(first posted 4/4/2011) 1970 was quite the party indeed, the grand blowout of the sixties muscle car explosion before the drugs were suddenly yanked away. There were plenty of reasons too: insurance, emissions, and the complaining neighbors. But one of the biggest reasons were the cars themselves: the svelte little compact-based pony cars binged on anabolic bulkers, and were suddenly 3800 lb heavyweights. Dodge wanted in on the party too, and crashed it in highly memorable style, hemis blazing. Who cared about tomorrow? The way the Challenger partied, obviously not it.
I’ve been wanting to find a Challenger since I started this gig. Then the other night, strolling down to the river under a spectacular sunset, I see a wrapped car on a side lot. Aha; a chance to do another well-wrapped car contest. Without really looking at it, I knocked on the door to ask permission, which was duly granted. But as soon as I got a closer look, I realized it would instantly be recognized: the Challenger’s distinctive mouth, side accent crease, and roof line were way too obvious. But these generous folks instantly offered to unwrap it, undoubtedly sensing my sudden increase in interest.
This particular Challenger’s owner came about her toy through the power of suggestion. As a six year old, she had a toy Challenger that she was always playing with. Her father told her that someday she was going to have the real thing. Six years ago, she took the plunge, and her toy now sits outside, waiting for summertime and play time.
She picked well too; it has a 340, upgraded with 360 heads. And with a four speed stick, to take full advantage of that high-winding mill’s 6,000 rpm redline. Yes, the Challenger (and ‘Cuda) of this generation are famous for their big-block 440 six-pack and 426 Hemis, but in the real world, the 340 was the way to go. These E-bodies were less than famous for their handling and braking prowess in stock form, and the big motors only made things worse. A little reality check: unless you ordered otherwise, your bad-ass hemi Challenger came with drum brakes all around: what a party! And the optional discs weren’t the last word in braking performance either.
The story has been told many times, but these E-Bodies shared much of their under structure with the new 1971 mid-sized Mopars. The Challenger essentially was a shortened Charger, much like today, actually. The odd thing was that the Barracuda had a 108″ wheelbase while the quite similar under-the-skin Challenger had a 110″ wheelbase. Why bother? And on which end was the wheelbase lengthened anyway?
I actually got out my fine-graduated architect’s ruler to try to answer that question on this picture of the two of them, but I’m still not 100% sure. My best guess is that the Challenger’s rear wheels are further back, but it seems odd that they would change that basic rear inner structure for two inches. Or maybe it wasn’t that hard to just push the wheel wells back a bit. Anybody know for sure?
What is a bit more obvious is the inspiration for the Challenger’s mouth. Yes, the Challenger’s eyes are recessed, but the fundamental resemblance to the Lamborghini Espada is inescapable. Unless of course you see a ’69 Camaro’s gaping maw with quad lights instead. I guess I’m trying to give Chrysler a bit of a break from the more common accusation that the Challenger is nothing but a bigger, badder gen1 Camaro. Which it was, mostly.
That of course leads to one of the two problems that the Challenger encountered almost immediately. The 1970 Camaro redefined the pony car for the seventies with a sleek new international look that made the cartoonish ‘Cuda, Mustang and Challenger look so…last decade. The Camaro also resisted the steroids, and as a result, pretty much owned the segment for the whole decade.
The other challenge was in-house: the Plymouth Duster 340 that arrived the same year redefined what the pony car market really wanted: a cheap, compact and reasonable-stylish coupe that could fly on a peanut budget. The Duster and its Dodge Demon clone were a huge success, while the Challenger was a flop. It staggered along through 1974, but its original vast arsenal of available engines was cut to just the 318 and the 340/360, and sales steadily petered out.
Yes, the splash the Challenger made at the party of 1970 was highly impressive, like that big drunk buxom girl who appeared in the early hours of the morning, took off her top, climbed on the picnic table and shook her hemis to the beat of Led Zeppelin. Fast rides for all! But when the hangover finally lifted, she was but a distant memory. Forty years later, the memory has returned, with a vengeance, at least to some.
