1974 Dodge Charger - She Said He Was Crazy

Seems like a lifetime ago when I turned down the chance to grab a 1972 Dodge Charger, not unlike this '74, from Brenda, a woman I slung hash to doctors and nurses with in a Long Island hospital cafeteria.  She wanted to dump it to upset her husband and she wanted all of $1,200 for it. Despite its propensity to stall out like many an early emissions system clogged car would, it was in solid condition. I passed on it because I knew better. She said her husband was crazy. 

I was maybe 21, maybe 22 and she was an "old" 26; she had two kids and a husband she claimed was abusive. She might as well have been 40. Or at least 30. I had convinced myself she had a thing for me - maybe she did. I don't know. She was a terrible flirt, smokin' hot too and even if she did "like me", it was probably a distraction for her. Nothing ever came of it. When you're that young, getting mixed up in something so "adult" was above my pay scale. Still is. 

This is for sale near Indianapolis with an asking price of $4,500. I find it hard to believe this is worth that much, but you never know. I'd choke on handing over what Brenda wanted for her for this. What Brenda was asking for her '72 years ago was a bargain even back then. 

Poster of the ad claims this is a 318 from a 1968 Coronet and ran great when parked; that seems like a while ago. Charger SE's came standard with a 318 but could have been ordered with a 360, a 400 or even a 440. Brenda's had the 400, two-barrel; sorry, us car people remember those details. I'd love to see what this would be like after it was gently power washed and buffed out. Looks like it may have been a light blue? 

These 1971 era "fuselage body" Charger and Fury coupes aren't for everyone but I love them, the four-sedans, known as "Coronets" not so much. Then again, I'm not a four-door girl. These came in Coronet wagon guise as well. Big two doors like this were everywhere when I was a kid, it's what we drove to tell the world we weren't driving our parent's car; kids today it seems don't care so much about that sort of thing. Their falling out of favor as fashion statements was a long time coming and I find it almost as hard to believe that cars like this don't exist anymore as much as it's hard to fathom they were as popular as they once were. 

This car is based off the famous Plymouth\Dodge "B-body" that was Chrysler's defacto intermediate chassis back in the day; the Chrysler division used it to underpin their Cordoba from 1975-1979 too. I used to kid myself that my '75 Cordoba was actually a Dodge Charger like this or the General Lee in disguise. I wasn't far off the mark either. 

The B-body was made famous back in 1962 when Chrysler executives mis-interpreted intel that GM was downsizing their full-size line. To counter, over reactionary Plymouth and Dodge came out with a stretched version of their A-body compact as their new-for-'62 big cars and the rest is history. Turned out GM was coming out with the Chevy II which was a compact car. Oops. Chrysler kept the old B around after 1965 when they rolled out new properly sized big cars. 

Nothing about this seems too bad save this big dent in the driver's door. Something tells me the latch mechanism doesn't work either on it. 

I passed on Brenda's offer because I knew her husband would either kill me or demand I give it back to him. I mean, he had guns, drank to excess and had that menacing look in his eyes that he might do things that most people wouldn't. I lost touch with her after she left the hospital. A friend had told me she was still with him but that was at least thirty-five years ago. I have no idea what happened to her Charger. 

 

1966 Plymouth Fury - Insanely Good

Here's the definition of "cool" if you look it up in the dictionary - "fairly low temperature but not cold" or "showing no friendliness of indifference towards someone or something". Meh. Doesn't cut to the quick of how I feel about this 1966 Plymouth Fury III I found on Facebook Marketplace recently. Urban dictionary is far more apropos: "insanely good". Yeah...that's more like it. 

1965 was a unique model year in that GM, Ford and Chrysler all had new full-size models. If I was to declare a winner amongst the "low-priced three", between the new-for-'65 Chevrolet, Ford and Plymouth, the Plymouth gets my vote. By a wide margin over the Chevrolet too. Your mileage may vary, see dealer for details. There are subtle if minute differences between this '66 and a '65 but for the purpose of today's soliloquy, there' all but identical. 

Big Plymouth's for '65 rode on a new full-perimeter frame, Plymouth's (and Dodge's) first new full-size chassis since the abortive 1962 downsizing. They kept the old "'62" full-sizers around making them the underpinning for a defacto mid-size line that was freshly fanciful at GM and Ford. 

