(first posted 8/22/2015) For anyone that didn’t already know, there was no Challenger R/T after 1971. For 1972, the sporty trim level of the E-Body Challenger range was known as the Rallye. It wasn’t the only change that would occur for 1972, as you can see even on this not exactly period-correct Challenger spotted on a dealership forecourt.
All 1972 Challengers received revised front and rear fasciae. The front was dominated by a gaping grille that dipped below the bumper. At the back, there were now four individual tail lights, their rounded rectangle shape echoing the new grille. Rallye models were available with fender louvers and bold tape stripes that trailed away from the vents, as if the vents were in motion.
The revised exterior perhaps wasn’t as conventionally handsome as the ’70-71 models, but the biggest change was in the performance department. Standard on base Challengers was the 225 cubic inch Slant Six, while the base powerplant for the Rallye was the 318 V8. There was only one optional V8, the 340 with a four-barrel carburetor. In one fell swoop, the 383, 440 and 426 V8s were all gone. Rising insurance premiums and unexpectedly slow E-Body sales had seen to that.
Dropping half the engine lineup (the smaller 198-cu.-in six was also axed) had a negligible impact on sales: 1971 saw 29,883 Challengers produced, with 4,630 of those being the R/T. The production tallies for 1972 totalled 26,658, with a total of 8,123 Rallyes. It seems big-block performance had become much less of a draw, and if insurance premiums didn’t completely kill it, the looming oil crisis and emissions standards would do the job.
Dodge realized this, and promoted the new Rallye model as a car that represented a “well-proportioned balance between acceleration, road-holding and braking.” It was said to speak softly but give you a big kick. A four-speed manual with a Hurst pistol-grip shifter was available with the 340 V8, as was a performance axle package with a 3.55:1 Sure Grip rear axle and a larger radiator. By 1974, the 340 was replaced with a 360-cu.-in V8. Sales would rise slightly for 1973, but by 1974 the Challenger’s death warrant was signed. Dodge’s pony car was dead.
As rare, early R/T Convertibles and 440 Six Packs rose and rose tremendously in value, the last three years of Challenger production remained somewhat stagnant. Lacking the convertible variant and the hi-po engines, the 1972-74 Challenger is simply less collectible. Sadly, like many pony car owners, this Challenger’s previous owner wanted it to look like one of the more valuable and flashy models. There was no R/T for 1972, but that didn’t stop this owner from applying the decals, the hood clips and a garish rear spoiler.
I’ve said before that non-stock modifications can be tasteful, but I don’t much care for this trend towards dressing up one’s pony car as its more expensive sibling. After all, not every Camaro was an SS396 and not every Mustang was a Shelby. There are enough of those that survived, thanks to their higher value and desirability, that the automotive world doesn’t need a bunch of pretenders. I’d be more likely to stop and gawk at a pony car if it was a humble, low-spec model, like this beautiful and original Camaro I saw in Griffith Park. Of course, that’s just my two cents and I’m sure there are some owners out there who may never be able to spare a million bucks for a numbers-matching Camaro ZL1 but want to feel like a million bucks driving their Camaro. Different strokes for different folks.
As for this particular Challenger, if any Brisbane Curbsiders were interested, it is gone now. The day I spotted this Challenger, I also saw the Firebird I previously covered as well as a beautiful Plymouth Satellite and a Plymouth Roadrunner. Thinking this dealership would continue to get more exotic metal, I made an effort to drive past there on occasion to see what they had. Alas, this must have been a fluke, as everything else there has been late-model. It may have been modified in a way I didn’t care for, but I was just happy to see any Dodge Challenger in Australia!
How much you want to bet that the new owner loudly claims this to be a real R/T at every car show he attends? Everybody builds “tribute” (gaak!) cars, nobody wants to admit they have.
He might but any Moparhead would know better.
Possibly not in OZ there werent any of these sold there new and the local performance Chrysler had a R/T version
If they’re gone with rallye trim I think it would of pulled it off a lot better than the R/T trim.
I rather liked the update to the front and the rear of the last few years of these. Especially the rallye version in yellow. I never understood why there wasn’t at least one big block offered. Not everyone shopping these cared about rising fuel/insurance costs.Just imagine a ’74 440 six pack and how valuable and rare it would be today.
I never really liked the later models sad “face”.Challengers are way out of my price range but that doesn’t stop me wanting one. Pink 340 with pistol grip gear shift please.