Fortunately, your Dodge dealer has the solution. Just don’t bring your tape measure, scales, or most of all, a clear memory. Not likely.
Muscle cars (as opposed to Pony Cars) were never really built to handle or brake, they were made for thrills like the rural burnouts and drag racing to the next intersection on that arrow straight road. The Challenger was a Muscle Car wearing a Pony Car suit, much like a local Mafia hitgoon in a tailored Armani. That being said, I have always had a soft spot for the Challenger ’cause of too many late-nite viewings of Vanishing Point. Kowalski lives.
It takes a Mopar to catch a Mopar.
While the whole muscle car / pony car topic has been argued to death, I must say I don’t quite agree with your take on this.
The best explanation I have heard for the terms is that “Muscle car” is all about what’s under the hood, while “Pony car” has more to do with the style and proportions of the car, ie: long front, short back, etc. They are not mutually exclusive terms; a Pony car can also be a Muscle car. With the 1970 Challenger and Cuda, Chrysler ensured this was possible by making the car wide enough to easily accomodate the big blocks and Hemi, which was a problem with the pre-70 Cuda.
Yep, the 383 in the original Barracuda was an extremely tight fit. So much so that there was no room for power steering, let alone air conditioning. Anyway, the only valid reason for ordering such a beast would have been drag racing. No need to steer.
Looking at that comparo picture of 1970 vs. 2008, I think again: What Chrysler should have done was what a lot of people were asking for, a two-door Charger, rather than this out-of-proportion Clydesdale . “Oh, no,” Chrysler said (coyly), “we’re never going to build a two-door Charger.” Instead they spent a big pile of cash they didn’t have making unique body panels, etc., for the Challenger.
I honestly think that a two-door Charger, a four-door Charger, and a Charger wagon (formerly Magnum) would have been a great subbrand.
+1
I agree completely that they should’ve lumped these cars together as variations of the same model, just like it “ustabee”. In the 60’s, a lot of models were available as some combination of: 2-door, 4-door (often sedan and hardtop), convertible and station wagon.
That was a bit crazy that each bodystyle had a different nameplate. A Challenger would look great as a wagon and a Charger would look cool as a 2 door hardtop or convertable.
One of my many half-abandoned scale model projects is a late model Challenger wagon (Magnum with Challenger front clip and rocker panels).
A 1970 T/A represents the Challenger on my list of dream cars. I’m not overly fond of the hood scoop, but would happily put up with it for a 340 Six Pack under the hood. Just don’t make me choose between the Challenger and a Javelin Trans Am.
Are there any 1978-1983 Challengers around out there, Paul?
Great to see another Javelin fan
My dad has an original, 80k mile T/A in dark burnt orange. It is by far the quintessential ‘muscle car’, to me anyway. Between the black scooped hood, spoiler, tape stripes and side exhausts – how can you go wrong? It’s a torqueflite car, but boy is it fun. People only seem to remember the AAR cuda though, tis a shame.
Holy shit! I hope he knows how much you love that car. That would be such a great heirloom. The Javelin in a great looking car but the Challenger just looks so well proportioned. DAD, GIVE HIM THE CAR. I’m about to buy a 73 Challenger Rallye, 340 four barrel. Freshly imported into New Zealand. Thanks America!
Although I have been looking at this site for weeks, I finally registered!
Paul, if you look carefully between the door and the front wheel, you’ll find your 2 inches, I think. Why that was worth the money I have no idea.
Keep up the great new site – things haven’t been the same across town since you left – but that boy of yours does a fine job there.
Thanks. It seems like it would have been easier to modify the front end, but…
I’ve read period reviews that said 2″ were added between the door and the rear wheel, to give a shred more space in the rear seat (which apparently didn’t matter, it was still useless). Dunno if they were accurate though.
I agree – I think thats where those 2 inches are
FYI, @baabthesaab, Ed isn’t TTAC’s editor-in-chief anymore.
Yes, the splash the Challenger made at the party of 1970 was highly impressive, like that big drunk buxom girl who appeared in the early hours of the morning, took off her top, climbed on the picnic table and shook her hemis to the beat of Led Zeppelin.
