This is not a Plymouth. Ceci n’est pas une Plymouth. If it were—if this were an American car—the callout on the front of the hood would say P L Y M O U T H.
Instead it says V A L I A N T, because…
…it’s a 1964 Valiant Signet 200, Canadian-specced, -built, and -sold at Chrysler-Plymouth-Fargo and Dodge dealers alike. Hell of a fine one, too, apparently well kept and well loved. If not for the body-coloured paint instead of factory matte black on the front face of the radiator support panel, visible through the grille, I’d have a hard time deciding if this were a repaint. Back when Bosch H4 headlamps like this were still made, Canadian Tire used to carry them.
People tend to think of Canadian Valiants as Plymouth Valiant front ends on Dodge Dart bodies, but they only did that for ’63 and ’64, number one. Number two, please don’t say Plodge, either. Even back in 1964 there was intelligent life outside the United States—actual, real, going-concern, developed countries with their own economies and cultures and everything—and the sheetmetal parts that went together to make this car weren’t begged, borrowed, or stolen from a Dodge or a Plymouth. They are what Chrysler Canada decided to build.
They go together well; all the ’63-’66 A-body front end assemblies fit and match up with all the bodies. I think the effect is more coherent overall than either U.S. model. The lines and angles work for me from any angle, though I’m not so hot on the underslung turn signals—too low, and too easy to foul with mud or slush.
I might like this even better with a ’64-’65 Barracuda nose, but now I’m being unreasonably picky.
As a kid I resented Elwood Engel for throwing conservative cold water after Virgil Exner, but there are just no false lines here at all.
I also dig the trim package Chrysler Canada came up with. Those sergeant-stripes ahead of the front wheel remind me of the ones on the rear quarters of my ’62 Lancer; the line running from the front wheel arch to just ahead of the rear one, then overtop of that to wrap around and tie together the quarters and deck lid…this was thoughtfully done.
The lack of a V-8 badge, and this small tailpipe, make me pretty sure this car has a 170 or 225 Slant-Six engine—a very good kind. It’s got the optional reversing lamps, too!
See? It’s a Valiant. The double angle to the trailing edge of the rear side glass has always made me smile (I don’t feel like saying the H-word, either; he wasn’t the first to have the idea, and he had nothing to do with this).
Driving a car with a pushbutton Torqueflite is good for the mental health; that’s a scientific fact.
This isn’t the first time I’ve seen this car around. It might be a good job I haven’t encountered the owner (yet?); I’d probably embarrass myself being that old guy prattling on—I used to have, etc—but who knows? Maybe the owner would offer me a brief ride in it. I’d like that, for old times’ sake.
Marvelous Daniel! Now that’s what an A body is supposed to look like. I didn’t learn until much later that US Darts had a different front clip, and they still look weird to me.
My grandfather had the 4 door version of this car, same colour too. Unfortunately he got in a crash with it around 1970 so I don’t remember much of it.
If you ever find the owner try not to prattle on too long, but this one made my day!
I own a 59 Lark, and a 61 Champ. Come on man. Your calling the Dart weird looking? 😂 Lol. They both look like a cicada. 😆 Lol
I have a 63 Valiant V100 with 26800 original miles on it.
It’s the same paint color with a beautiful red and white interior with a 170 and the push button automatic.
It needs tires and I am having no luck finding any in Canada.
I want to take it out to some car shows this year preferably with some original B-78 13 tires.
If anyone has any idea where I could find some for reasonable price I would greatly appreciate it.
I’m in Regina .
Thanks
The original tires on your ’63 were size 6.50 × 13. Those letter sizes like “B78-13” came along some years after your car was built. Either way, olde-tyme tires like that are now available only as special collector-car items from the likes of Coker and one or two others. They are expensive! And the appropriate radial tires for your car, P175/80R13 or P185/80R13—car tires, not trailer tires—are very difficult to get hold of in quality worth trusting one’s life to. Not impossible, but not easy.
If the car is always only ever driven on and off a trailer, and it is judged for originality at big-name auto shows, and you have the budget, then (and only then) it might be worth buying the old-type tires. Short of that, nobody’s going to think less of the car (or you) because it doesn’t have 1963-type tires. If you are driving the car on actual roads, you are vastly safer with radials, even though they aren’t original.
Thanks for your information.
