What I hadn't forgotten was how pathetic 140 horsepower was in those times. By the time I got to my hot-rodding days in the late 1960s, you could buy a Chevy Nova with 375 hp. No tires or brakes or suspensions, mind you, but enough power to rotate the planet ;-)
My guess is that Chrysler bailed on the turbine engine when they actually discovered how expensive it would be to produce. As my university professor of transportation technology reminded me one day when I was extolling the future of the Wankel engine, "Just remember, the easiest, most reliable machining operation is the production of a round hole. Piston engines will be with us a long time." Even now with CNC mills, machining turbine parts is still hideously expensive.
And they would never have fixed the fuel consumption problem. Even after 45 years of expensive research since 1963, gas turbine engines are only fuel efficient in high-altitude uses where operating rotations are fixed for long periods.
But when I was bouncing along in my dad's Ford station wagon in the early 60s, I would dream of the silkiness of a turbine powered ride. The technological optimism of those days was utterly intoxicating. "Remember the I35W bridge--who needs terrorists when there are Republicans"