There’s no way they could have gotten a 6-pack through emissions, and even if they could have, I doubt it would run very well.
Did they test emissions at wide open throttle? I believe that emissions were only tested by the driving program later used for EPA fuel economy testing. If you’ve ever seen it, the biggest acceleration event is something like 0-48 mph in 22 seconds. Perhaps a 440 6-pack could have been set up to complete the test on its primary carburetor.
FWIU it was the dyno technology of the day that was the limiting factor that led the EPA test protocols to such granny driving, so that probably was as much a factor for emissions as for economy testing.
Having done a few smog tests on 440 six pack cars, I doubt it too. The one I saw several times, it was sold often, would load up just idling for a minute or so, and would slam both meters (CO and HC) over to the peg and it would take a run around the block in 1st to clean it up. I did get it to pass, twice. I took and drove the crap out of it and as soon as I got back to the station, I had a co-worker jam the sniffer into the pipe and took an idle and then a 2500 RPM reading, and it made it. It was climbing, though. The last time I checked it, the owner had added an MSD 6C ignition box and a giant coil, and it passed pretty easily. I think if they put a cam in like the 440 four barrel had in ’74, it might have been able to be EPA certified, but what was the point? The ’74 cam was pretty mild compared to the ’71, and the Thermoquad had enough airflow to make it run fairly well.
My brother got a 500 CI 66 mustang through emissions. It passed 1983 standards. By the way, it also runs 8 sec quarters at 160 mph, street legal, pump gas, and gets a whole 12 mpg. Why couldn’t the factory do as much.
“…gaping grille…”
SRSLY??
Somewhat pithy this morning, aren’t we.
I still really like these Challengers, but you can’t deny it has a larger opening than the 70-71. It gives it a somewhat surprised expression…
The “Gaping Grille” look seems to be all the rage in 2015.
Once again, Mopar styling was ahead of it’s time, ahead of the competition.
🙂
The automotive hobby is ultimately supposed to be about having fun. If you want a car with a certain look, but “real” examples are priced through the stratosphere and hoarded away as collectibles, what do you do? If it suits you, make your own! As an added bonus, if you want to do something unique like put in a non-stock drivetrain, modern comfy seats, or paint it a non-stock colour, it’s not like you’re messing with a “historic artifact”.
I love this car; the only thing I wouldn’t like is all the nerds coming up to me at car shows and saying, “That’s not a real R/T! Who do you think you’re fooling?” Seeing as this is an E-body which has a large fanbase, that would probably happen frequently and get old fast.
Some folks in the Mopar B- and E-body world are getting to be as extreme as their Corvette brethren. To them if it isn’t exactly as was when it left Dodge Main or Lynch Road, defects and all, it’s a worthless POS.
…and not just that. Consider the 1970 Chrysler 300-H (Hurst). This modification to the standard 1970 300 consists of changes that practically any car guy could do himself, yet it’s a big deal because the factory did it. Yet modifications that a guy does carry out himself are sneered at.
+1. Leaving things bone stock is boring, same as slavish tributes. This car looks like it couldve driven off the pages of Hot Rod magazine from when it was built right up to the mid 80’s. Im not fond of the spoiler but beyond that, it all flows together.
Agreed, I like this car. Except the louvers.
Nonetheless, I despise clones. Granted it is the car owners prerogative to do as he pleases. However, of the clone owners I have met, and these aren’t the ones doing it to sell the car immediately, they still try to hide the fact by simply not mentioning it when showing it or when they do eventually sell it.
Clearly this owner is selling the car, probably his original intention, and I am sure there is no disclosure about this car not being a true R/T.
Clones are fine as long as they are not passed off as the real thing at sale time. Like Marc from” Grave yard ,” you have to know your VINs .
Before the Dodge Challenger reverted back into its original larger Muscle Car design in the mid-2000s through today, the name was also given to a Mitsubishi Galant Eterna based Dodge badge engineered version also called the Challenger from 1978-83. This may have competed with the Fox based newly designed Ford Mustang for 1979, but Dodge’s entry was just not too serious enough. The Plymouth Saporro same car as the Challenger, even less was discussed about its competitiveness if at all.
