(first posted 4/15/2016) While you most likely see despair and sorrow weeping from every blemish and rust hole on this seemingly decrepit looking Charger, I don’t. For me, the optimism spraying from this Dodge has soaked my being, making me realize it yearns for those rich adventures that still lie ahead in the road of life.
No doubt some will view these pictures and question how a car in this condition would ever pass any sort of safety inspection where they live. There is rust in both the rocker and quarter panels and one can only imagine the potential horrors that lurk around the undercarriage. Focusing on such things is valid yet pessimistic; the optimism of this Charger is still dripping off me, well after finding it.
Part of this optimism is fed by the delightfully youthful aura cascading from every nook and cranny. Youth is a wonderful thing, that time in life when everything is fresh and anything is possible, when the highly obvious hurdles that stand in the way of grand and lofty goals are viewed as being somewhere between trivial and nonexistent.
This is the time of life in which most people are highly immune to the toxicity of chronic pessimism that many inadvertently succumb to at some point.
That any optimism could be still emanating from this Charger is truly baffling. How so? When this particular car was new, pessimism was a vicious scourge that was engulfing the Dodge Charger nameplate much like a snake devours a mouse.
For that matter, pessimism was simultaneously feasting on the Chrysler Corporation and much of the United States auto industry. One wouldn’t think optimism would spring forth from such a toxic template, but it has.
When the Charger debuted in 1966, it was an optimistic reinterpretation of the Dodge Coronet with a much nicer than non-Dodge grade interior. From both this angle and in profile it had a profound similarity in physical appearance to the AMC Marlin, but Chrysler was optimistic the mid-sized fastback was a wave of the future. Or at least a profitable niche.
It was neither.
Dodge sold 230,000 Coronets compared to a paltry 37,000 Chargers. Charger sales dropped like a lead balloon, to around 15,000 for 1967.
That doesn’t sound like a recipe for a bountiful harvest of optimism.
Rather than licking its wounds and staying home, Chrysler tried again and persevered. Just like optimistic people often reap nice rewards, Chrysler kept its chin up and introduced the next generation of Charger.
Released in 1968 and running for three tremendously successful years, this was peak Charger-dom. At some point everyone reaches their peak in both appearance and performance. For the Charger, this was it.
Infrequent are the cars that look great from all angles, with no quirky detail that one cannot look past. This is one of those few.
The third generation was born in 1971. The Charger was maturing, perhaps reflected by a little thickening around the midsection that tends to happen at a certain age.
Naturally, Chrysler was optimistic about this newest Charger, even if it was in actuality just a two-door Coronet.
Upon the winds of insurance foibles and fuel crises, the Charger underwent a rapid and profound transformation by 1973. Like the former gold-medal winners who are now announcers at the Olympics, they were still in the same shell, but dressed much differently and obviously pining for their glory days.
Sadly, this is the automotive personification of that aged, former Olympian.
Just don’t interpret this unfortunate morphing as pessimism. Even the most devout of optimists realize they must adapt to remain relevant and vibrant. It just doesn’t always create the desired outcome.
The testosterone fueled R/T of 1971 mellowed into a vinyl-topped, laurel-wreathed brougham practitioner by 1973. Our featured year of 1974 was mainly a rehash, proudly putting on a face of confidence in spite of the formidable challenges presented by changing tastes, a fluid market, and external input.
Much like the Olympian who is attempting a comeback beyond a certain age, the Charger simply couldn’t pull off the impossible. By 1974, the rounded Charger was simply out of its element, trying unsuccessfully to compete with younger, prettier competition. What a blow to ones optimism.
But slipping into a discussion of this Charger in 1974 terms is woefully missing the point. Let’s remember this is 2016. Much like sharp rocks dull over time and exposure, the turbulence experienced by our featured Charger in the days of its birth has subsided. What was once a car outgunned by the competition, the optimism seeping from this Charger has turned the tables. What a delightful find in comparison to some bloated Torino or a Colonnade-bodied GM.
So what exactly prompted this tsunami of optimism originating from an otherwise corrosion-covered Charger?
Inspect the automotive anonymity in the background of these pictures. Notice how the Charger is parked well away from anything else. Remember the youthful aura I mentioned earlier?
I found this Charger in the student area of a high school parking lot.
Undoubtedly this car is owned and being lovingly treated by a young person unencumbered with the pessimistic thoughts many of us would have and are likely thinking about such an automobile. The owner of this Charger is able to see beyond the scars of over forty winters and truly appreciate this Charger for what it is – a remnant from a time long ago when the name of Charger meant something totally different that what it does today.
Context is everything.
Found March 25, 2016
Hickman High School, Columbia, Missouri
My first car, just like this one bought it in 1989, age 16. Was in better shape than this one at that time of course. Not so much now. I know where it is parked to this day.
Nicely done. I did not see the HS parking lot angle coming at all. I had exactly the same type of optimism when I bought my first car at 16. It was a ’63 Valiant 100 two door sedan with no floor boards and a seafoam green interior. I thought it was the coolest thing because when I looked at it I saw what it could be. Eventually it attained some of that imagined style, but in my mind it was always the coolest thing on the road. I was one of the few that actually saw it like that, LOL.