It will only be used occasionally for fun and not likely further than 30 miles at most as my Dad gave me the car before he passed away and it was his pride and joy.
I have seen the Coker website which is quite expensive but I guess I will have to bite the bullet and get tires there, unfortunately with the exchange rate I am looking at close to $400 per tire and was hoping someone may have heard of an alternate option.
Thanks for your response it’s much appreciated.
You might take a look at these; probably the best appropriate-size tires you can get, and they offer a good mix of olde-tyme looks with the much safer radial construction.
You’re not kidding about the deficient front turn signals: They’re practically invisible! I couldn’t even figure out where they were hidden on the car until I spied a hint of deeply-recessed amber in the fifth photo.
The Australian AP6 Valiant had better-located front turn signals, though they were smaller than I’d like. The ’64-’65 Baccaruda had better, larger ones, but placed too close together. So: the Baccaruda items placed à la AP6. Yeah, that oughtta do it! Something for me to try in Photoshoop maybe someday.
For those who haven’t seen one, here’s an AP6.
I was wondering how this car would look with an Aussie Valiant front., but you beat me to it. The AP5’s indicators were about twice the size of these, but the straight-across grille bars of the ‘5 wouldn’t look right fronting this body. Do you reckon our Valiant badge is the same as the Canadian one? Can’t tell for sure on my screen.
And a good call on not calling that rear window line a Koffmeister Hink. 🙂
There are two versions of this hood/bonnet badge, at least of the U.S. “PLYMOUTH” item: the shallow one, dimensionally like the one on the Canadian ’64 pictured here in this post, and about a 50 per cent deeper one such as I had on my American ’64 Valiant. Same size and shape, directly swappable. I’m not sure whether there were the two kinds that say “VALIANT”, as well. I don’t know whether one kind was originally used in ’64 and the other kind in ’65 or what, either. Yes, the Australian AP6 badge is the same as (one or the other of?) the Canadian item(s?).
I like the AP5’s front face a whole hell of a lot better than that cheapass-looking face they inflicted on the US and Canadian ’63 Valiants. I think I might agree with you that the AP5 setup wouldn’t match well with this body, but I’m not sure; I’d have to see one. I do think the AP6 nose would go well, and I might even warm up to the narrower fender spear. Certainly the AP6’s closed valence below the bumper bar there is a much cleaner look than the open one with the turn signals on this Canadian car.
So harsh! That face brings back happy memories for me.
I had a ’63 Valiant. A baby blue convertible. I thought it had a very nice looking face. Of course, I didn’t have to look at it much. I was in the driver bucket seat looking at my 4 dials. The pushbutton transmission was an added plus.
No stupid console to impinge on seat room. And with the top down that Valiant had to be one of the easiest 2-door cars for rear seat access ever.
Since I owned this car while based at the Presidio of Monterey for language school, the top was usually down – the way God meant convertibles to be driven.
The 64 U.S. Valiant, was “thin” and said plymouth. The 65 U.S. Valiant was the “thick” one. It was made “thicker” due to the hood release mechanism being in the badge, whereas the 64 hood latch was between the edge of the hood, and the grill.
Thanks, Charlie. I’m kind of amused to watch these little details fade from memory, now I’m no longer chattering about A-bodies all day/every day. My ’64 had the thick badge; I guess it must have been swapped on prior to my ownership.
Canadians also benefited from their Valiant’s 111″ wb; American Plymouth Valiants were still 106″ wb. Or they had to go to their Dodge dealer for a Dart.
It’s surprising in retrospect that it took Ma Mopar so long to get it sorted to long wheelbase for the 4-doors/short wheelbase for 2-doors. That didn’t fully happen until the F-bodies because they kept coupes on both wheelbases up to the end of the A-body run.
I would agree that it’s all about what you are used to. Me? The side view doesn’t work because the arrow crease on the Valiant front fenders make the sides too busy in combination with the Dart’s heavy lower body sculpting that goes over the rear wheel.
I see this car as kind of a Greatest Hits version of the A body.
That close-up of the passenger door reminds me of two of my favorite features on Mopar bodies of that time. The vent window latch was designed so that the force to keep the window closed pushed towards the glass, not like the GM design where keeping the window closed constantly pulled the latch away from the glass, making it loose and sloppy over time. Then there is the strip at the trailing edge of the front window on hardtops that protected the gap between windows from straight-on carwash sprays.
