When I saw these two wagons side-by-side, I was struck initially by the obvious contrast between them. But then I noticed the similarity of their rear-most side windows, in their general shape and downward slope of their upper edge. And then I started noticing a few others.
Like the nine-spoke wheels/wheel covers. The flush door handles. The…the…RWD! Well, maybe you can come up with more.
But the really salient question is why old Datsun 710 wagons seem to have an affinity to hanging out with powerful versions of these Dodges?
The full write-up on this same turquoise wagon is here: CC 1974 Datsun 710 Wagon
another thing I notice is the area of glass compared to metal. Both cars seem to have that “tall body” look that people clamor for nowadays. Another similarity I noticed is the upsweep of the window line right before the C-pillar. Also, these cars with both shunned when new, but are considered future classics. 😀
The Magnum, shunned? Not hardly. True, its sales were noticeably less than the 300 and the Charger but were still very strong. Im too lazy to look it up, but on Allpar, there was an interview with Ralph Gilles…he said the Mag was killed off by one lone beancounting exec…who is no longer offering his services to Ma Mopar, I might add. Gilles said that not only was the Magnum a profitable car, it had a LOT of love from within Chrysler as well. He cited it as a car he wishes was still being built.
Speaking of opposites, one is looking good from the outside. The other is good for looking outside.
Not a fan of these Dodge models, esp. the gunslit windows and ridiculously large wheels. Sat in one at an auto show when they first came out, and couldn’t see outside over the high beltline and narrow glass area! But the Datsun is nice, particularly in that shade of turquoise green.
It seems that the people that live where this picture was taken all have a thing for “wagons”, whether starting with the honda fit, our two show cars and including the jeep and the white toyota (or scion?) just off screen.
Speaking of ugly aftermarket wheels….
A little piece of me dies whenever I see a Magnum wagon wearing donk wheels. These are far…FAR from the worst Ive seen done to one thought.
Im not much for that Datsun…510 wagons on the other hand are nearly as sweet as the 2 door coupes. But call me an enormous fan of the Hemi Magnum. Visibility be damned, that chop top look is righteous. Rolling on Torq Thrust M’s, blacked out and bellowing thru dual Magnaflows, these things are sheer badass. But they are a slave to whatever color theyre painted. White looks horrible on them, yet surprisingly silver works VERY nicely with plenty of black. I normally hate gunmetal grey as a main color for a car, but it actually works here. But the cheap roof racks that many of these had….UGH.
Uh, guys, that Magnum is the version that I would have had built: I believe that’s a Charger front clip on the Magnum chassis? Remove the damned hood scoop and that the way I would have wanted one. I believe they sold this combination in Europe (or tried to, at least) as a Chrysler (Magnum?)
Oops, on second glance, that Charger is a four-door sedan – just the same, visualize that one the Magnum body.
I always loved the lines of the Magnum, but thought the front end was ugly. And since they’re the same car, it shouldn’t take all that much to swap over a like year Charger front.
The sheetmetal is different from Charger to Magnum…Ive seen it done, though. More common is a switcheroo between the 300 and Magnum, since the main stampings are shared. Personally, Id like to see a Challenger front clip on the Magnum!
That’s actually what Europe got–the Magnum body rearward of the A-pillar with the 300 front clip, sold as the 300 Estate.
caught me napping, I forgot to mention that. I believe its available in SRT-6 form with a turbo diesel even.
When I say shunned, I mean, not by car-people, but almost everyone I talk to who isn’t into cars says they don’t like it for one reason or another. I think a big mistake with the Magnum was letting the 2.7 power it. And, well, the interior plastics, but that’s another story in itself. I don’t like them, not hate them, but I don’t see many stock ones anymore. And the stock ones I do see are beat-up to the point of looking like they came off the nearest “Buy here, pay here” car lots.
Well its definitely one for the car people, youre right about that. Sedans tend to be the domain of the ‘transportation device’ set. The 2.7 shouldn’t have ever been in the LX at all, much agreed. The 3.5 makes a fine base motor, the 4.7 flex fuel should have been available on non -R/Ts. What was SORELY missing on these is a manual trans on the R/T. Had that been available, then Id have passed up my PT Cruiser GT for one.
I see LOTS of clean, fairly stock magnums…dubs being the only mod which is easily fixed thanks to Jegs first, Craigslist second. Wonky scissor doors and goofy paint do disgrace a few though. Luckily the cleaner ones tend to be Hemi powered (the only ones that interest me), the V6 models tend to receive the dirtbag ghetto mods.
The 2.7 was definitely a mistake in the LX. A co-worker had a first-year 300 base with the 2.7 motor, and hated everything about that car except for the looks. Ended up trading it in on a Chevy Equinox, which he loved (go figure…)
The 2.7 just has a lot of flaws. They aren’t a durable motor. BUT, for what it is (a base motor) its not that bad. My parents rented a 2.7 Charger back in ’08 when they last visited up here…with 3 of us in the car it was more spry than I would’ve thought and turned 29 mpg going from Portland to Astoria…which has its share of grades.