That, to a large extent, explains why Chrysler intermediates were always a bit bigger than GM and Ford's middle-children meanwhile these new full-size Plymouths were slightly smaller  than "their" big boys. They're sized right if you ask me. 

 

You wouldn't be alone thinking what were marketed as intermediates at Plymouth (and Dodge) were full-size makes and models as well. Back then it was like Plymouth and Dodge had two separate lines of full-size cars. 

The first Plymouth to wear a "Fury" badge was a sub-model of Plymouth's then top-of-the-line "Belvedere" in 1955. Fury became its own series above the "Belvedere" in 1959. In 1965, the "Belvedere" moniker, which I've always thought was a simply gawd-awful name for a car, remained on the aft-forementioned 1962 circa platform officially becoming an intermediate what with the Fury now riding on the new and larger platform or chassis. The Belvedere nameplate finally swam with the fishes after MY 1969. 

Fury came in five different trim levels. For 1966, there was the rental grade, bone-stripper Fury "I" bought by rental car companies and municipalities. Then there were the Fury II's and III's that were better appointed with niceties like power steering and brakes, automatic transmission, air conditioning and 17 different exterior color schemes; Fury I's only had 9. 

Slotted above the "III" was the coupe only Fury "Sport" and lastly and leastly if you ask me, akin to Ford's "LTD" and Chevrolet's Caprice, the Fury "VIP" that was all but a luxury car with plush interiors, fake-wood trim and, of course, that bastion of luxury car denotation, fender skirts. Even on VIP-coupes. Well, no one's perfect. 

Unfortunately, there's a lack of details about this car in the Facebook Marketplace ad and while I was surprised to find it still posted when I searched for it again this morning, that could be an indication of trouble. Or someone looking to flip something they bought and quickly realized there was a whole lot to do on it they didn't anticipate. Been there done that. Note that big blob of blue paint on the hood - this oldie but goodie got resprayed a long time ago. 

Only 57,000-miles on her 57-year-old ticker but low mileage on an old car and $2.75 will buy you a ride on a New York City subway; in other words, in general, it doesn't matter.

Lack of photos of the front seat and the dash is disconcerting. Along with the resprayed paint failing there's some trim falling off but all-in, based on the pictures, not a bad looking Fury III. Especially up near Detroit where the tin-worm is as popular as it is down here in Cleveland. 

These things can be bought in even better shape for around $12,000 these days which tells me as well that the used car market is coming back down to earth. A year or so ago this would have been priced around ten-grand if not more; makes me feel a little bad for anyone who overpaid for a car during the height of the Pandemic-driven, hyper-price inflated days. 

Much of the credit for 1960's Chrysler's I appreciate goes to the famed designer Elwood Engel who his staff said had an uncanny eye for "commercial viability" of designs. I'd say he was insanely good at it. 

 

1964 Chrysler New Yorker - Double Standards

These 1964 and similar looking '63 Chrysler New Yorkers certainly have their fans, I'm on the fence about them. 

That said, with this being a Chrysler, I think nothing of looking past its quirks and foibles. For certain, if this was an American Motors design, I'd think it freakish and weird. My inner voice screaming, "why can't you be normal?". It being a Chrysler I'm like, "yeah, that's cool. Not my cup of tea but ok."

Double standards are funny like that. Not unlike that charming, oh-so-handsome guy who thinks he can say whatever he wants to women in the office and get away with it. The older, pudgy, balding bespectacled clod says things not half as offensive and he ends up in HR. 

Chrysler's New Yorker was all-new for 1960 New Yorker had huge brake shoes to fill after Chrysler's 1957-1959 models changed the game wholesale. Legend has it when GM executives got wind of Chrysler's 1957 line, they scrapped their plans for their '59's coming instead with some of the most outlandish designs of all time. The Chrysler class of 1957 on top of a literal bumper crop of lovely designs they introduced for 1955. Therefore, safe to say that Chrysler was on quite the roll back then but in a day and age of "planned obsolescence", to keep everything new and make last year's model seem old and outdated, something was bound to go wrong. Or less than right. 

From 1955 through 1964, though, Chrysler had a series of designs that were, for the most part, confident, balanced, cohesive and seemingly penned by one person or team with a singular vision; that makes sense because they generally were designed by famed auto designer Virgil Exner.  

Doesn't mean they all "worked", though. Naturally, I think this works somewhat better as a coupe but all 1963 and 1964 "New Yorkers" of the vintage were 4-door sedans; you wanted something with just 2-doors you had to get a "300 J" or "K".