I also agree on the health benefits of a pushbutton Torqueflite.
Ah, and for me that arrow crease is one of the best parts; I like it better than the narrower ’65 arrow crease. On this car I think it goes well with the double-angled trailing edge of the rear side window.
2 of my earliest car memories are an aunt’s 1966 v-200 sedan and an aunt and uncle’s 1964 Signet, like this but a much more sharp blue.
Like DougD I was very confused later on when I discovered these weird looking American things called PLYMOUTH Valiants!
Nice find! I had almost this exact car with a 273 for a short time. Mine wasn’t this nice, but it was a good driver. Until I read an article here a few years ago I had no idea these were unique to Canada. I had seen a few US Spec Valiant hardtops around and wondered why Mopar went to the trouble of using multiple bodies for these.
These were quite popular here judging from the number of 15 year old examples that were running around when I started driving. I preferred the looks of the ’65 myself, but I agree this would be cool with a ’64-’65 Barracuda nose.
As a kid I resented Elwood Engel for throwing conservative cold water after Virgil Exner, but there are just no false lines here at all.
Engel had essentially nothing to with this car, or any of the ’63 Chryslers, except for raising the rear fender line of the (US) Valiant. 99.9% Exner. Well, Engel did oversee the detail changes on the grilles and some other trim bits.
FWIW, I prefer the original (US) front ends on their respective rear two-thirds. The Dart, with its longer wheelbase, different roof with longer C-pillar and extended front and rear ends, was clearly designed to look longer, on both ends, to make it look rather like a mid-size car in length. Its longer front overhang matches its longer rear overhang.
The (US) Valiant was designed to be a shorter, more compact car, and its stubbier front end matches its stubbier rear end.
There’s balance in both of those approaches; this looks a bit unbalanced. I can’t imagine this coming out of the studios; it’s just not quite organic enough.
According to the measurements, the Dart’s overhangs are only some 3″ more in total than the Valiant’s, but their design clearly accentuates the sense of length.
Well, and there’s the fact that the Dart’s front end is of course rather unique and quite attractive for that reason. I’d be inclined to put one on a US Valiant body. I’m assuming it’s been done.
Geez Paul, aren’t you getting fussy. Let’s instead dwell on the fact that this car is gorgeous! And the colour is perfect for the era and car.
What I find remarkable is how Valiants, which were a sensible budget choice, can elicit so much admiration 50+ years later. It shows that poor Chrysler could do a few things right, back in the day.
“Getting fussy”? I’ve always been fussy. 🙂
I love this car; it’s not only a splendid time capsule, but the fact that Chrysler swapped front ends like this makes it very unique and fascinating.
I’m just doing a bit of a design critique, 58 years later.
…but I was rabidly pro-’60 to ’62 Valiant/Lancer, which meant I had to be rabidly anti-’63 to ’66 Valiant, which meant Exner ruled and Engel sucked. We’re not talking about realism or logic here; I was 14 and knew it all.
I’ve fallen for that “as a kid trap” before, even though I’ve used it plenty of times myself. I need to slow down and read all the words before I fire back.
The question I have is why Chrysler Canada chose to use the longer 111″ wb Dart body as the basis for their Valiant. It goes against the grain of Canadians having lower incomes and being thrifty. Why would they chose to sell a bigger car as their entry level compact?
My guess is that they wanted to fill a perceived gap in the market with something a little bigger than a Nova or Falcon for not much more money. Plymouth Belvederes and Dodge Coronets were not sold here until ’66 as far as I know so this may have been a way to span the compact/intermediate market with 1 car.
Could it be because these came out pre-Auto Pact and Chrysler didn’t want the expense of manufacturing two different bodies for this market? They must have anticipated the Dart size would appeal to a wider slice of the population. Compared to the US, in Canada compacts are more likely to be used as primary family cars, as opposed to secondary vehicles or bought just by singles/couples.
Fair question, but then how do we explain the ’65 Canadian range, which included both 106″-wheelbase Valiant-shaped Valiants and 111″-wheelbase Dart-shaped Valiants?
The Auto Pact came into agreement in 1965 which would have allowed those different variations to be imported starting that year, and the need for Canada-specific exclusives (Plodges, Cheviacs) to disappear.