A girl Ive dated on and off has a ’04 2.7 300C with over 200K. Same trip to Astoria and still good on gas and handled the grades better than Id have thought. No engine issues but the torque converter has given her a few issues. Comfy car and as sedans go, its not horrible to look at.
Do people really “clamor for that tall body look” or is it a case of designers going there because they were forced to?
I learned to drive in a “tall body” car, a 1949 Plymouth. When you got into that car you almost climbed UP to sit on a couch-like bench. The rear window was sort of a slit, I guess, partly by design and partly because body engineering forced it on car makers. But the other windows weren’t all that small. I don’t care for the mobile bunker look and suspect others don’t either.
TRIVIA: in Europe the Magnum was sold as a Chrysler with a 300’s front clip and an available turbo diesel.
I for one Hate, Detest and Loathe that tall-body look. There’s a world out there, and a driver has to see it! While I’m at it, I’ll register my hate for thick pillars as well. You can almost lose an entire car in the A-pillar of my Mazda 3.
Bit more trivia – Australia also got the Chrysler 300 Estate. Very popular, too.
As do I but I have fairly radical views on modern cars so I certainly don’t represent the majority of people. But I do know a fair number of car indifferent friends, relatives and acquaintances who complain about the lack of visibility in newer cars, and know NO ONE who has said new cars are “better looking than ever”.
Personally I think every newer car needs about 20% less body below the beltline and about 10-15% more glass area.
That Datsun will probably still be kicking around long after the Dodge has croaked.
Not so fast. The dual tailpipes point to a likely Hemi, which means the Mag will be haulin ass for some time. Even the 3.5 is a good motor. Now if it were a 2.7 then youd be onto something.
Not if they both left Oregon’s climate
I could go for either, but since it’s Friday, why not say “both, please!” 😉
Just add some nice aftermarket wheels with 70 or 65 series tires to the Datsun.
I’ll follow MR74s advice and go for the 3.5 V6. DEFINITELY lose the donk wheels, though!!
As an owner of a plymouth volare, I can’t help thinking of a volare wagon
With V8 though, since a 90hp slant six just doesn’t haul a sedan even with AC off lights off and radio off, a wagon would be far worse then
In my book just about nothing tops the Chrysler 300C Touring 3.0 CRD. I’m not talking about LX body cars, I’m talking about all cars in the history of cars. That front end was classic, and it boggles the mind the designers could go so generic on the current 300C. There must be a “story” behind that decision and I’d sure like to know what it is.
I remember seeing one of those in Australia, very sharp. Chrysler was stupid to discontinue that badass wagon.
The 300C (sedan and wagon) with the V6 Benz diesel, the 3.0 CRD you mention, was pretty popular back then. Here’s another one. Some numbers I read in the review of this 2006 car: 218 hp, 376 ft-lb @ 1,600 rpm. Top speed 140 mph.
All the focus seems to be on the magnum.
Those are 710 wagons. Not 610s
Yes; that was a typo. I got it right in the link on the bottom; 50% at least 🙂
Late at night here and I’m viewing this on a 40″ screen and I still didn’t see the link on the bottom. Wow, I’m officially old!
The last line of text:
“The full write-up on this same turquoise wagon is here: CC 1974 Datsun 710 Wagon”
As a Volvo guy, I could never understand why anyone would want to cut off the upper part of cargo space!
I know the owners of this Datsun. We got some recording software from them when we opened our studio.
I’m amazed you found two different 710 wagons (though I’d be shocked if you found even one 710 coupe)….they never sold in very high volume….I myself had a ’74 710 4 door, which I guess may have been the most common version, but even it wasn’t very common. I also had those wheelcovers on my 710 (heaven forbid that we would have had alloy wheels on our economy cars back then…now they seem almost common, except on the lowest cost versions.
The 710 wasn’t very powerful, and gets a lot of derision for following the first generation 510 which was universally loved (unlike the 2nd generation 510 was not loved). I never drove a 1st generation 510, but did drive a 2nd generation one, and thought it was at least OK. My 710 got me through 4 years of undergraduate school, only failing to start when parked outside during the blizzard of ’78, and later rupturing a coolant hose (got it patched up enough to get me the 4 hour trip back home)…so though not a fun car, at least pretty reliable.
I liked the Magnum when it came out, save for the poor visibility, but that’s kind of par for the course these days. I drive a VW Golf now, which used to be cited for its wide C pillars as being hard to see out of, but compared to a lot of cars, has pretty good visibility. The worst thing about them is you sit so low (compared to A1-A3 Golfs), I miss the higher seating position, having owned an A2 GTI previously. Sitting so low seems to make the visibility worse….damn the aerodynamics, I like sitting up a bit higher so I don’t feel like I’m in a tub.
As always, the CC Effect is in force … I saw a 710 wagon this week. The first one I’ve noticed in years. Or perhaps they’re everywhere and I only noticed it because of this Outtake.