It is amazing to me how a car so unpopular when it was new can be so valued and Xeroxed today. Chrysler did get an exemption to keep small bumpers in the final year and the 360 was a fine performance option. Still the buyers stayed away, and then lined up for younger cousin Cordoba a year later. Now the old Cordoba isn’t worth diddly and Chrysler refuses to Xerox it. Strange world
+1. The E-body, in all aspects except appearance, was a horrid car. Poor quality, even for a Chrysler product, with even worse ergonomics. Even if much of the E-body’s sales hadn’t been cannibalized by the much cheaper, better built, and just as fast Duster 340, it’s unlikely they would have sold well when new. And yet, today, an early one equipped with the biggest big-block and convertible top will bring absolutely insane money. I suppose it’s analogous to works of art; enough people want one not so much for how they function as originally intended, but simply for how they look.
+2. These really weren’t well received at all when new, but you’d never know it based on the market today.
Based on my ownership of a ’75 Duster 360, if the A-body cars had considerably better build quality than the E-bodies, then the Challenger/Barracuda must have been truly horrible.
Good point about the Duster 340 cannibalizing E-body sales. The majority of the A-bodies were built right alongside the Es at Dodge Main, yet they had far different reputations for quality.
They might have been built alongside each other, but the engineering was far different between the A-body and E-body. Up until the time emission controls became mandated in the mid-seventies, I think that all A-bodies were essentially the same, solid car that was carefully engineered and introduced in 1960.
The E-body, OTOH, was a hastily-modified, late-sixties B-body underneath. It was a bastardization with the primary focus being to have a ponycar that would readily accept the biggest engines Chrysler had.
Actually it’s sort of the other way around, the Es were a pretty substantial refresh of the B structurally, the 71 Bs were actually more like stretched E bodies.
I think part of the issue was that the E-bodies had a lot of minor design flaws — stuff that was designed in ways that were hard to assemble properly or such that even if it was assembled properly, it would work itself lose or fall apart.
I’ve always liked these…but it’s the same story as the 71 Mustang…redesign to accommodate big blocks cause that’s what was hot, then the insurance companies made big blocks too expensive to own, but the cars we’re already upsized.
Well insurance premiums did the Es no favors when new, I think the popularity of them in the last 20 years was sparked by the nostalgic “I so would have bought one of those then but couldn’t afford it” mentality. The relative rarity of them among ponycars simply drove the prices up to ludicrous level and when enough collectors started fighting each other for them they got swept into the market that cares nothing more about an old car than it’s “investment” potential, hence seeing them sell for 6 figures at Monterey among Enzo era Ferraris.
Also, some of the performance models were REALLY rare. People get carried away with the “one of only 237 with this arbitrary combination of options and colors!” stuff, but the number of cars with, say, the Hemi was really down into exotic sports car territory in terms of scarcity.
Potentially worse than the ‘gaping grille’ are the oddly angled taillights, what with the two outboard lights angled out, and the two inboard back-up light/reflector combos angled in. I’ve never been able to figure out if there was any functional purpose in this, other than to make the rear end look strange. Honestly, if it weren’t a Chrysler product, I’d say it was some sort of production fluke.
First off, I’m happy to see a survivor, even if it has been pimped-out to be something it isn’t. However, I agree with William’s sentiments that finding an unmolested original, which is truly period correct, is much more exciting. At a local car show not long ago, my 12-year-old son commented that it must have been “so amazing” to be alive in the 1970s and see “all these cool cars everyday.” I had to burst his bubble a bit by explaining that you were much, much more likely to see a white Chevelle 4 door sedan, or a granny green base Firebird with poverty caps, a brown Galaxy 500 Country Sedan or a taxi yellow Coronet–used as a cab, than to ever see red Chevelle SS454 hardtop coupes, or white/blue early Trans Ams, or orange Torino Cobras or Plum Crazy Challenger R/Ts. The fact that so many muscle cars are clones frankly just makes them boring to me and takes value away from the truly rare real ones.
At least that poverty spec camaro has potential to be the raw material for a buildup into something cool. Even the sedans you mention have SOME character. Compared to a camaccord theres no contest. I cant see any of the plasticky jellybean sedans ever having an impact like the old school cars.
