Mike Hayes has found some real gems over the years, but this one is right at or near the top, as in the rust-perforated top of this ’77 or ’78 Dodge Charger. These cars have become unicorns in any condition, but this one takes patina to a whole new level. Vinyl tops are brutal.
Here it is, in its full glory. This Charger has spent a lot of time outdoors; a bit too much so, and undoubtedly most of that time was under or near trees, as their pollen sticks and that forms the first organic base for subsequent growths of lichens and such.
Mike wondered if this car had been totally submerged in water, as he thought the round stuff might be barnacles. I very much doubt that, as once a car has spent a while totally immersed, it’s almost impossible to bring back from that watery grave, and be in driveable condition. It appears to be lichen to me, which starts to expand in a circular pattern.
It’s got a license plate.
And it looks like someone started on some bodywork on this side. Did they get discouraged?
The Charger at this time was of course a Chrysler Cordoba dressed down a bit, but this one is taking the casual look a bit far.
A true curbside classic.
Here’s some related reading on these:
Driveway Capsule: 1976 or 1977 Dodge Charger SE?
The excessive rust and broken tail light suggest this car is abandoned, but the tires being not flat suggest this car is still being driven.
Although I’m unsure how the owner can get away with having only 1 tail light.
Amazingly, Google StreetView shows this car parked elsewhere in the same neighborhood as far back as 2011. And in the 2011 image below, it’s missing the same tail light.
Also, the rear shot shows the license plate has a 2023 sticker on it – so it appears the car is still registered and likely driven.
I wonder what its original color was. It looks like the body was also sandblasted at one time.
Are you sure the Cordoba isn’t a Charger that’s dressed up a bit?
I get this. I also don’t see the Charger as being dressed down. Rather, the Cordoba was like the Charger that removed like 70% of its accessories and replaced a few of them with classic jewelry items or Rolex for a more tasteful, less ostentatious appearance… all within the context of what was considered tasteful in the ’70s.
I’ve read somewhere that Cordoba parts support is extremely limited. I can’t imagine what it would take to source good parts for the Char-doba.
This makes me sad! A car that wasn’t exactly loved when new, and now here we are. Glad to see it in 2022, in any condition. Agree that this is an outstanding find.
I’m both crestfallen and confused…it looks like the ’77 Charger is very similar to a Cordoba, but what confuses me is that they also offered an essentially similar ’77 Magnum…what was the difference between a Magnum and a Charger that year? Seems expensive to offer different models of such similar cars.
Crestfallen in that I drove a Magnum that was close to new in ’77, I was a transporter for Hertz and I remember liking it quite a bit. This makes me feel old, maybe I’ve deteriorated a similar amount (and I wasn’t close to new in ’77)
Something tells me while this Charger has seen better days, it still runs beautifully.
Apart from the roof, if one power washed the lichens off, this Charger may not be as rough as it initially appears. Still far from perfect, but surprisingly more presentable.
I was going to say just that. Of course, I seem to be an eternal optimist about these kinds of things – and I’d hate to see what the interior looks like – but this one may actually be saveable.
Finding that tail light might be difficult.
You got me curious. There are a buffet of choices for light replacement.
Who would have thunk it?
And, yes, I think this one could be saved – with enough time. I am also guessing it to be painted brown. My parents had a ’77 Volare in about this same color.
https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2499334.m570.l1313&_nkw=1977+dodge+charger+tail+light&_sacat=6000
Amazing! Although 2 observations… There are a lot more left side lights available than right side (I can understand how the left side might get broken more often, but then shouldn’t there be more used right side lights available? “Dammit! I’ve replaced that left tail light 3 times. I’m getting rid of the car, but that light’s going on eBay!”).
Second, a set of NOS left and right side lights will apparently run you about $200 more than I suspect many people would pay for the whole car 🙂
A true curbside classic.
Being the pseudo-Cordoba Charger, makes it extra special. The triple pane opera windows, side marker lights, rear tail lens, and triple horizontal section grille, was collective overkill, when new. The ‘triple’ theme even cheesier here, than the original triple vertical pane opera windows on the ’74 Charger SE. Like the weathered paint surfaces, super clean (almost bleached) whitewall stripes, is often a sign of long term environmental exposure. Not careful owner upkeep.
Love the throwback aggregate and concrete road surface.
Brush paint it with some POR15 to handle the rust and obtain some Corinthian leather seating (made in NJ) and it’s good for a good time longer. Oh, and a tail light lens from a Chinese supplier will keep it street legal.