A friend had a 74 in high school in the mid 80s. Had a 400, but also the vinyl top and power windows. Kind of reflected the betwixt nature of the car. The interior was a big step below the first Charger. She would have added that the 400 was a big step up from the 135 in the 86 Charger.
Now that it is over 40 years old, a kid fixing it up is perhaps more a kid living someone’s else’s legacy than finding his or her’s own tastes and desires. Outside a nearby fusion restaurant, there is a crowd of most but not all Asians with a bunch of ricered out older Civics, M30, SC300s and RX8s. Though the cars and people have changed, this is more the spirit I remember from high school.
So a kid “tuning” a 10 year old Civic is finding his own tastes and desires, but one fixing up a 42 year old Charger is living someone else’s legacy? I fail to see how that makes a bit of sense. If anything, I think going against the prevailing trends with a true classic like this one is a sign of a kid who has found his tastes and knows what he wants, as opposed to getting into the same kind of cars that all the other would-be gearheads at his school are working on.
I get it. Muscle car prices skyrocketed in price because baby boomers dreamed of those cars as kids. As they grew older they could afford them. Following generations may not feel attached to them (or cars in general). But some do grow fond of older cars out of curiosity.
I remember Model A Fords dominating car shows in the ’70’s. Because that generation grew up with them. Many of us here appreciate Model A Fords, but few have fond memories of these as everyday cars when growing up.
a kid fixing it up is perhaps more a kid living someone’s else’s legacy than finding his or her’s own tastes and desires
I don’t just reject that implication I outright resent it. Did the pages stick together where after “finding your own tastes and desires” is completed with “within arbitrary the boundaries established by your birth year”? Oops, I accidentally like what I like, and yeah much of it came before 1988. What, I’d be more true to myself if I fit neatly into my generational bubble? When I hear a song I like on TV I should say “eew” and move on after I look it up and find out it’s old?
The older I get the more I find the idea of generations complete nonsense. Evolution takes thousands of years to observe even a mild change in a species, the idea that a zoomer is so fundamentally different than a boomer that they can’t possibly “get” the appeal of an old Dodge Charger is absurd. High schoolers pick what’s available to them, what their savings/allowance will allow and what their parents allow them to keep in the driveway, a 74 Charger isn’t the first thing that comes to mind fitting that criteria in 2016 but there it is. He had a Charger in high school when most boomers who feel generationally entitled to muscle cars actually had a VW or Datsun in their class of 1976, who’s living who’s legacy again?
Take it thats no State Safety Inspection in Missouri when its allowed to drive with 1/2 the rear end body work missing? or is this a rare lightened NAsCAr model?. Any ways to see
a non restored 74 Charger must be unique?.
Someone’s palms must be getting greased to keep that curbside beater on the road. Nice trailer hitch/bumper supplement. The weight of that hitch and/or frame abutment would no doubt make up for any lost body weight from rust out. Lol.
But as you say, nice to see it mobile and getting used.
That massive hitch was welded on the sub-frame by Don Lehenbauer in Auxvasse Mo in ~1990. He had to remove the rear panel to accommodate. Pulling a 16 foot flatbed trailer with 6″ shackles wore what was left of the bushings out. Later, I leveraged the hitch to hold an inverted channel iron that I welded 2″ pipe on to. I used 2″ rubber donuts to mount the shackles from below. The leaf springs still use the same bolts & shackles as before, but the shackles pull down to the channel iron like a Chevy pickup instead of pushing down from Dodge’s original design. The result was that it no longer cornered like sitting on a 2 legged stool and since the frame where the bushings had been was completely rusted away, this single innovation added decades to the life of the car.
Mark, thank you for filling the role of the pessimist I mentioned in the second paragraph.
But to answer your question, inspections here are every one to two years after five years of age; its primary function is to ensure all the lights work and the brakes are fully functional. Rusty quarter panels do not necessarily affect anything with functionality and your assertion half the rear body work is gone is a gross exaggeration.
” Rusty quarter panels do not necessarily affect anything with functionality”……..maybe so, but…..I would highly doubt that you could find any safety inspection in North America that would allow said vehicle to be legally on the road. Chief among them, would be exhaust gases entering said car, not mention body integrity in an accident.
Well, you just found one.
https://www.mshp.dps.missouri.gov/MSHPWeb/Publications/OtherPublications/documents/SHP-494.pdf
This matter is finished.
So you can drive a car that would just fold up in an accident.Mad.
Mark, I understand your basic concern but this is growing tedious. The statement I made in the second paragraph was to try and avoid this whole scenario.
Each state in the United States regulates such things within their state and what is being practiced is what works for them. Where I live has safety inspections as I linked to above; other states have none whatsoever.
There are things done in other states and countries that I find to be mad, but I also know that is what works for them and move on with my life.
This blog is posted online, with comments opened to the public. That’s fine if YOU don’t want to talk about something, but other commentators should be free to discuss topics which are related to the article. Stating “this matter is closed” is arrogant and not aligned to what Curbside Classic tends to promote: open dialogue and creativity.
