CC Cohort nifticus stumbled into a horde of Dodges; five, no less. Let’s take a closer look.
Rightfully heading the Dodge Boys pack is a ’69 Charger R/T. Except for the missing grille, it looks quite stock and complete, which is a refreshing thing. Undoubtedly that’s in part because it’s a 440 and not a Hemi, otherwise the odds of that would really be low.
I rather liked those rectangular exhaust tips in 1969, never mind the rest of the car. I still like them, and the car.
Behind the R/T is something a bit less sporty, but certainly not as common: a 1964 880. Jim Cavanaugh gave us the full story of this “hybrid” here.
Right behind it is another Charger. Nifticus says it’s a 383; sounds plausible enough for me. It’s got wider rims and dog dishes, a look that works well. And of course there’s a Dodge pickup in the driveway.
This one has its divided grille intact. I thought that dividing the Charger’s gaping maw was pretty dumb. What was the possible point in doing that? Feeling more Pontiac insecurity? The 1970 lost the division, but got a chrome loop bumper, which still didn’t look quite right either. 1968’s nose is the right one.
And bringing up the rear is a 1969 Dart Swinger. This guy has a thing for 1969s. Again, nifticus labeled this a “273”, so he must have some inside knowledge. 1969 was the last year for the little 273 V8; in 1970, the 318 was the smallest V8. It also looks like the swinger is getting the short end of the attention stick.
A fabulous assortment of Dodge’s. There isn’t a bad one in the bunch.
This is ironic as I just read Marchionne (i hope that’s the right spelling) is having a meeting in Italy today about the future of FCA and there is no mention of Chrysler and little of Dodge.
Perhaps the 69 Charger got a grille divided in the middle because the 69 Coronet adopted the same “look”?
Perhaps they should have adopted the grille treatment from the Polara? That is, divide the grille into 3 “boxes” instead of two.
BTW, I don’t think the 70 Charger’s loop bumper looks all that bad.
My dream Charger would be a ’69 for the side marker reflectors and taillights, with a 1968 grille.
I’ve said it before: I really wish Chrysler would have done a new, retro ’68-’70 Charger instead of the Challenger. Honestly, since the new Challenger is a styling dead-end, that’s the route they should take for a replacement instead of these SRT Barracuda revival rumors I’ve read about. The ’68-’70 Charger is often regarded as one of the high-points of Detroit styling.
And, although I wouldn’t exactly call them a gold mine (no Hemi), those old, mostly intact Chargers (especially the R/T) with solid sheetmetal are definitely worth some serious coin, to the extent I’d actually be afraid to drive them..
“My dream Charger would be a ’69 for the side marker reflectors and tailights …”
LOL. This is exactly why I like the ’68 better. Actual sidemarker lights instead of reflectors and the round tailights were conservative, but quite classic. And, the ’68 front grill is clearly preferred. The ’69 isn’t bad, but looks like a result of the designers need to just change something for the sake of change to differentiate the new model.
I love the 68, those taillights even separated from the car as a part they are a stunning piece of automotive sculpture, but as a whole I feel the 69 taillights look more integrated into the car. I actually theorize that the 69 design could have been intended to be used from the getgo, the bumper is shaped around them, and the wide finned design(the 69’s lower angled portions have that ribbing) was a theme established by the 66-67s. Perhaps because the 67s were such poor sellers a clean break using the round taillights from the start was necessary to give the new body its own identity.
Either way I’d put money on both designs being finalized at least at the same time, with a flip of the coin on which to debut with. I know many of us subscribe to the “first year purity” school of thought, but these weren’t cars that had been around for 4 years and got some clunky mid cycle facelift to stay fresh with the trends or regulatory laws laws like the second gen Camaro. That argument could be made for the 70, since the loop bumper was clearly used to bridge designs to the all new 71s, but the detail differences between 68-69s don’t signal one being an afterthought over the other IMO.
The biggest issue I have with the loop bumper is it looks unbalanced in relation to the mostly carried over 69 rear end. It’s the same queasy feeling I get when looking at 1973 model year cars with the 5mph front/2.5mph rear bumpers, I like bumpers to compliment one another, but the 70 Charger looks like two different cars put together. Albeit good looking ones.
My kinda guy/gal!
The Dart Swinger would easily “Clean Up Well” with some attention paid to it.
Judging by the amount of grass, the 880 is getting the shortest end of the stick.