This explains a lot about why I like these cars.
The E-body Mopar story is full of ironies. Chrysler management discouraged Dodge from developing a version of the original Barracuda in 1964, so Dodge didn’t enter that market until it was already collapsing. The Plymouth Duster, which was basically a reinvention of the A-body Barracuda that had been a perpetual also-ran for the past six years, turned out to be a big hit, while the all-singing, all-dancing E-body mostly seemed to cannibalize Charger sales. Allpar had some commentary from former Dodge product planner Burt Boukwamp, who said the Challenger was a real sore point around the office afterward.
BTW, there’s what looks like an orphan clause in the first sentence of the paragraph under the first “uncovered” shot.
I’m not sure on the why but aside from the wheelbase difference the body is also longer on Challenger by 5″. Though that 5″ in bodywork may have been the reason for the 2″ chassis stretch.
I’m guessing it was just another way for Chrysler to screw Plymouth over…
Indeed! The front overhang is greater as well as the wheelbase in front of the door. No function – just better understeer.
The Challenger was aimed at the up-market ponycars like the Mercury Cougar and Pontiac Firebird, while the Barracuda targeted the Mustang and Camaro. I can only surmise that the extra 2″ of wheelbase made it more ‘upscale’.
It didn’t matter much, though. As has been stated, Chrysler ended up only cannibalizing sales from its own carlines. The Duster/Demon took E-body sales, while the E-body tended to eat into B-body coupe sales. There weren’t a lot of ‘conquest’ sales from Ford or GM (well, except for a few Nova or Maverick sales).
Love these cars, though I’ve never owned one. Much more familiar with the A body 340 combo myself. However, if I found a pile of money that I didn’t know what to do, I would be looking at an SRT Challenger in a heartbeat.
…And for all of the R/T’s machismo and 350-odd hp, my Saab 9-5 is only a few tenths off its 0-60 time…
Then from this Charger, 10 years later the super duper Camaros and Trans Ams were lucky to break 12 seconds to 60. I seem to recall that the aforementioned Saab family sedan’s specs show it soundly defeating several years’ worth of Corvettes. Sure, it’s 30 years newer – but the horrifying land yachts of the ’50s would have outdragged the best of US-made ‘performance’ cars from the mid-’70s on. How horrid it must have been to know that your dad’s bone-stock family coupe could whip the hottest Detroit could manage in the late ’70s. Small wonder they turned to disco and coke.
Talk about “damning with faint praise”. You just can’t help trash-talking 50’s cars at any convenient opportunity, can you?
dad’s bone stock family coupe would have whipped what the Europeans and Asians where offereing in the 70’s also.
Put modern tires on tha R/T and that FWD Saab will be more than a couple of 10ths behind it.
The late 70’s Trans Am’s where always sub 8 second cars to 60 with the hot setup of the day.
Thanks Captain Obvious. I could give a rat’s ass how much BETTER newer cars are…your 0-60 time is so impressive. NOT.
I’ll never understand why people post garbage like this..I guess it makes them feel bigger (?)
Yet all these years later people still lust over E bodies, 70s Trans Ams and 50s land barges, while Saab today is only being mourned by a few weird teachers.
Being a Saaboholic and NOT a weird teacher, I believe I would disprove or invalidate your above statement @XR7Matt.
+1 – Another Saab mourner here… proud to be weird, but definitely not a teacher. I didn’t even graduate college and I don’t own anything in tweed, wear glasses or smoke a pipe. I did once own a Charles Mingus album, however. I’ll especially miss the 2nd generation 9-5, which I’ve been seeing many copies of lately. I apologize for going O/T here, but what a ridiculously good looking car! Sad to think they’ll likely all disappear soon since they’ve now been relegated to orphan status. So long, 9-5… we hardly knew ye 🙁
Thankfully, any time I get all misty eyed I can just go out to my driveway, fire up the 900 rat rod and go smoke all of the land barge muscle cars down at Cruise Night…
j/k j/k j/k !!