Doogie, please explain how calling me arrogant aligns with the open dialogue and creativity you have stressed.
This article did not revolve around what is involved with safety inspections anywhere. Information I offered was met with skepticism and I then provided definitive proof to back what I said.
Your name calling could easily be interpreted as arrogance; on the other hand, I will let my record of 350+ articles here, using my real name, reflect my openness to dialogue and creativity.
During a visit to upstate New York in the spring of 1982, I saw a 1974 Oldsmobile Delta 88 hardtop sedan driving down the road with rear quarter panels that were literally flapping as the car moved. It looked far worse than this Charger.
For many years, Pennsylvania’s inspection standard was that the rust hole could not be any bigger than a quarter, if I recall correctly. The catch – how you repaired it was up to you. A bondo repair was perfectly acceptable.
Same for me – while back in Indiana in the 1980s, I remember seeing a 1973+ Chevy pickup with the box so badly rusted that there were wooden sawhorses placed sideways in the bed, with straps holding the sides of the box to them – the bottom edges of the outer side sheetmetal were completely rusted away, allowing the sides to flap in the wind.
Having grown up in the non-rusty (excepting coastal areas) Pacific Northwest, this was quite the shock, seeing it for the first time.
The 1977+ GM A-bodies also had a particular feature wherein the rear wheel spray would accumulate inside the back bumper, causing the bumper mounts to rust off in a few short years. I lost track of the number of Cutlasses and Monte Carlos that I saw with 4×6 wood rear bumpers.
You had to really watch the road on state highways right after a railroad crossing, as you never knew what automotive part would be found on the road downstream of the crossing. Mufflers/tailpipes were the most common by far, but there were also a few bumpers, formerly undermounted spare tires, and the like.
Back about ’70 I saw an FJ Holden being driven along the road with no hood and the front fender actually flapping – I couldn’t believe it. My state doesn’t have any annual inspection for roadworthiness, but now has a very strict inspection for when a car is sold – cost me $1100 in repairs when I sold my Mazda 3 privately. But unless it attracts the attention of the police, you can drive anything that’ll move here. And in my experience if you car looks to be in good nick they’ll just check the tyres then you’re good to go.
In Pennsylvania, if you know where to go, that rust hole could be patched with well greased currency at the “inspection” station.
I realize this is a bit late, but looking at production numbers and 1973 was the Charger’s best year. Not bad for a car the 3rd year into the production life of it’s 3rd generation.
BTW, 1972 and 1974 were about equal, saleswise, at 75,000 units.
This car would even be able to be driven and licensed in Florida. My old car wasn’t rusty but had a cracked windshield and a bulged hood and I had no problem tranferring my out of state plate…..though cops often gave me a very thorough look over.
It’d be fine in North Carolina or Virginia too. For a car this age, the safety inspection checks the lights, signals, brakes, mirrors, and tires. They might do a visual check for presence of year-appropriate emissions equipment if they’re being really thorough. But there aren’t any regulations on the books for rust/body damage.
Are you familiar with the song “My Old Yellow Car” by Dan Seals? It’s a Country song that came out in the mid 1980s — was always a favorite of mine, even before I was old enough to personally relate to it.
It’s sung from the perspective of a man reminiscing about his first car, which was yellow (obviously), old, rusty and dented. The lyrics start out with this:
She weren’t much to look at, she weren’t much to drive;
She was missing a window on her passenger side;
The floorboard was patched up with paper and tar;
But I really was something in my old yellow car.
When I envision what kind of car Seals was singing about, I’ve always thought of a Dodge or Plymouth in exactly this pale yellow color. In exactly this condition. And the fact that this car is parked in a high school lot only adds to that aura.
The song ends with the singer lamenting that, despite his wealth and success in life, he really wishes that he was still driving his old yellow car. I bet someday, the kid who owns this Charger will be saying the same thing.
Eric, that song isn’t sounding familiar at the moment, so I will have to find it.
In a sense, this Charger made me think of the movie whose title slips my mind – the guy could only see the girl as a slim, highly attractive person whereas to everyone else she was homely and morbidly obese. He had seen the inner beauty, much like the Charger’s owner has done here.
Shallow Hal
Funny but bittersweet movie, in many ways, a two-hour object lesson.
Here it is, Jason. I always pictured a ’67 Impala Sport Sedan when hearing this.
That exact song was playing in my head as I read the story above. Thanks for letting me know I’m not the only one who remembered it…
And pretty much every vehicle where I grew up (Wisconsin) looked like this before it was 10 years old, so this level of rust (especially on a car of this era) seems “normal” to me…
Awesome. Almost certainly, some pretentious old guy gives that kid crap about the car’s condition, but I hope s/he takes it in stride. Maybe this kid will learn to weld someday and will fix a little bit of the rust, or at least use it for some practice. If s/he doesn’t drive it in the winter anymore, however, this thing could last quite a long time in its current state.
This is kind of like the Dirty Dart, but rustier. Beaters are super fun (to me). In fact, the Dart’s engine came from a ’74 Charger; it’s hard to imagine a 225 pulling one of these behemoths around. I can’t imagine the Slant Six take-rate was high in one of these.