Funny to think, too, that all those base models that were once blending in with the scenery have now become much less common; so many parted out, crushed, bump-to-pass and derby bound. Old lady cars and stripper base models really stand out from the crowd in the 21st century; forgotten nameplates strike up good conversation. Case in point; I went to register a Dodge Polara at the licensing office. First off, they didn’t have that model name on file and had to go dig through some old books to figure out what kind of car it was. Then, they thought it was a compact and had a scale weight of 2700 pounds :-p Finally, they just asked me to fill in the correct weight and body style. Since then, I can’t count the number of times people ask, “A Dodge what? Never heard of it.” Or, worse, they call it a Dodge Polaris. The world’s largest jet ski! So, the now uncommon, but once very common cars definitely carry their own charm!
Haven’t they heard of Google or Bing or…the Internet at the DMV?
Sure, but they have to input data into a proprietary database that’s designed to encourage users to select from a (long) preexisting list — otherwise, their recordkeeping would get really screwed up from casual key punch errors. It’s not so much, “I have no way to figure out what this car is,” as, “I don’t know how to properly enter it into this system.”
That DMV experience is very funny, but not very surprising. I’d love to see a Polara today! I literally can’t think of the last time I saw one in person, though at least they do live (and die!) in the TV shows and movies from the ’70s and early ’80s.
Based on your comment, I thought it would be interesting to look at the numbers. In the years that the Challenger and Polara overlapped (’70 through ’73), the production totals broke down as follows: 172,169 Challengers (of which a mere 24,568–14%– were genuine, from-the-factory R/Ts) versus 368,406 Polaras. Of course, based on a car show today, you’d think America had been swimming in Challenger R/Ts back in the ’70s. I can only imagine how many actual big block Polara engines have been yanked to create “new” R/Ts (which probably started life as light green 318s).
That probably happened with a large number of A,B, and E bodies receiving C body big blocks and drive line components.
There is actually a statistical formula that predicts how many cars, of a certain era, and so forth are left. Based on sales, rarity, desirability and a few other factors. It can be pretty accurate in estimating how many of a certain type are left.
Given that it should be no surprise that there are more big block A,B and E bodies out there than the formula predicts. There are also less C bodies out there accordingly and many of the New Yorkers and Imperials for sale are missing their drive trains. Putting 2+2 together equals…
Fortunately my 73 Polara has a 360 which in many ways is a better engine for the car when it comes to weight distribution. Stroking it to a 408, which only I know, makes it even more of a sleeper.
well tbm3fan , what exactly is that formula? I have often wondered how Many 1999 Dodge Intrepids are left with a 2.7 say…. I’d love to see the statistics of How Many Of each model are left side by side with original production,
They called ’em Polaris all the time even back in their day.
I’ll take any Challenger from 1970 to the current crop. Even if they ain’t period correct. I have always liked these cars in any shape or form.
I tried to by a 1970 Challenger R/T with a 440 when they first came out. I was ready to go until they found out I had orders to Vietnam and wouldn’t finance me.
I said it in the RR post, ill say it again: LOVE IT!!!! I agree that ‘faking’ an R/T is kind of hokey at best, an dishonest at worst. But I can also see really wanting a particular model which just isnt there so you go and make your own. Long as you’re upfront when selling it then I dont see an issue. I own a Rumble Bee and i see fakes all the time. Some are pretty convincing and others are just imitating thru admiration.
That said, the spoiler on this car IS a bit much….
Hmm, I’m not sure, but for the kind of money a car like the one pictured probably commanded….I think I’d rather have the same year Charger.
I watch too much tv, and while many shows will feature vintage cars, I’d rather have Michael Weston’s “plain black Charger” than Mike Mannix’s 72/73 grey Barra-llenger.
As far as whether to mod or keep “stock”? Do what you want….just keep it tasteful. On the car featured here: louvers OR wing, not both. And if you must have a wing, avoid the “Superbird” look
A close friend of mine owns #62 of the 69 1969 ZL1’s It is a bit of a let down to see a car like that and know it can never again be driven like it was intended to be for fear of lowering it’s value. I much prefer a daily driver with a built 350 over a car you can only look at.
I know the E-Bodys are revered now in the collector market now but they were duds as far as Chysler Corp was concerned by 1972. The men who went to bat to produce these cars all were banished to the far corners of the company. Why did they build a B-car based automobile to fit an engine that only a few hundred were sold in a year? If they had just used the money to completly restyle the 1969 Barracuda without worrying about big blocks–they could have sold like Dusters.