There's a wonton flamboyance to this car that's not unlike the fashion conscious who are able to pull off wearing just about anything and make whatever it is they're wearing seem more special because they're wearing it. Others wear the same thing and something's just not right, or "off". 

It's like someone my age trying to wear "skinny jeans". I mean, candidly, I don't embarrass myself in them but the look certainly draws attention in ways that I didn't intend. It's like my wife wearing a bikini, she most certainly can but she doesn't. 

This Facebook Marketplace find is for sale in Angola, Indiana over in north central Indiana right on the Indiana-Michigan border. The asking price is $5,600 and that seems like a bargain considering it has a rebuilt 440-cubic inch V-8 with lots of go-fast stuff on it. I'd talk the poster of the ad down just to get the motor; wish I had a Cordoba to drop it into. 

No doubt a hardcore, old school Chrysler fan would cry afoul at that notion. Don't be calling H.R. on me. 

1969 Dodge Charger - Good Ole Boy

I can't complain about how insane prices are for used cars these days seeing I just sold my somewhat rusty but still very solid 2006 Chevrolet Tahoe LT with more than 153,000 on its clock for $6,000. Still, I find the $25,000 asking price for this 1969, non running and non-numbers matching, 1969 Dodge Charger R/T to be laughably absurd. 

I can't fault the poster of the ad on Facebook Marketplace for asking that amount but I would seriously question the mental health or business acumen of an individual who would spent that kind of money for this. "Rollers" are hard to put a price tag on and this one might be better than most but I have to imagine this one is overpriced. Make that way overpriced. 

Unless the buyer can do all of the restoration work themselves, factoring in the cost of labor and parts, this is going to be one very expensive restoration. Then, possibly, whomever buys it might have a gem on their hands that might be worth around $60,000. Sorry, that's a big if. 

Resto-rat-mod this cost effectively and it would be something unique and interesting. Not every old car that's beat to death needs a Concours quality restoration. I don't get spending $60,000 to make $60,000 or make something worth $60,000 that'll be something you'd be afraid to drive. Flipping cars is a dicey game too - especially bombs from up here that are rusty. Like this thing is. 

I get that on a list of top-ten "gotta have it" muscle cars from back in the day, one of these would be sitting at or near the top of it. But man, it needs everything. 

Dodge's first Charger in 1966 looked more like an over-sized AMC Marlin than a competitor to peel buyers away from any GM muscle car; Dodge didn't get a "pony car" until 1970.  Fastbacks in general and in particular on (nearly) full-size cars are tough putts and the '66 and '67 Charger is case in point. I mean, this thing looks cross between a station wagon and a Coronet with an Oldsmobile Toronado's tumble-home thrown in. 

Dodge built the Charger on Chrysler's B-body platform that traces its heritage (or infamy) back to Chrysler's abortive 1962 downsizing of Dodge and Plymouth models. When Chrysler "upsized" in 1965 they kept the B-body around as a defacto intermediate. 

After two years of stubbing their bumpers, they got it oh-so-right in '68 with these beauties. Being featured in the 1968 Steve McQueen cop movie "Bullitt" may have had something to do with popularizing them as well. Sales stunk for the '66-'67 models but they were actually quite good in 1968 and 1969. 

        

Further helping to popularize these cars is that they were featured in the TV show, "The Dukes of Hazard" that ran from 1979 through 1985. Legend has it anywhere from 255 to 325 1968 and 1969 Dodge Chargers were used in the show's production. 1970 Charger's, that do not have the '68 and '69 Charger's "sugar scoop" or "tunnel-ram" rear window treatment, were not used although the Charger's featured in 2005 movie were all 1970 Chargers. 

Ok, so, the details on this thing: apparently this is a "real" Charger (whatever that means), the engine is "correct" but not original nor is it running, the paint is original and remarkably so, trunk pan is rotted out, rear quarter panels are shot, rear frame rails need work, driver's foot well is "Fred Flinstone'd" but the torsion bar mounts are supposedly in good shape. Oh, and it's filthy and the wheels are historically incorrect. 

Aside from all that, Mrs. Kennedy, what did you think of Dallas? 

If you know all that and still think this a bargain and you actually know better than I do, perhaps I'm the moron. Hey, that's a distinct possibility but in this case, I don't think so.