I’m surely not the only one who thinks the Charger so lost its way in the ’71 redesign, and it would get worse before it got better. It’s nice to see Dodge turning out new Chargers again that are worthy of the name, even if not everyone loves having rear doors. I lived through the ’80s when a “Charger” was an Omni coupe; I never thought at that time the nameplate would someday again grace a big RWD Hemi V8-powered ride.
While I don’t dislike the new charger (except the 06-10, which are ugly) I don’t see how the 71 lost it’s way and the current one is more worthy of the name, 71 was really the last of the chargers glory years, I don’t think any restyle could have topped the 68-70, and the current sedans definitely don’t, not even close.
I’m preoccupied with the snake and mouse. I suppose in context it would relate to the Mopar, but for now I’m in just as much awe as old Slither there.
This 74 is certainly much nicer in styling than the 75 that was its successor. The current model today is a beautiful car, wish it came in a 2 door as well.
Awesome, that brings back high school memories (although from the mid 80’s when a Charger in salt belt Canada would have looked much like this). Quarter panels are now eighth panels, hah!
I would guess that it’s quite easy to operate a heavily rusted car in Missouri, so long as you don’t attract attention and get pulled over for doing something stupid. European style annual inspections are generally not the case in North America. Get it certified once and you are good to go forever..
High praise to whoever is keeping this on the road. Now about those quarter panels…
I’m afraid most kids today don’t see beyond the rust and dream about “what if'”. My high school parking lot was filled with cars like this. Today, all you see, for the most part, are leased BMW’s and Audi’s, or hand me downs from Mom/Dad of the same brands.
So true of high school rides back in the day. My high school ride was a ’57 Chevy 210 4-door sedan with a 6 cylinder and 3-on-the-tree…light blue with quarter-sized rust holes in the rear quarter, one black fender, and using probably as much oil as gas judging by the smoke screen it left…but I sure do recall a lot of fun times with it!
Part of that is that they simply aren’t permitted to see. Helicopter parents are, even as parents go, anti-“what if”. I can imagine a lot of them simply being too afraid to let their kids drive anything that didn’t have a superb safety rating from the NHTSA, 26 airbags, etc. This is the generation of kids where someone calls the police when a 12 year old is left in the passenger seat. And before someone says I’m a jerk and don’t-want-kids-to-be-safe-and-wait-till-I have-kids-and-I’ll-understand, no, I get it, but yet it certainly stifles doing this kind of thing. Really seems to have changed in the last 10-15 years because even as late as 1998-2001, when I was in high school, many of us had older cars.
Plus I honestly think we are made lethargic from sensory bombardment of constant texts, instagrams, snapchats, emails, and all the other crap to have any energy left to focus on things like this. (the abridged version of a much longer rant that doesn’t belong here 🙂 )
+1 Well we can take solace in the fact that the same helicopter parents buy their kids smart phones loaded with all the data… because, you know, to keep track in this “more dangerous” world!.. put all 26 airbags in their mandated safety blob, which the parents also financed for them, to the test when they get into a horrendous crash texting/sexting their friends…. Great parenting today! Teach them nothing when it comes to common sense, encourage/enable irresponsibility, but damnit make sure they’re protected when their abhorrent behavior turns south.
Matt you’re *SO* right here .
A Friend of mine’s Son just died last week , his mother smothered him so much he was simply unable to deal with life .
I can’t see how helicopter parents claim to love their Children as good Parenting is teaching them how to get along fine when you’re not there by default .
-Nate
This is the perfect place for a rant. I like hearing all sides of a story. It seems to me more kids are considered about getting a phone than a licence to drive. I was (am) an odd duck that liked to drive cars and trucks that were different than everyone else. Fix it or just drive it the way it is. I see this and have a big smile.
Remember though this car is 42 years old. When I arrived in high school in 83 the oldest car was a 65, nothing even close to prewar.
That’s the thing. Huge leaps and bounds were made in so many aspects between the 40’s and the 60’s that a ’74 in 2016 seems, at least to me, like much less of an anachronism than a ’41 would have seemed in ’83. I graduated high school in ’98, which is almost 20 years ago now, but the oldest car in our student parking lot was a ’59 Land Rover Series II, 39 years old at the time, a similar age gap. (The next oldest was, admittedly, much newer. We had a pair of ’70 Chevys, a rough K5 Blazer and a beautiful Chevelle SS, clocking in at age 28.)
Not only that, but The average age of a car on American roads was 7.2 years in 1983; now it’s 11.6 years. So a ’74 Charger in 2016 is 365% of the average age. A car exceeding the average age by that same amount in 1983 would be 26 years old, i.e., about a 1957 model. A ’65 model was 2.5× the average age in ’83, which would be like an ’88 model today.
Great piece and shots, Jack Lord. I hate to think the insurance industry I work in was partially responsible for the decline of so many great nameplates.
As for this particular car, I totally get the premise of a youth seeing past the rust and imperfections to this car’s potential and “what could be”. Sometimes, I miss my youthful ignorance in this regard.
