On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 08:42:07 -0500, Steve > wrote:

>Way back when I owned an M-body (83 Gran Fury) it would consistently
>turn in about 20-23 mpg highway. They were definitely sleepers when it
>came to efficiency. Chrysler always did build the best, even in the dark
>dismal days of the 80s. <snip>

I agree...the M-bodies were much maligned but really good, honest
cars, if not "flashy" like GM's FWD competitors.

>But it also had a 2.45 rear gear and couldn't get out of its own way
>off the line (though the top end was darn near unlimited). My wife's 93
>v6 LH would simultaneously out-accelerate the M-body, AND get better
>mileage, AND has cleaner exhaust. <snip>

I have the 2:45 Dana 44 rear end as well, and once the converter locks
up in third at 36 MPH, you just wait for awhile to get up to speed.
I'm no speed merchant, so I don't care. The point is exactly as you
state...even though Chrysler was reeling from almost collapsing in the
late '70s, they alway still did their best in terms of putting out a
good product, and their economy and emissions were far better than
what GM and Ford could offer in an RWD sedan at that time.