A nice collection, too bad there seems not quite enough time, money and space.
Those Custom 880s are such a weirdo-mobiles. The whole idea of a panic-designed, last-minute car for Dodge, made out of a Newport body with a ’61 doghouse, to have a legitimate full-size car when sales of the mainstream, downsized 1962 cars plummeted.
And the 880 hung in there for two more years, too, with nondescript, Oldsmobile-like grilles until Chrysler could get real full-size cars into production for 1965. I remember the first time I saw one and thought it was some kind of obscure Rambler and was quite taken aback when I saw the ‘DODGE’ lettering on the hood.
Love the Chargers. ’69 was my favorite year. A girl I briefly dated when I was a teenager had one. 383 with a six-pack, IIRC. She drove it like an old lady. When I got the chance, I opened it up. What a rush! 30 to 100 was quite effortless compared to my malaise mobile at the time.
This guy must really like the sixties. What’s with the hula-hoop leaning up against the Dart? Perhaps he’s really embracing the whole “Swinger” thing. ;o)
Wow, I could very happily adopt any of these. It is funny that while I have had several Chryslers, Plymouths and even an Imperial, I have never owned a Dodge. I should do something about that some day.
It is cool to see a couple of Chargers looking like they did in 1981. Now they are all painted in high impact colors and spend their lives riding on trailers.
The 69 grille divider never sat well with me either, and it was resurrected again for the 71-74s. Dodge was so self conscious about matching Pontiac they didn’t know how good they had it beat with the 68. Not even remotely a dealbreaker for me though, and I actually am quite fond of the 69 taillights, possibly even a little over the round 68s, this is one of those body’s that I wish lasted for more than three measly model years, there really was never a better looking car than this.
That’s a lot of money parked in that street. I frequently see rusted out hulks of 68-70 Chargers selling for $10,000+, a real deal 440 RT and 383 car with zero rust probably has car collectors hiding in the weeds!
Oh, yeah, I’m kind of surprised to see the Chargers on the street. Not so much for security or weather damage reasons, but the endless parade of punters trying to buy them, and most of the offers at way lower than market value. That would get real old, real fast.
If those Chargers were mine they’d be under lock and key. As much as I like them, that ship has sailed for me. Too much $$$$$.
LOVE those Chargers! That black one has a very ‘Death Proof’ thing happening…Stuntman Mike would approve.
Totally agree on the bumper treatments of the 2-gen Chargers. ’68 is by far the best year. I still like the ’69 and ’70 nearly as much though. Just different levels of awesome in my eyes.
That little Dart looks like its a power wash and a tuneup away from being a helluva driver quality classic. Those ’67-’69s with the concave grilles are my absolute favorite Darts. Such a unique looking face on an otherwise understatedly attractive body.
I think the Dart hardtop body is as good looking as the “regular” B coupes of the same years(Coronet and Satellite), but for me it’s the rear end that sets them off, the concave rear window and inward facing taillights make it look like it’s going a million miles per hour. Underrated little cars, which is ok because I can still afford one!
Yup, that tunnel window definitely evokes big brother Charger. Kind of foreshadows how the now-dead Dart evokes the ’15-up Charger.
A bodies in general are underrated, and actually attainable. Here in the PNW you can find them in clean condition with V8s for prices that are actually in reach for guys who aren’t flipping hotrods, opening bar/grilles and shouting ‘Woooooooooo!!!!’ down in TX.
Those Chargers go for stupid money here, he could retire if he got an export program going, The Swinger is the 67 Valiant body style here one of my favourites of the slant six era and those hardtops are becoming hard to find here and command good coin, Nice collection.
I found these cars in a neighborhood in north Seattle. I talked to the owner (nice guy, mid-to-late 30s). I did inquire (I was interested in buying) about the two Chargers. The R/T is a numbers-matching 440, automatic, buckets (with buddy seat in-between) and column shifter. He said it was not for sale at any price. The other car is also a column-shift car, 383 with factory a/c. That one was also not for sale. He said both are daily-drivers, Both are well-worn, but rust-free.
The owner claimed that he constantly has people offer money for the cars. He said that he has been offered as much as $40,000 for the R/T, but again, he is not interested in selling.
You wanna go fast? Buy a Dodge.
You wanna go for a long time? Buy a Chevy.
With the age of these cars, and they all look serviceable, someone got the best of both worlds.