As an owner of a 70 and a 74 Charger SE, I can appreciate both designs. Clearly, I prefer the 70 to look at. However, the 74 has its charms, and in the future, will be more appreciated, as the 68-70s are either restored and very expensive or ultimate basket cases. If someone is interested in getting a Charger, the 71-74s are affordable and have established running gear. A good deal of parts are available.
Many cars post 70 were looking this way – Mustang, for example. The long hood, short deck, elevated rear with poor visibility. Maybe it was a European styling influence, such as from Pantera.
The grilles appear to be in excellent shape – I could use those….The SE grille is not that commonly available.
As an owner of a 1970 Charger 500, I agree with Jeff. IMO, 1974 was the last good year for the v-8 RWD Charger, the Cordoba knock off that followed was the pits! 🙂
I like it. I’ve certainly driven worse looking cars. Kinda reminds me of the CW McCall song “Classified Ad”. Bet it cost more than $28.15 though. Count me as a 71-74 Charger fan. I like the bodystyle. After 75, I’d rather have the Cordoba.
+1!
I’ll raise your Cordoba, with a Dodge Magnum or 1979 Chrysler 300 (I can’t believe Wikipedia doesn’t even have an entry for that version of the 300 – I read and memorized the entire article on these in one of the car magazines of the day – I used to have the production figures memorized).
I don’t know. I like the 77 earlier round headlight models. Same thing with Rancheros. I greatly prefer the 76 and earlier Torino front end more than the 77-79 LTD II front. There are cars though I like better with square headlights.
> I can’t believe Wikipedia doesn’t even have an entry for that version of the 300
It does, although the organization is a little crazy. I found the pictured “curbside classic”:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_300_non-letter_series#1979
It appears that the passenger side front fender was repainted at some point in the car’s life as there is much less colorfade on it compared to the remainder of the car.
I repainted that QP in ~1992. The original fender had been pushed back into the passenger door and I replaced it with a white fender in ’88, so I could open the door. When I got around to painting it, I used an acrylic with hardener and thought that I could just leave the paint sit in the sprayer while the first coat dried. The second coat went on with a rough texture because the hardener was already setting up. I got so mad I didn’t pick up the sprayer again until a 2020 Covid project painting the trailer this Charger used to pull. That’s why it rusted out.
My 1st car was a yellow car, a sporty 2 door fastback, that I wouldn’t mind owning again….a ’68 Mercury Cyclone.
If I saw the car pictured here on the street I would almost instantly form a mental picture of what it looked like when brand new.
To my eyes, ALL the 70s Chargers from the 66 to the 74 look good, though the lower trim 3rd generation models with their “taxi cab” interiors would be lowest on my list.
My high school car, circa 1982, was a 1970 VW Beetle with rusty floors…when I drove through puddles water would splash up around the parking brake and get my butt wet.
It wasn’t a whole lot less rusty than the Charger in these pics.
That is a heck of a hitch on there too…hopefully there’s not a slant six under the hood…
There’s a advantage to that though. My friend Morgan had a 72 Bug with pinhole rust in the floorboards. There is a street here that will flood if someone’s toilet backs up ( they just spent another 3 million trying to fix the problem) and one day when his car began to float, we just waited for the floor to fill with water. You could feel it start to settle and we were then able to drive on thru.
Oh man, memories here. My college roommate Dan’s father bought one of these in 1978. A red 74 strippo with a slant 6 and 3 speed. The manual steering with that small 1974 steering wheel that seemed to be all hub was the worst part of driving it.
I have mixed feelings about these. I prefer the 73-74 version to the 71-72. Something about the roof lines was improved with the later style. I do not, however, care for that SE roof with the multiple teeny opera windows. In a solid color with a metal roof, these are attractive.
I wish I remembered how certain few cars were legally allowed to avoid the monster bumpers that attacked Detroit in 1973-74. These Chargers seemed to get by with those fat rubber guards that don’t look like they would do much absorbing in a 5 mph hit.
As for that rust, I used to see a lot that looked like this around the early to mid 1980s. These were fairly susceptible to rust mites, and it is amazing that one this rusty has survived.
I’ve always thought that 1971-72 models are the “purer” version of the design. It was obvious that Chrysler was trying to make the 1973 and 1974 Chargers into a Monte Carlo/Grand Prix competitor, and the car simply wasn’t designed for that role. The opera windows and stand-up hood ornament look out of place on the car.
Yeah, I always thought the SE quarter windows looked out of place. It’s worth noting that the quarter windows of the non-SE ’73-’74 Chargers actually look better than the earlier ’71-’72 versions.
It’s worth mentioning that although ’71-’72 and ’73-’74 Chargers look very similar, they share no body panels.
I disagree about it not fitting the role (see my post further down), “Grand Prix” isn’t exactly a name fitting for hood ornaments, and padded opera windowed half tops either, and really the original intermediate 69 GP didn’t have any of that crap either. This Charger bodystyle just simply wasn’t conducive to it, and the 75s were just so clearly badge engineered that there was no point to their existence at all
I actually prefer the 1972 only SE treatment to all of them, which essentially cut off the upsweep of the existing 71-72 quarter window.