I agree with the consensus, dumb/unnecessary comment – and even though I love my Saab, I’d trade it and twenty more of them in a heartbeat for an O.G. Challenger. I think Mr. PenisSoft (see below) was trying to make some point about the gross exaggeration of Gross HP “over”-ratings and whatnot. The less learned of muscle car fanatics still stubbornly believe that the last hi-po cars available to mere mortals were produced in 1971, and the pinnacle of automotive performance already came and went over 40 years ago. You know… the same kinda diehards who insist that heavy perimeter frames and lap belts are safer than HLSA, crumple-zones and airbags. This line of thinking (once much more commonplace than it is today) has undoubtedly contributed to the mystique and desirability of many muscle cars, especially the Challenger and ‘cuda.
Are any of these folks actually reading this site, however? I seriously doubt it (they’re all too busy trying to get their Novas into the 16s), so I don’t really get why this article was chosen as the forum for his grievance/observation. Plus, Monsieur PeepeeSoft made that comment in April 2011, so I doubt he’ll ever read this… but I hope he joins us here in the present day, so he can see this picture I’ve been itching to find a use for on here (found on Flickr, michele cat’s photostream).
Fast, slow, old, overrated, whatever… when you pull up next to a clean, classic E-Body, it exudes the sentiment on this license plate to all drivers surrounding it, even the ones driving Saabs; and 99% of the time, it’s correct… comparatively anyway:
Dude, that was harsh….loved it.
Which is why Vampire Weekend lit two Saabs on fire for a music video. . . ‘Cause their twice as hot as any ’70s Challenger.
Sounds like someone needs to sit through a screening of Vanishing Point and refresh their Mopar awesome-o-meter.
When these E-body cars came out in 1970 I owned a 1967 383 4-speed Barracuda. Considering that this rig had the weight distribution of a blackjack it gave remarkably good handling, and more performance than I needed in most cases. In impromptu street drags, if I was already going over about 40 I usually didn’t need to bother downshifting, and this with a 3.23 rear end.
I really liked the looks of the E-body cars, but they weighed significantly more than my A-body, and to buy one with the same mechanical goodness my car had seemed pretty expensive at the time. Of course I could have had power steering….
I always liked the lines on these cars and, of course, the traditional Mopar suspensions and powertrains. My problem was on the insides. These things looked and felt cheap, cheap, cheap.
Slam the door on one of these, and you get the same awful sound and steering wheel judder as on the 70s B bodies. The door panels were largely molded plastic. There were lots of these around when I was in my teens and 20s, but I gravitated to other Mopars that felt more solid. Pretty sad when the interior of a 71 Scamp would put a Challenger to shame.
One other note: After the late 50s-early 60s Mopars, these may have been the first of the “modern” pull-type door handles that became almost universal in the 70s and forward. I always found these easier to use than the AMC design. But I still preferred the handle with a pushbutton that these replaced on most cars. I think it was a safety thing that would not result in an unlocked door popping open during a rollover.
I doubt the door handles were a safety thing. My 97 Lesabre had the push button handles on it. I’m not sure Nadar has been in enough cars to go after the door handle design yet.
Darn: I hate to hear that about the interiors. They sure are beautiful to look at though. I cannot find one unattractive feature of the ’70 & ’71 Challengers. These are by far my favorite non-C-body Mopar product.
I’ve only experienced these vehicles through magazine and internet photos unfortunately.
“But I still preferred the handle with a pushbutton that these replaced on most cars. I think it was a safety thing that would not result in an unlocked door popping open during a rollover”
WTF! Funniest thing I read all week, next to the SAAB story by penisSoft!
Are you related to Malcom Bricklin,by chance? Sounds like one of the talking points of why gullwing doors were better by design than traditional car doors.JK
Lots of lawsuits from doors opening in crashes.I read somewhere that it was mostly due to door latch failure. This applies to a lot of GM cars with the old style single pin style strikers.
.
WTF! Funniest thing I read all week, next to the SAAB story by penisSoft!