That’s not it. For one thing, the Auto Pact was signed in January 1965, five-ish months into the 1965 model year, and didn’t take immediate effect; MY65 was mostly or completely over by the time it did. The vast majority of Canadian ’65 Valiants were made in Canada, with a small number imported to deal with a strike. The enormous model range was ’65-only; the ’66 Canadian Valiants were Canadian-built, and were all on the 111″ wheelbase (except the Bareacuda and station wagons, which only ever had the 106″ wheelbase worldwide). The Auto Pact didn’t affect the A-body Mopars until MY67.
When I was a kid, Valiants of this generation were not considered economy cars. They were marketed more like a smaller Coronet. Pretty much every 1964 I ever saw was a pretty nicely trimmed car for the era. Chrysler wasn’t at this point wallowing in the mud with the Falcon and Chevy II. The el-strippos came along after the auto pact, with the V100 trim level.
Er-ruhhh…angonnaminnit, that last thing you said isn’t so; V-100s were offered in Canada right from the start in ’60. The ’64 Canadian Valiant brochure nlpnt links below shows the V-100s, as does the ’61 brochure at the same site. And on the B-body side, while the Dodge 330 was the base model in the States in ’62-’63, in Canada there was an even strippeder 220 model. More detail and brochures in VinceC’s excellent post.
I do think you’re right about Chrysler Canada aggressively positioning the Valiant a rung above its GM-Ford-Rambler competition, particularly in ’63-’64.
This car is beautiful ! .
I hope you get that test ride in it .
-Nate
Not bad, but I agree with those who like the US Valiant better.
One side effect of this is that the only 106″ wb A-body Chrysler Canada offered in those years was the station wagon; as with the Dodge Dart wagons, they rode the shorter US Valiant wheelbase because there was only one wagon shell.
That didn’t prevent the Canadian brochure’s illustrator from stretching the wagons to match the rest of the line in illustrations, though;
http://www.oldcarbrochures.org/Canada/Chrysler-Canada/Plymouth/-1964-Valiant-Brochure/slides/1964_Valiant_Cdn-16.html
Yeah, that’s a strange one; the wagon glass and quarter panels are way too long in that artwork. We also see a body style that was not offered in the States—that two-door sedan with the Dart C-pillar but without the double-angle trailing edge to the rear side glass.
You mean the Hoff— never mind. 🙂
I’m sure many here know this, but some probably don’t: the Valiant was a separate marque from Plymouth in the U.S. too – but only for its first year in 1960. Not including Valiants in total Plymouth sales made it appear that Plymouth sales plunged that year, compared to Ford and Chevy which could include Falcon and Corvair sales respectively in their total sales figures, so it became the Plymouth Valiant in 1961. I’d never have noticed that Canadian ’64 Valiants said “Valiant” rather than “Plymouth” above the grille if not pointed out to me as it was here. But seeing big VALIANT badges on Barracudas looks all wrong to my American eyes.
I remember as a kid during my (at least) annual trips to Montreal where most of my family resides, I’d often see these huge Canadian Tire stores at the ends of malls, the size of department stores or other mall anchors. I wondered why Canadians bought so many tires they needed such big stores to sell them. Did all that snow-melting salt wear out tires quickly? Only years later did I learn that Canadian Tire by then had expanded into other auto parts, then non-automotive hardware, then sporting goods including some clothing, then other miscellany. Cool store that doesn’t have any obvious American equivalent.
Such a pretty ride!
As a life long U.S. Mopar lover (50 years worth) this simply looks like a Dodge Dart that had been wrecked and put back together with Plymouth Valiant parts..altho i do like the trim package. Canada did this with many models over the years. Like putting 64 Dodge Polara instrument panels in 64 Furys .Mexico played mix the parts also between Coronet and Charger grilles with roll out or hidden headlights..kinda common in the 60s..but ill stick with the purebreds
“Purebreds”, eh? Welp, there you are. As I said up above: the USAmerican perspective and reality are not the world’s only, nor are they necessarily the correct or default ones.
Thats a Valiant III here in argentina. With some changes on the front grill.
Argentina’s Valiant III was a Dodge Dart from front to back, but with Valiant badging and a grille without the US model’s “D O D G E” letters.
Why “III”? Valiant II would make sense since this was the second generation, but not III.