In the 1970s, the wife half of our neighbors drove a medium metallic blue 1974 Charger SE. It had wire wheel covers and white vinyl roof. They were in the late 50s at the time. They kept it in great condition. It was later traded for a brand-new K-car.
When this body style debuted, Car and Driver raved about the styling (same with the 1971 Road Runner). The problem was that success of the 1969 Pontiac Grand Prix and 1970 Chevrolet Monte Carlo meant that Chrysler was, once again, peddling cars that were aimed at a target that was no longer relevant. Attempts to dress up the Charger and turn it into a Grand Prix fighter weren’t quite successful from an aesthetic standpoint, although the car did sell reasonably well.
The question of the bumper is an interesting one. If this is a ’74, how did they manage to get away without grafting a monstrous I-beam onto the front of it like everything else that year?
As for that serious looking hitch out back, it makes me wonder if someone close to this kid may have kept this car running and functioning as a tow vehicle for a boat or something, then as kids reached driving age it was offered up as an option for someone with some kind of an affinity for it.
When I was young a neighbor and close family friend hung onto a ’74 Coupe DeVille, which sat in the yard for several years under the guise that it was waiting for us kids to get licensed and it would become someone’s first car. For better or worse his kids and those of everyone else in the neighborhood all got newer and more practical first cars when the time came. That Caddy was almost this rusty by 1983 when I started driving, but in truth I would have jumped at the chance to pilot that rig. Even at 17 though, I knew my Summer lifeguard job wouldn’t pay to feed that beast. It eventually went to the crusher after many years of being a lawn ornament. I was living elsewhere by the time it was taken away, but I’d venture a guess that it saw the dawn of the new millenium from the same spot that it watched us all grow up from. It was a running joke in the neighborhood, “Need a car? Sam’s still got that Caddy…just needs a little spit & polish.” (I secretly wanted to rescue it for years. A few years ago my mother texted me a pic of a similar one at a car show in Daytona Beach with the caption “It Lives”. If it were still there I’d still be tempted today)
In previous E-body CC’s, others reports that Chrysler was given a bumper exemption on vehicles already in production and scheduled to be phased out, presumably by 1974. So, they were able to get away with the big bumper guards on existing bumpers rather than the massive, replacement railroad ties on other model cars in 1973 like, say, the Ford Torino, which soldiered on pretty much unchanged until it was replaced in 1977.
Even smaller AMC got the same bumper exemption, as can be seen on the final two years of the Javelin.
I suppose someone will correct me, but I believe there was a longer phase-in of the bumper regs for 2 door coupes and convertibles owing to there less stiff structures needing a longer lead time for the needed re-engineering. My GUESS is that until this exemption was allowed most car makers used this….idea (?) to believe convertibles would be legislated out of existence.
Some car manufacturers, with limited sales in the U.S., also got an extended phase-in.
In all cases, the front bumpers still had to met a “token” damage-free speed of 2.5 mph.
Yeah, combined with the advent of widely available A/C lowering convertible sales even more, and the fear of rollover standards, it was a foregone conclusion that convertible production was going to go away in the seventies, at least for most car models. Even that last bastion of the convertible, the Mustang, would not get one with the 1974 Pinto-based version.
Convertible sales were highest in 1965, and those were mostly Mustangs, so it’s fitting that ponycars are one of the last places a convertible still exists today.
Another ‘loophole’ that Chrysler exploited were the 1968 mandated side marker lights. Although the 1968 cars had illuminated side marker lights, most 1969-70 Chrysler vehicles got away with unlit side reflectors.
Ford messed around with the regs, too. The 1968 Mustang had front fender lights, but rear quarter reflectors.
Seems like the only other nameplate besides Charger that has gone through more varied and radical permeations was Cougar. I wonder if it would still be around if Mercury had survived.
Regardless, the Charger story is fascinating, in that it’s yet another indicator of how much power Dodge dealers had over Chrysler. Dodge was always trying to encroach on Plymouth’s territory and the dealers really howled when they weren’t given a Dodge version of the 1964 Barracuda ponycar.
To placate them, they got the 1966 Charger. Much like the Barracuda was a thinly disguised Valiant, so too was the Charger based on that shining example of mediocrity, the Coronet. Besides the tacked-on fastback and hidden headlights, the Charger’s interior was really unlike anything else at the time. The Charger’s true 2+2 seating could be converted to a completely flat, open rear deck and there was that wild electroluminescent instrument panel. I once read somewhere that the instrument panel was the most expensive part of a car to develop or change. If so, the 1966 Charger must have cost Chrysler dearly.
In a bit of irony, when the 1968 Road Runner was being developed, Dodge passed on getting their own version. A lot of Dodge executives, like Chrysler executives, in general, thought the Road Runner was going to be a loser, with original estimates being around 4,000 cars (they ultimately sold 10 times that amount). Dodge then had to scramble to get a version when the RR turned out to be a hit. The 1968 Super Bee was actually a later introduction.
Anyway, what the revamped second generation 1968 Charger lacked in a much more mundane interior, it more than made up for with what is regarded in many circles as one of the best styled cars to ever come out of Detroit.