OK, I know it’s ridiculously juvenile and stupid – but “PenisSoft” is the funniest thing I’VE read all week! I was reading this on the train on my way home from work and couldn’t stop giggling like a moron. I think the people sitting nearby probably thought I had something wrong with me.. thanks a lot, LOL!
I had a 70 Challenger in Plum Crazy. Our nickname for the car was: Chipped Challenger, becase the paint would simply pop off the car in random places. Only the primer stayed on in those spots – can’t explain why the paint fell off. Had a black vinyl roof so no paint lost there. The dash developed giant cracks, and there was no stopping the quarter panel rust. Happy to sell it, but still miss it.
Plum Crazy was the color of the gods. Many, many years ago I tried talking this kid out of a Plum Crazy 70 Charger with the 440. He didn’t go for it, which still breaks my heart. I’m not a mopar guy by any stretch, but you simply cannot deny the sheer cool that these cars represent.
I had a 70 and because it was such a bad car, I bought a 73. Bought both new, they were 318s. I put slightly over 130,000 miles on each. I remember having the brakes done on one when it had 118,000 miles on it and the mechanic, who drove it, told me that I should not have had to have had new brakes that soon-18,000 on the odometer. They were both solid, much more so that the Camero-Firebird and dependable too. I was an early adapter of radial tires and with the heavy duty suspension which I ordered for each, they were very pleasant, roadable cars albiet not as good handling as the Camero-Firebird. With my experience, I take exception to anyone who maligns the quality or design of this automobile.
I always thought the E bodies looked like the previous GM F bodies and vice versa.It’s a great looking car though,make mine a panther pink/moulin rouge 340 thanks!I love the Mopar paint from 70/71 only AMCs Big Bad Javelins were as brightly coloured
To me, the E-Bodies were the perfection of the 1st generation F-Bodies. I liked the original Camaros, but I love the Cuda and Challenger.
These were in a class by themselves. Larger and much heavier than a Camaro or Mustang, and a very plasticy feel to the interior with those huge, thick doors and door panels. Ones I checked out felt somewhat cheap compared to their competition.
The closest competitor to this, was, I believe, the Javelin, which by that time was also huge compared to the originals. The Javelin wasn’t much of a star by that time, either.
Of course, I’m going on memory here, but I don’t recall any raging reviews of these except the engine. Trying to move this car was an effort in itself because these weighed in at two tons or near enough to make it a dog for what it was supposed to represent.
All that being said, I do like the lines, but compared to a Camaro, it was the clumsy, chubby kid on the block that could yell the loudest.
Yep, reviews were overwhelmingly negative, essentially limiting the only good thing to brief, straight line acceleration runs. Even a short amount of chair time was enough to want to get out ASAP. B- and A-body Mopars were better rides in every way.
Except maybe in appearance. Today, the most clumsy, chubby kids from over 40 years ago (Hemi-Cuda convertibles) command outrageous auction prices. Even junkyard E-bodies are worth much more than they should be.
We have the new Challenger but its a bit if an orphan as we didnt have the original. The local Valiant Charger put the US offerings in the shade for on road driving dynamics and availability, and on racetracks the Valiant put even the GTHO Falcon in the shade on NZ racetracks.
Ah yes, the Valiant Charger. Make mine a Hemi 6 powered example with HD suspension, Limited-Slip Differential, and lime green & white or creamsicle.
It’s a Hemi Jim but not as we know it.Let’s see some more Aussie iron!
That car looks to be in pretty good shape aside from some missing trim. The ones I remember from the mid to late ’70s were all rusted with roached interiors. I’m thinking the lady must have spent some $$$ to get her dream machine. These things were pretty much a joke with serious street runners back in the day. Too heavy to really work with the 340 and too hard to hook up with anything bigger(Camaros and Mustangs were not much better). Road Runners and 340 Dusters were a much better way to take it to the streets if Mopar was your flavour. The Challenger was certainly a looker though.
I’m wondering how 360 heads are an “upgrade”? “J”, “O” or “X” casting 340 heads used to be the hot setup on a 360 back when.