That rope tied around the rear bumper makes me think this car was used to tow something at some point. It doesn’t show in any of the photos that I took, but the license tabs are up to date. If the exhaust isn’t too leaky or too loud, the owner could probably fashion a tail light cover out of red cellophane and legally drive this oxidized classic. Judging from the neighborhood where I found it, I’m guessing that this car is owned and operated with considerable irony by an Urban Hipster.
I believe it’s a 1977, “Special 2 Door Hardtop”. Who knows about the original color. It seems from the brochure that brown-ish colors (even the reds are brown-ish) were quite the thing in 1977.
This one doesn’t have the T-top, but from the brochure, it doesn’t seem that all of the “Specials” did.
And here it is with some shine left on the paint. I wonder if this one had that fancy 2-tone upholstery.
Clearly the laws regarding road worthiness are somewhat lax in that part of the world. You rarely see any cars pre 1990 in the Uk as they have been swept up by our MOT system
Yes. As of January 2020, an emissions test is no longer required in Washington state to renew your car’s registration. As for the car’s other obvious imperfections, a safety inspection is required if the car has been rebuilt after being totaled out by an insurance company, but no inspection is required for this type of gradual decay! That’s crazy, but that’s how it is. Just thinking about this car makes me want to get a tetanus shot…
At least you guys in the UK have a unified system across all your counties, Andrew. In Australia it varies from state to state, and I understand the US is similarly variable. Having said that, lack of a tail light would be enough to put it off the road even in Victoria, and they’d probably send you for a full roadworthy test – normally only needed if a car is sold.
I agree with Actually Mike, it’s crazy this amount of decay can be legal. Who knows what structural horrors lurk within. Somehow I doubt it’s just patina.
Wow. That one is all rancid. I don’t know why I’m surprised by this, as that’s just what vinyl tops do… almost every time.
A friend actually had one of these in high school, and I think I’ve only seen one of the Dodge variants since then. I always disliked the tail lamp treatment… the setup on Ricardo’s Cor-THO-ba was much nicer, what with the rear side markers that matched the front. If I owned the car (and it wasn’t sporting so much rot), I’d actually break with originality and locate the necessary rear bits off a 1975-77 Cordoba. Already have a half-ass excuse to go for it as is.
Oooh, roof rust! I wonder if anyone has ever bought a car and then spent the winters in Michigan or Wisconsin and then summered within 100 yards of a seashore somewhere? That way the car would rust evenly, starting at both the top and bottom and meeting somewhere around the door handles.
Roof rust is one I would like to avoid. You can screw up patching lower quarter panels and nobody really notices if it’s low enough and there is some chrome in the area. A wavy, bubbly roof (not to mention the leaks) is something else. That one is nasty!
Sorry, but I don’t love these enough to even think about adopting something like it. The worst part about it is telling everyone you have a Charger, then having to follow up with “No, the one that looks like a Cordoba.”
It would be even worse to get a 300 of this vintage and have it mistaken for a Cordo-Charger repeatedly.
While this car may not rival the Chicago Cutlass, it is in very bad condition. We don’t really see the interior however.
If this were a Charger made 4+ years earlier I’d think that license plate was a vanity plate, but on this it’s probably just a coincidence.
Find a taillight and throw on some Coker Eagle GTs on Rallye wheels and it’ll look good as new, I say!
I actually like all the variants of this body, especially the 300. This poor car could only be saved by someone with more money than sense, or by a body shop owner who hates going home to his Wife.
Doubt this car will ever be stolen.
That’s one plus.
6 monthly insections on pre 2000 cars here not that I bother with my 66 wagon, that Charger would have been off the road a long time ago here they are anal about rust,
The ’78 Charger was an oddball, the Magnum debuted in ’78 and was supposed to replace it. Nonetheless a couple thousand Chargers were built in ’78, I think in Windsor Ontario. Of course the Magnum was essentially the same car, but with different sheetmetal from the beltline down. Also had the nice looking Cord inspired grille.
Only one thing to do to this car, CRUSH IT!
Even the tires are probably 20 years old —
I doubt the owner would have splurged on Coker whitewalls recently ….
My state has many shortcomings when it comes to vehicles, but the above would not pass the bi-annual safety inspection….Thank God!!
Sad to think that this is the fate for every 1994-97 Chrysler LHS and New Yorker. My favorite car of all times (I’ve owned 6 over the years; 3 new, 3 pre-owned). Regardless of how diligent one is with waxing and cleaning, the paint seems to go on them. Also, I had the same experience on every Accord & Civic I owned.