Sadly, the mutations began with the 3rd generation in 1971. When performance went out and brougham became the rage in the seventies, the poor Charger did its best to adapt, starting with the sorry Cordoba-based 1975 Charger, mercifully being replaced in 1978 by the short-lived Magnum with it’s semi-hidden headlights. Things really seemed to hit rock-bottom with another Iacocca-special, K-car variant, the 1981 FWD Charger.
Even today, try as they might, the 4-door sedan version of the Charger is just never going to have the style or impact of that great, classic 1968-70 car. I’ll always maintain that rather than the Challenger, Chrysler should have went with a retro, second generation Charger. After all, the new Challenger really is nothing more than a 2-door Charger.
Can’t disagree with your overview of Charger history, but I wouldn’t call the 1966 Coronet “mediocre.” Chrysler’s intermediate offerings during the 1960s were quite competitive, and in some ways better than their GM and Ford competition.
I actually got that from an old National Lampoon quote where they described “The gleam of a newly-minted 1966 Coronet” as a shining example of mediocrity.
None of the 1966 domestic intermediates were bad, but of the three, the Coronet (and sister Belvedere) were definitely the least ‘boldly’ styled. At least they had better drivetrains than the Fairlane.
Perfect name for the color of an unloved car.
“Medi-ochre”.
🙂
Nice thing about living in Oregon, we don’t have safety inspections on our motor vehicles. You can register a cardboard box with a Harbor Freight lawnmower engine on it here.
Same with Indiana. We had one for awhile in the 70s, but everyone figured out that it was just a chance for dishonest mechanics to take advantage of folks with old cars. You can drive some pretty ratty stuff here, but you might get a ticket if the car is bad enough.
In NM also, no safety inspections at all!
Texas has safety inspections. They ( depending on where you go) drive the car briefly to check the brakes. Other than that, just basic stuff, lights, wiper, etc., etc.
Nice approach to the article. I also did not see the high school angle coming.
This generation Charger seemed almost invisible to me as a kid – overwhelmed by popular GM and Ford products in the sales charts.
Around 1976, these popped up on my radar, and started a real appreciation for the exterior. About a block from my home, a very well kept home became the abode of a ’74 Charger SE with white top, bright lime green paint, and Mopar road wheels. They also had a ’76 New Yorker Brougham four door hardtop with a brown top, light tan paint, and road wheels. The immaculate house and cars were enjoyed by the very good looking people living there. I’m not sure if the young lady that drove the Charger was a daughter or wife, but she was definitely an asset to the neighborhood. That house was brimming with optimism fed by a delightfully youthful aura.
In those dark days for Chrysler, I’m sure Ma Mopar would have appreciated more scenes like I recall.
The rolling definition of ‘separation anxiety’.
In a turn, when the chassis goes one way and the body and interior (along with occupants) go the other.
Law of nature; equal and opposites et al. Except rust didn’t et al. It et the Charger.
Dodge didn’t just ‘whip up’ the ’68 overnight, they had it planned for a couple years. It hit the sweet spot of the time. But also, a certain movie and TV show shined light on them.
The ’71 Charger/Satellite was penned at height of Super Car [Muscle] era, and was meant to get trade ins of 64-69 rides. Same with the fastback versions of ’72 Gran Torino and GM’s Colonnades, meant for sportiness, but detuned for personal lux.
I love that picture of the early silver Charger along with the text of the ad. For one thing I have always preferred the styling of the original design as it is a long fastback. The ad gets it right. This is a personal car which you would form an attachment to. During the 1970s Oldsmobile had a series of ads that featured the owner standing next to “their” new Olds. To me, the ads convey a sense of intense pride of ownership, of total enjoyment of this vehicle, that will whisk them away from hum drum life and responsibilities to a life of excitement. Even now, at my age, I can still that get that feeling standing next to my old XJ6.
Yup, they used that theme throughout the 70 Catalog which I have.
Here’s a picture of my new baby.
These later third gen Chargers always fascinated me for their transitional nature from supercar icon to also ran personally luxury coupe. It’s odd since, if you think about it, the Charger always was that – Ignore the big Hemi or 440 or even hotter 383 engine options in the 66-70 years, this was a midsize 2 door only car with bespoke fashionable styling and upgraded interiors(68 not quite as so as 66/7 but still noticeably nicer than Coronet) and had a huge array of powertrain choices, many of which not at all muscle. That’s pretty much the exact description of the 1969 Grand Prix, the car often credited for starting the intermediate PLC movement of the 70s. The Charger should have been a natural fit if you think about it.
I also saw the Cougar referenced a few posts above, I agree I think the two cars followed similar trajectories, both it and the Charger essentially pioneered the smaller PLC (compared to the big Tbirds, Rivieras ect.) and both essentially hit their stylistic peak early on, leaving any successor in an impossible shadow. The unfortunate part for the Charger is the Cougar’s sales skyrocketed when it went full on midsize PLC in 74, Dodge floundered, despite effectively being there all along
Also Great to see a high schooler NOT being foisted into a late model Corolla, or worse inherit the family minivan(dodged that bullet myself). I’m sure it took some convincing of the parents, I know it did for me, And I unsuccessfully lobbied for at least three cars of similar vintage and condition to no avail. It was an uphill battle just to get them to sign off a newer RWD car!