Valiant I: 1960-’61 (same body as US ’60 Valiant)
Valiant II: 1962 (same body as US ’62 Valiant)
Valiant III: 1963-’65 (’63 Dart body)
Valiant IV: 1966-’68 (’66 Dart body)
My Dad had a 1966 Valiant Signet. I thought that was the one that got the design right, clean lines, a nice well balanced grille. I found these 64s and even the 65s a bit too busy, and trying to recall busy design lines of the early Sixties models.
The other design element, is that to my eye, the car looks too big for its shoes. The tires are way too small. What are these the 6.95/13s? A set of 15 inch tires would have done wonders for the car’s stance.
This particular Plym – er, sorry – Valiant is a beautiful time capsule, rolling its way around town as you say you have observed this machine before. Just leave that little Pentastar emblem on the side as you leave, inasmuch as it would be a great souvenir, it belongs on its owner’s car. I always thought those were stick on, not fastened through the body.
Great shots and writeup!
The US/Canada A-bodies all came with severely undersized wheels (13″ × 4½”) with pathetic kiddy-kar tires (6.50 × 13) until 14″ × 4½” and 14″ × 5½” wheels became available in ’65, and standard (the narrower ones) in ’69 or so. P205/70R14 tires on 14″ × 5½” wheels look and act just right on an A-body; 15s would be too large and would throw too much load on steering linkage components not designed for it.
The plastic stick-on Pentastar emblem came much later; in ’64 they were made of metal and had a large central spike which accepted a quick-nut on the inside of the fender, and a smaller offset spike to keep the emblem rightside-up. So no worries about theft from this car.
The ’66 Dart’s a pretty good iteration of this design cycle, to my eye—particularly in Spain with appropriately-shaped headlamps. The US ’66 Valiant…eh. I like the Australian one much better, their VC model.
My dad’s stripper ’68 Dart still came with those tiny 6.50-13 tires. Ridiculous.
Regarding the Valiant emblem on the C-pillar: from a distance, I actually thought it was an upside-down fratzog.
All Vals from the first one here in ’62 (the ’60 US style) had 14 inch wheels, even though they initially came as kit for assembly. You’d think it might be for rougher roads, but both the Falcon and the Holden were using 13 inchers till the mid-’60’s.
Practicalities aside, it did a lot for their looks. Even this rather sweet two-door Val here looks a tad roller-skatey.
Yep, and there were some nice hubcap + trim ring setups on the Australian Valiants. And the Swiss-built Valiants and Lancers and Darts are said to have had something like double the number of body welds versus the North American-built ones (but I think they came with the 13″ wheels). I’m guessing Chrysler Australia did it for the same reason they put the 225 in the local Valiant from the start, rather than the 170: they wanted to deliberately and decisively trounce GMH and Ford, not just be competitive.
Nice write on that 64 Valiant. Those were really good cars. (Re)Tiredoldmechanic mentioned a 64-65 Barracuda nose, just the grill from a 64-65 Barracuda would do the job.
We certainly enjoyed our 65 Barracuda which still survives and resides in Tucson.
While the ’67-’69 is the best of the A-body Barracudas, the ’64-’65 is a close second.
What I could never figure out is what Engel was doing with the ’66. Normally, there’s a bit of a transition to next year’s model change, with a good example being the 1970 Satellite getting a quasi ‘dumbbell’ grille in preparation of the 1971 B-body coupe loop bumper version.
But the 1966 Barracuda is almost as if Engel was making the statement of “oh, so you thought the ’64-’65 Barracuda front end looked like a Valiant? Wait until you see the 1966”. The 1966 Barracuda front end certainly looked nothing like the 1967. An analogy might be if Ford had slapped a Falcon doghouse onto the 1966 Mustang. The 1966 Barracuda seemed just that goofy with the only difference from a Valiant being a Barracuda emblem in the middle of the grille instead of the Valiant emblem.
Seems like, instead of making the 1966 Barracuda look more like a Valiant, they’d have done better to put a sporty (well, sportier) Barracuda front end on the Valiant hardtop and convertible.
Wow, all this talk about Valiant turn signals,, Canadian Valiants versus American Valiants versus Australian Valiants, what grills look better etc……are making my head spin !! But to each there own, I like all years of Valiants and have had many different years in the past. After reading all the comments this afternoon, I decided to clear my head today and cruise òaround in my ’65 Valiant Signet, 440 powered, with a 150 NOS shot of nitrous…..I’m all good now !! Keep cruising brothers and sisters !!