A few years ago I bought a ’73 Challenger that was the same color as this one. A previous owner had added these same R/T stripes, only in white. The hood stripes, however lacked the R/T call out that this one has. Mine had started out as green with a vinyl top. The top trim was still there on the c pillars. It also had a built 440, 727 Torqueflite, jacked up suspension, black steel wheels and cop dog dish hubcaps. Otherwise it was pretty plain. It sure drew attention, though, as it had a real no nonsense, don’t mess with me look. It was an interesting car to own. I would never have added the stripes if I had been the one to build it. I am not a big one on clones or graphics. I kept it a year and a half and sold it to buy my ’66 Mustang. The Challenger, as I said, was fun, but the engine was just too high strung for the kind of driving I like to do with my old cars.
Theres a couple of these roaming local roads one in Kermit green the other blue like this with a 6 speed tremec trans, I prefer them to the new Challenger models but then I prefer early Mustangs to the current efforts too same with Camaros, Oddly I saw a nice early Camaro rag top on a trip yesterday 396 callout etc but couldnt be bothered stopping to shoot it I did however stop to shoot a Morris 1100 on a used car lot and a Plymouth Fury, just different tastes in cars I guess.
Beautiful car, nice write-up (great ads), and interesting comments.
I remember these well, and perhaps just as another perspective, as is sometimes implied now these cars were not universally disliked back in the day, and their quality wasn’t much different than the competition. These were not the best of times for automotive quality for anyone. A big reason these didn’t sell as well as hoped has a lot to do with timing… it was too late to the pony car party just when all kinds of things were forcing big changes in the automotive world. Just the wrong car for a rapidly changing time. It wasn’t alone, consider just as one example the attractively styled but just too big and heavy ’71-’73 Mustang.
Where I lived at the time in the Midwest these were quite desirable for those who could afford them and still wanted a car of this type. I had a friend who had one, and compared to other cars at the time, it was fast. The only weak thing I can recall is that it should have had better brakes. With regard to the cost of these cars today, people often collect and value what they couldn’t have in their younger years, and there were a lot of people who liked these cars but just couldn’t have one at the time.
I would like to have a white ’72 Challenger like the one owned and driven by Brock Yates in the Cannonball Run (2nd in ’72 and 3rd in ’75). And I’m glad for all of these that still exist, modified or not. Modifications were a big part of these types of cars even new, so that doesn’t really bother me (except in this case that wing would have to go).
The quality of the E-body was B-A-D, mainly because it was rushed through development. Of particular note are the door panels. They used these huge, hard-plastic panels that had such a wide margin of size when they were popped out of the molds that they gave the assembly line guys fits trying to somehow wedge them into the door frames. Then, the plastic amplified the sound of the long, non-insulated door, giving a very poor-quality ‘twang’ when the door was closed.
Likewise, the stripes on the Barracuda were worthy of mention in how difficult they were to put on. The 1970 AAR ‘strobe’ stripe was tough, but the all-time worst of any car has to be the huge billboard quarter panel stripes on the 1971 Barracuda. If the things weren’t applied just right the first time, it was said to be impossible to be able to align properly and the whole time consuming process had to be started all over again.
I don’t think the quality was really all that bad, I had two friends who had bought new Challengers, a ’70 and a ’71, both R/Ts, and another who bought a mint, pretty much showroom condition ’73 Rallye bought in 1977. They all had 340’s and the ’71 and ’73 were autos, the ’70 was a stick. None of them had any major issues and the door panel rattle was easily solved with a little trial and error trimming and some filler goop. The ’70 was wrecked when his GF (Now wife of almost 45 years) spun out in snow on her way to work and whacked a pole. The ’71 hung around a long time, finally going away in the early 80’s. It was majorly rusted by then and had a very bad “death tick”. The ’73, which I drove a lot was trashed inside anout by 1982, he was a terrible driver, and he ALWAYS destroyed the headliner in every car he had, and was just hard on cars in general. He replaced it with a ’78 Z-28, which had a cammed 350 in it. I moved away from him and never saw what he did to it, but since he hit it before the Challenger was gone (He parked the Challenger in the center of the garage, then tried to pull the Camaro into the garage next to it. He tore the hell out of the nose of the Camaro, and somehow did nothing to the Challenger at all) I knew It wouldn’t be good. He sold the Camaro in 1986, I would imagine it was a basket case. If he hadn’t messed up the Challenger so badly, I would have bought it to fix up. Oh well. I knew someone who had a ’71 440 Cuda bought new and other than the vinyl top rotting out, it looked ok in ’79, and it ran great and everything inside looked ok.