Who cares if it handles? It’s a beautiful car. In my opinion one of the nicest looking cars ever. There’s just not a bad line on it or bad angle to look at it.
These always catch my attention when I see them.
Agreed. And I love the colors they had on these and the ‘Cuda. Have to remember though they looked outdated when new.
On what planet did they look outdated? The fact that they created a similar looking car about 34 years after they quit making them says otherwise.
Eons ago I knew a greasy kid who picked up a well-worn light blue 340 four-gear for cheap. We took it street racing a few times, and he let me drive it on a couple of memorable occasions. It was really fast off the line — so fast that I wondered exactly why anybody would need the 383 or the 440. That 340 with the (totally bitchin’) pistol-grip provided enough kicks for me: I really didn’t require a whole lot more excitement than that. Or maybe it just SEEMED extra fast because it was a poorly-maintained, high-mileage rattletrap?
Beautifully styled cars, with the best fuel-filler doors, ever. (Well, except for not being lockable.) Other commenters have complained about plasticky door panels, but nobody’s mentioned those gorgeous horizontally-stitched high-back buckets that Dodge was doing at the time.
I like the new Version 2.0 Challengers, too, although I know them only from a distance.
Kowalski lives.
I like the new Challenger more than the Camaro but not the Mustang
the new Challenger compared to the old makes the new seem pathetic. Sorry, just saying. Too bad the Challengers and Chargers rusted so fast in Northern VA!
You’re right but a new Challenger will be kick the tyres and light the fires.A pony car you can drive anywhere anytime and not have to worry about breakdowns.I intend to buy a Mustang V6 because I haven’t the time or patience for mechanical work on a near 50year old car.
The fall (September) 1969 debut of these cars is the most memorable of my whole life. I was still a few months away from turning 15, but was in the process of becoming the car nut I’ve been my whole adult life. And, yes, all these years later I still recall checking out the new, 1970 Dodges with my Dad. All the great colors. Plum Crazy was really awesome. GoMango, Top Banana, SubLime, Hemi Orange, and the beautiful B5 blue.
Oh, and I bought a red with black vinyl top (and interior) 1971 Challenger in 1976. It was just a mild 318/automatic car with an R/T hood put on by the previous owner. Didn’t get to enjoy it too long because my brother borrowed it once and wrecked it. More recently, one of my co-workers (who bought his wife a loaded 2013 Charger SXT Plus) has encouraged me to get one of the new ones.
My sister’s best friend’s fiancee got one of the first Challengers available. His dad put the down payment on it for him and co-signed the loan for it as a HS graduation present. It was yellow, with a while vinyl roof and had a 340 and 4 speed. I rode in the back seat and it was pretty damn quick. I wanted one or a Cuda from that point on. 4 years later, I had the cash saved to buy one, and I found a black Cuda in June of ’74, but my mother didn’t seem to understand they were going away, so she put off going over to the dealership and putting a deposit on it. I ended up with a ’74 Roadrunner instead. It survives today, totally restored, with a 472″ stroked 440 in it. I wish I could fly out to Las Vegas and drive it again.
I like these best of the pony cars and like the new one too.
I was thinking just the other day that an interesting automotive history “What If” is what if Chrysler had built A-body convertibles (most likely the 111″ wb Dart version) up through 1976 and the Eldorado had had to share the “Last Convertible” limelight with Swinger and Scamp softtops.
Surely even if the E-body program broke even, the ragtops lost money?
If Chrysler had a crystal ball back in 1968 and could have foreseen how the bottom was going to drop out of the big-block ponycar market, that’s exactly what they would have done. Specifically, continued the Dart hardtop as Dodge’s quasi-ponycar competitor and kept that car’s convertible in production. But, no, Dodge dealers had been screaming for years for their own ‘real’ ponycar, so the E-body was born, and for a measely two years, slow-selling big-blocks were available.
The irony is how the Duster/Dart Sport 360 managed to stay in production for another two years after the E-body was cancelled.
This is a car I wish I had bought one of, back in the day. A 1973 probably.