other reps that "cheated," he would have logged at LEAST 65,000 miles in T/A's.  That's 13 cars times "at least" 500 miles.  If he drove them to the higher end of his estimate, he'd be wheeling around for nearly 130,000 miles.  That's 20 to 40 trips from California to New York and back.  Doing more math, that's about 25 different T/A's being driven 500-1000 miles EACH DAY for three months straight.  Assuming about 50 zone reps, that's four hours behind the wheel for every rep, every day, 7 days a week, until they were approved.

Hey pettybird!  How have you been doing?  I was just wondering if you could provide us all with some additional statistics on things like "trips to the moon" or other genius logic concerning the impossibility of Chrysler Zone Managers driving their cars 500 miles in a short period of time.  Since you used a "7 days a week" in your quote above, lets stick with that number.  I know I am being absolutely ridiculous but please tell us how many miles you believe COULD have been driven in that 7 day period period IF there was a "mandated mileage" from Chrysler?  

I'm doing great, thanks.  I replaced the upper radiator and heater hoses on the 4 speed bird (they didn't look so hot after 20 years) and went to a Porsche Club of America social gathering on Saturday.  Today (Sunday) I got to autocross a real 2000 Mustang Cobra R at the Ohio Muscle Car Challenge.  Enjoy your weekend?

[pettybird]

Is it Monday enough for proof?   

[DC_1]

I am not going to take the time to read  and post the FIA homologation documents for the mopar trans am cars to educate the uneducated to settle an argument based on bad information on the internet esp here. The same info I have is out there so go get it and read it for yourself.  If you want my FIA copy of the document  send me $100.00 and you can be king.

Well that sucks.....you have some of the information that could help shed some light on this topic but you don't want to take the time to do so. Why bother even posting on the subject  

Getting back to the matter. I have a hard time believing some of this story and personally I would like to see more cooberating evidence. I am not calling the guy in the interview a liar or doubting that some kind of drive requirement for these vehicles was mandated or instituted for what ever reason. I just would like to see more information and specifics. It seems odd that they wanted so many miles put on every car.

This does remind me of something I do have first hand knowledge of.  My uncle was a Area Production Manager for Chrysler at the Windsor assembly plant for many years. I remember in the 70s and 80s him bringing home a car off the line every day. It was referred to as a "Over-night drive". He had a clip board of quality checks and comments he would fill out and turn in the next day with the vehicle. Sometimes he would even take a car for the weekend and put quite a few miles on it. I could see where the document posted earlier would account for the miles put on a vehicle for situations like these over-night drives.

Something else I don't understand is why Chrysler would need to put 500 miles on the cars. I get that FIA wanted to establish the rule requiring 2500 street versions be made, but how can they mandate a specific mileage requirement. Just because you build them does necessarily mean people will buy them. And how is a manufacturer to guaranty  how long it will take to move them off the lot. Like the Daytona's built for NASCAR production requirements, once the cars were shipped from the factory that should satisfy the production requirement rule. If the manufacturer takes a year to move them because the public doesn't  embrace them then that is of no concern to FIA.

[hemigeno]

I really haven't had time to get as engaged in this topic/subject as I'd like, but I also have a rather limited knowledge of the homologation requirements beyond what is common knowledge regarding the Charger 500, Daytona and Superbird programs.

Last Friday I was in Dave's (ECS's) office, along with Dave Stuart and Tom Barcroft.  Dave S. mentioned the 1600 mile document already posted, and thought it represented back-in-the-day proof of how many miles a car could have been driven in a given period of time prior to the original owner taking delivery.  In my mind, it does just that.  Of greater importance, I also learned a lot from Dave and Tom's discussion about Chrysler's internal handling of cars that dealerships essentially wouldn't take - or at least wouldn't take at the factory's wholesale price.  The Trans Am cars may have indeed fallen into this very category.  Dave described a scenario where a Regional Sales Manager is assigned, say, 500 cars that are not in demand.  He is responsible for 300 dealerships, and he asks them each to take (or pretty much forces) one car per dealership.  That leaves two hundred unassigned cars.  So, for this discussion's purposes... IF the Trans Am program's homologation rules were such that Chrysler needed to show the cars were shipped to a dealership or otherwise gone from Chrysler's inventory (and remember my previously stated lack of specific knowledge on this subject, so I am wide open to correction on this), what Dave Stuart described makes perfect sense.  Dave said that the manufacturers could not run a new car across the auction block for disposal at a discount.  However... if they put a few miles on the clock, it could then be sold at auction (the auction is for dealers only, so the car would end up at a dealer's lot anyway).  That is how they could "knock the price down" to the dealerships below the stated wholesale/invoice amount.  It represented, in essence, a way to discount the unassigned vehicles.

While I can't state with any degree of certainty what did happen back in 1970, I can at least say the discussion with Dave and Tom shed a lot more light on what MIGHT have been the impetus behind the mileage thing - although it makes the most sense to me if it was in relation to unassigned cars rather than the entire number of Trans Am program vehicles (again, I'm anything BUT an expert in this field).


Dave W. - thank you, as always, for your hospitality and kind assistance.  I am always amazed at the passion and enthusiasm you have for this hobby.

[DC_1]

Makes no mention of built and SHIPPED

[DC_1]

I buy into Hemigeno's theory that driving the cars 500 miles had more to do with offering them at discounted prices in order to move them out of inventory than it had to do with EVERY car accumulating that minimum amount of miles to comply with some racing program. Sounds far more plausible in the abscence of documents supporting the other claim.

[DC_1]

I haven't found any 1970 specific rules but here are some of the other years.

http://www.fia.com/sport/regulations/histappjregs.html

[hemigeno]

I don't know that I have a "theory" at all, I'm just trying to understand what everyone has been saying here.  Yes, I can be slow to catch on.   

I am not sure what the SCCA's official rules might have been, but it appears that the requirement was to assemble or produce the cars.  This is mentioned in both in the ACCUS memo posted by DC_1 and in the following document shamelessly swiped from The Challenger T/A Registry (see the last paragraph):