Funny thing about the stripes. For all the justified criticism of E bodies with their under developed engineering of the basic platform and its well known faults and sloppy assembly quality the stripes is one aspect Chrysler got right.
I’ve owned a few and looked at many more original Mopars from the 1970-74 era. The stripes have always been properly applied. Mopar must have had at least 100 different stripe/decal options available across the product line at that time. I can’t remember ever finding one that had been applied wrong. I’m sure it happened but my understanding is that they put considerable effort into working with 3M to produce the vinyl appliques and then train workers to properly apply them.
It isn’t an easy thing to do. I restored a 71 340 Duster and sweated getting the full length side stripes on straight without wrinkling or tearing them. I took my time but it would have been much tougher on an assembly line. My Duster wasn’t the most complex stripe design by far. The ‘Cuda with the strobe stripes must have been a real ball buster. Credit Chrysler for doing a great job on this part. Okay, they also got the color palette just right for this era of cars. A good example of “selling the sizzle, not the steak.” That’s really the story of the E-bodies.
Whenever I see a 72-74 “R/T” like this I think to myself if it were mine I’d have swapped the 70-71 facia and and taillight panel instead of the decal kit.
I’m not too big a fan of the the 72s not so much for the front end redesign but the rear. The small separate lenses just look cheap, in fact they remind me of a 1970 Comet, and the angled lenses are really odd looking since they don’t really jump out at you from a glance, yet when you notice that detail they look misaligned.
Yeah, I mentioned earlier the oddly angled rear taillight lenses. I really wonder what the thought process was behind that little bit of typical Chrysler weirdness.
Speaking of weirdness, it’s odd that car seems to be a 340 from the hood emblems and factory dual exhaust tips, yet it doesn’t have the Rallye fender side ‘scoops’. I guess it was possible to get a 340 engine in a non-Rallye Challenger back then. It would be more conclusive if there was an interior shot since non-Rallye Challengers had a much plainer dash cluster.
I thought this front end was a better design than the ’70-’71. Where did the Charger fit in relation to this?
Charger’s of that era were fuselage styled and kept the big blocks till the bitter end in 74.
William, I think there is another late seventies Firebird at this dealer now. You will recognise it by the hot pink screaming chicken decals….
Once again I have to call into question the historical narrative of a poster regarding the timeline of the first “energy crisis”. There was no “looming energy crisis”. The verb looming is analogous to seeing a storm brewing up on the horizon, as in “looming storm clouds”. Product planners weren’t sitting around in 1972 saying, “well, I guess we’d better get ready for the energy crisis that’s coming in the fall of ’73 boys”! The Arab Oil Embargo blindsided America overnight, it was in no way predictable. Looming insurance issues? Yes. Looming emissions regs? Yes. The energy crisis didn’t “loom”.
What did “loom” were the eventual CAFE laws, but these were well into the future on the far side of the triggering event, hence unforeseen in 1972.
These two factors, along with socio-political-economic issues such as rampant inflation, the economic downturn of the early ’70s, a boomer population that was exiting it’s post teenage years along with a growing social awareness of things like environmental issues, were also involved. These all conspired to kill Pony and muscle cars. When I think of definitive early 70s cars, i think Maverick, Vega, Duster, Gremlin. Don’t forget Toyota, Datsun, Mazda, et al, especially if you lived on the west coast. The so called fuel crisis was a mere post-script, since the muscle car was already dead by then anyway.
I’m aware of the fact that the energy crisis was an unforeseen event and came as quite a shock to the industry. I apologize for using the word “looming”. Perhaps “imminent” would have been a better choice of word.
Looking at the history of the events leading up to the OPEC embargo, I don’t think “looming” is a wholly unreasonable term. It’s not that the embargo specifically was something anyone reasonably have anticipated, but there were signs that the continued low price of oil was not going to be indefinitely sustainable, that the OPEC states were chafing at the limits, and that sooner or later push was likely to come to shove.
That’s admittedly a political observation that was beyond anything even the most astute long-term automotive market researcher (much less the general public) was likely to spot, but the energy crisis didn’t come out of nowhere.
Lots of short memories here. Looming is accurate. Many of you have forgotten or never learned what the political circumstances were at the time. It is complicated but pick any of the several historic events that contributed and start there.