Just to mess with your head a bit more, here’s another one and another set of turn signals, an Australian 63, one of my favourites.
Ray Guardiano! Yours is a name from the past for me; I remember seeing your cars in the Slant-6 News. If I recall correctly you customised a ’62 Valiant wagon. Dechromed it, painted it black-black-black, and called it…the Batmobile, was it? I also remember a ’69 Dart and a ’76 A38 (cop-spec) Dart. Interesting blue ’65 you’ve got there. What are the shark fin ornaments from, there at the top-front of the fenders?
I find it ironic that Chrysler dropped the transmission push buttons for 1965 in an effort to “standardize” with the rest of the industry after market research revealed a significant percent of the public would never buy a car so equipped. Now, it seems like every manufacturer has a different type transmission dial, buttons, selector or lever.
My father had a 1957 Plymouth Belvedere with push button TorqueFlite. The only thing on that car that worked perfectly and reliably.
Wonderful find. As someone who grew up in Canada while these went through their “old beater” stage the US versions still look a little off to me.
I have a Canadian made Valiant 1965, convertible it has the barracuda rear end slant six automatic power steering,and poor brakes. The trim on the side I have never seen in pictures of US made cars. Fun car to drive. It has the same front end as the featured car.
Spotted in Brantford, Ontario in 2019
Wow, that’s a pretty well unbent car! Pity about the extensive rust.
Front
Interior still complete.
Leaning tower of power.
A 170, as it seems. Chrysler Canada painted those this slightly greenish blue colour for awhile; the 225s were red as in the States.
I can almost smell this interior through the screen from clear across the continent.
It was a very straight car. and complete when I saw it. I always wince a bit when I see something like this in the junkyard, because it was probably in decent shape before it sat neglected for years, and finally someone made the call to the scrappers. If I see something in the yard that is in my sphere in this shape, I would be on it like a locust on crops to get all the good bits off for my fleet. There’s been a few cars found in this yard over the years that were in excellent condition, and ended up there because Grandad/Grandma died and nobody wanted the old car around.
Here’s another one found in 2014 at the Bothwell show.
Same goes for Mexican 1967 Valiant Acapulcos following up on your comment that there’s actually intelligent life outside of the US, since such cars were still being built as two-door hardtops with the 225 and the four-on-the-floor stick shift, making them the sole hardtop Valiants in the world since they got scrapped by Elwood Engel’s 66 to 67 redesign.
Hey, how cool! I didn’t know that. Sharp-lookin’ car it is, too; this would’ve made a Valiant Scamp more coherent with the rest of the Valiant line than the rebadged Dart they used instead.
@ Dean ;
That seems a shame, the rockers look pretty solid .
Too many old man cars wind up junked because no one wants to bother selling them, California junkyards get them in a steady dribble .
-Nate
I had a Canadian 64 valiant 4 door (body by fisher) back in the 80s, I use to drive to the drag strip on weekends. Two Things. Mine didn’t have the optional reverse lights in the trunk lid. Just stainless steel covers, as all the trim was stainless. Also, the k member has a notch in it right where the oil pump would be on a B engine. Wonder what Dodge was thinking lol. The 383 fit good with road runner manifolds. 12.89 best et on street tires. Miss that car:)
“Body by fisher”…?
My bad. Fisher body was a different car.
I am USA born and raised so I never saw the Canadian version of this car until recent internet ramblings.
I sought after a 64 Dart because I was a young impressionable kid who loved the Turbine Cars. Jet Powered Fantasy and owning a 64 Dart Convertible with those big headlight rings makes me feel like I have the next best thing.
That being said I would not kick the Canadian Valiant out of bed, no indeed. Its not an assemble from a parts bin thing. It has its own style and grace and I would surely own and drive one of these here there or anywhere.
My Hat’s off to every country that built their own A Body, be it South America, South Africa and Europe.
How cool is that?
My favorite a-body was my triple black 69 340 Dart that I ran into a cops house with. The cop that arrested me asked me if I had full coverage insurance.I told him “yes” and he said” GOOD,cause that was my f#*@ing house you ran into! Swear to God! 7/12/72, I was 21.
La version américaine est plus jolie . Spotted recently au Québec et à vendre:
https://www.kijiji.ca/v-voiture-collection/granby/1964-plymouth-valiant-v-200/1629147006