The formation of OPEC was an effort for producers to regain some control of prices from the big oil companies.
In 1970 the United States pulled out of the Bretton-Woods economic agreement and went of the gold standard. Previously the dollar’s value had been fixed to the price of gold and other currencies were pegged to the dollar. This caused the dollar’s value to float. The other industrial nations followed. Anticipating currency value fluctuations everyone began to print more money which caused the dollar to drop in value. Oil had been pegged to the dollar which meant OPEC was making less. OPEC then announced they would peg the price of oil to the price of gold. They were slow to work out this new system and prices were slow to rise until the embargo. You could say that the 1973 “oil shock” was really an adjustment back to the Bretton Wood price levels but delivered all at once instead of gradually. A gradual adjustment would have been much better for everyone but that is not how it worked out.
The 1967 Arab-Israeli war in which the Israelis captured much territory changed the balance of power in the middle east. This included the Golan Heights from Syria, the West Bank from Jordan and the Sinai from Egypt. Efforts to broker a permanent peace settlement involving return of captured territory were unsuccessful and without that it was just a matter of when, not if, there would be another war. If military and diplomatic means didn’t work OPEC was willing to use economic means with an oil embargo. The very idea of an embargo was to threaten consumer nations and undermine support for Israel.
Why should the United States care about an oil embargo? The US had been the worlds leading oil producer until the middle 1950s. Although domestic oil prices were protected by tariffs, we had begun to import a lot of oil from Canada and Venezuela. From that time on US production began to decline. Because middle east oil could be produced so cheaply the major oil companies realized that despite the tariff they could turn a profit refining imported oil. That is how the US became dependent on oil imports.
At the time my father was an executive with Shell. (He had started out as a chemist with Shell Oil in 1940 and had later moved over to Shell Chemical in the early 1950s) He had access to information that the average American did not. He and I had already had discussions about existing oil supplies and known reserves. He knew cheap oil was not going to last forever and we needed to be thinking ahead to what might come next. An oil embargo was not an idle threat. (He also put his money where his mouth was. Despite being an executive with Shell who could have driven a fancy car he drove a 1969 VW Beetle. He declined an Olds 98 that the company offered him.)
The 4th Arab-Israeli war, (The Yom Kippur/Ramadan war), jumped off October 6, 1973 and quickly became a giant shit-show. It was US and Israel against Egypt and Syria with a coalition of Arab States and also Cuban tank forces and North Korean pilots flying Egyptian Migs. The US Navy and The Soviet Navy both sent more ships and subs and faced off in the Mediterranean. It was quite the Big Deal.
In retaliation to US support of Israel, OPEC announced reduced oil production starting October 17. After President Nixon authorized massive arms allocations and $2.2 billion in other aid to Israel, on October 19, our good friends in Saudi Arabia declared a total embargo. The other oil producers followed suite and the embargo was extended to everyone else who sided with the Israelis. In a very short period of time the price of oil jumped up 300% +/- resulting in what became known as the “Oil Shock”. Later it was known as “the first Oil Shock” after a repeat in 1979.
“Looming” is correct. Any intelligent person who was paying attention to events at the time knew there would be a reckoning of some kind.
In the ideal world the job of industrial and political analysts is to research and test the possible and probable outcomes of every circumstance. In the ideal world they do this objectively without political coloring and influence.
The world we live in doesn’t work quite that efficiently. Not everyone has access to good information. Many people don’t know good information when they see it. This is how smart people, institutions and whole countries can be surprised by events.
Look at the US auto industry, did they have good information? Certainly they did. There are lots of very smart people working there. Do they always know good information when they see it? Obviously not. They continue to make short term decisions that threaten their long term viability. Historically you can see evidence of this whenever they continue to produce and sell vehicles that are too big or too inefficient, too dangerous or too expensive. The industry usually reacts only when events overtake it. Sometimes it is more nimble than others. Usually it has to be forced to make necessary changes.
If you read this far I thank you.
Paolo,
Very nicely explained. Thanks.
I don’t like the dishonesty of some clone builders. Especially if they try to sell it as an original. The buyer always has to check the VIN. However not every performance variant had a specific VIN identifier. I know that the Mustang Mach One has a specific identifier and I would imagine that the Boss series cars have similar identifiers. On the other hand these cars really only varied in optional equipment fitted to the regular model, So any example can be outfitted like the high level performance model. Builder’s today upgrade these cars to a much higher level of performance than was available back in the day at a much higher cost. In Hemmings Muscle magazine a Boss 302 owner stated that he added some improvements to his car, especially to the motor, but that if you change it too much, it really isn’t a Boss 302 anymore. For me I think that the muscle car thing has become totally divorced from reality. The prices are astronomical for vehicles that really don;t have any engineering in them. For example an older C4 Corvette sells for peanuts but has incredible chassis development, with lots of potential. These musclecars jumped the shark for me years ago.
I had a stock 340 4bbl,automatic,3.23 geared 73 Challenger rallye and it did low 14’s with the stock carb !! I later added headers,holley carb and it would run to by buddies 71 Chevelle SS 396(402) with 3.08’s that he ran high 13’s (13.80-13.90’s all the time)..I sold the car to my other buddy who swapped the cam/heads and ran 12.90’s with the 3.23’s…We knew how to make them quick,not like most who have mis matched heads/cam /carb and cant run 13’s with a 440 !!! My 340 was dead stock,never rebuilt 80,000 original miles,not rolled over 4 times like most..no such thing as a 40,000 mile 40 plus year old car..these 60’s early 70’s cars had at least 220,000 by 1980 at minimum…I sold them so I know..5 digit odometer after 99,999 it went back to 0…I sold the same 1968 Chrysler 300 3 times and all 3 times it had 45,000 miles lol..It actually had 290,000 miles as it was always serviced by us since new and the owners kept immaculate care of it in/out…the last time we put new paint to cover minor rock chips/door dings etc never any rust here on the West Coast……I am the 4th owner of the 2 door hardtop 68 Chrysler 300 440 tnt low 13 second 1/4 mile car dead stock the car was my dealer demo back in the mid 70’s when it had 110,000 on it and ran mint (we rolled it to 43,500 was my job to do so) So,i took it to the local drags as it felt quicker than my 383 Super Bee I had 383/727/3.91 ,yes the 440 300 blew it away ! 440 had the high performance TNT(most had the 440 4bbl 350 hp single exhaust,365 hp with duel exhaust as per Chrysler back then) TNT was actually 410 hp,not 375…so its 375 net..Anywho my other buddy had a 74 Cuda with a low mile 360 never touched with 3.91’s he ran 13.90’s .he hooked up and went not like my 300’s 440 that spun down the track..or my 68 Charger RT that burns down the track..
What model /year is this one
It seems 71 from the back
While from the front bumper it looks as a 73-74
Same one
Me and my 3 year old ’73 Challenger Rallye 340; when it was just a two thousand dollar car that hardly anyone wanted anymore.
Gaping grille or not, this is my favourite generation of the 1970s Challengers. I preferred the dual taillights on each side as well. It’s been well written on CC that this redesign was a deadly sin, and I can relate. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder I guess.
I wouldn’t cast the redesign as a Deadly Sin (although the Plymouth Barracuda 1972-74 redo did look a whole lot better).
But maybe the E-body, as a whole, though, would qualify. The big money Chrysler dumped, first, to develop the fuselage cars for 1969, then the E-body for 1970, well, it just didn’t seem to have anywhere near the hoped-for return, and the economic downturn of the seventies (with the sole bright spots being the 1970 Duster, 1975 Cordoba and 1978 Omnirizon) really put a crimp into Chrysler’s product development of more profitable vehicles. Even the revolutionary 1972 Dodge Club Cab pickup didn’t garner near enough sales to help much.
If not for those few successes, I’d be willing to bet Chrysler wouldn’t have lasted long enough for even Iacocca’s rescue.
I’m not a big fan of dressing every classic car up to look like it’s highest-performance version.
In my area, its been done to death and quite boring to see.
I would love to see an occasional stock, basic version of a Camaro, Mustang or Challenger (or any Mopar) but that seems impossible.
That said, I prefer a non-vinyl roof and usually like the styled steel wheels with trim rings on them.
But the blue one in the ad (with the pretty lady) would be wonderful to see in the real world, hubcaps, vinyl and all.
Still, happy to see ANY muscle car that isn’t a jacked-up Camaro with a blower.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1mFgYLJKbA&t=560s
The Dodge Challenger bought new by Bruce Hudson. A crew member of the Edmund Fitzgerald who went down with the Fitz a year or so after he bought the car new.