Great point about how the vast majority of the ‘musclecar’ sixties’ Chargers were likely sold with 318 or 383-2v engines, similar to how the majority of Mustangs had either a six-cylinder or lo-po 289. There was a really great CC a while back on a ’69 Charger with a Slant-Six.
This anomaly wasn’t lost on Chrysler, either. It’s worth noting that the ‘SE’ package didn’t begin with the 3rd generation Charger. The wheels were actually set in motion with the first Charger SE in 1969 (although it could be combined with, say, a Charger R/T). The broughamification began in earnest with the scalloped quarter window version in 1973, and was complete with the ill-fated 1975 Charger.
In that regard, one could say Chrysler did okay with how they tried to make both a Grand Prix and GTO version of the Charger. The Charger was originally conceived as kind of an ersatz ponycar/upmarket GTO fighter. They didn’t have the resources to come up with the likes of a 1969 Grand Prix and a GTO. They, instead, put all their 1970 PLC eggs in the E-body basket (there was an SE version of the Challenger, too). When the Challenger quickly fizzled, Chrysler had little choice but to switch their PLC efforts entirely to the Charger until they could get the Cordoba to market.
You know, I don’t recognize it and it was before my time, but there is something endearing about this somewhat ragged specimen.
Does anyone else feel the yellow adds to that? It wouldn’t be the same in black.
+1
A black 73/74 Charger was a star in the TV show Burn Notice. I have wanted one ever since.
I wondered how long it would take for a Burn Notice reference to surface. 🙂 That solid black Charger with the standard roof may have been as attractive as these came.
Yes…black, with white vinyl interior is by far the best iteration…and without that broughmtastic SE roof/quarter window treatment!!!!
The only thing that really irritated me about the Burn Notice Charger was the way someone felt it necessary to paint the steering wheel white to match the white interior. They were evidently too young to remember that white interior cars of the 60s and early 70s almost always used black dashes, carpets and steering wheels.
Yes, I am with you there. If I were to ever build an homage to the Burn Notice Charger, I would NOT Krylon the steering wheel white!
I often wondered if the production crew did that for some, specific purpose related to cinematography. It seems too major a gaffe….and it remained consistent for most of the show’s run.
When CHPs cars were ordered from Chrysler back in the 60’s they specified a white steering wheel—no A/C.
In some scenes you can see the paint has come off the wheel in places.(black underneath)
Great show!
A black wheel would not be fun in Florida.
Another Burn Notice Charger shot. I love this car…and the show. It’s on Netflix—worth a weekend binge…!
Difficult to see this car in such sad shape. With that level of rust, and being firmly in the shadow of the infinitely more popular ’68-’70 models Id have to wonder if its even POSSIBLE to save this car. Worth it? Sure, if youre a Moparphile. Shouldn’t take a genius to figure out where I stand;)
Reminds me of the Charger featured in Big Sugar’s music video for ‘Diggin’ a Hole’.
The Mexican setting of this video, along with the wheel covers, ID this car as an Automex-built Mexican version.
Beautifully written, Jason.
And I loved the image of the snake devouring the mouse – pessimism engulfing the Dodge nameplate indeed!
I hope this car survives, but I fear the owner has his work cut out!
I always admire an old car like this. to me an old warhorse like this is a totally honest car.
it’s saying “I’m bloodied but still standing. I’ve had a lotta life in my seats and under my wheels and every time I start to wonder if they are right about me being to out of date and not worth their time somebody always comes along and makes me feel like I did in the showroom all those years ago. I wear my scars proudly because every one of them was earned doing what I was created to do…keep my owners rolling down that road to whatever awaits them”
LOL…I’m sure the “religious right” wouldn’t approve but this old girl has a soul that speaks. Long may she run!
+100
ALWAYS LOVED the 66-71 American Muscle cars (Mustangs, Challengers, Cudas, GTX, Chargers, Camaros, etc). But that takes NOTHING away from the 2005-2016 Mustangs, 2008-16 Challengers, 2011-16 Chargers, 2010-16 Camaros, and the INCREDIBLE Dodge 2016 Hellcats. My opinion ***only*** of course – these 21st Century cars are better in every possible way, INCLUDING looks.
Better in every possible way except outward visibility. I can’t see out of the last two generations of Camaros, and the others, though not as bad, still have high beltlines and pillars that are twice or three times thicker than the ’60s and ’70s cars. Of course they also hold the roof up during a rollover and contain side-curtain airbags
When my mother didn’t put a deposit (I wasn’t quite 18 yet. I had the $$ but couldn’t legally buy a car yet) on the ’74 ‘Cuda I wanted, and was soon gone, I decided I would go with a Charger or Roadrunner. I liked the ’71-72 Chargers a lot, but by the time the ’73s and ’74s, I liked the Roadrunner a lot better and went with that instead. I didn’t like the front end on the ’73-74 Charger at all, it just looked tacked on too much. So I ordered a 360 “HP”4 barrel, 727 torqueflite, 3.55 posi, in “Silver Frost Metallic” with red stripes, with black vinyl interior. It was ordered in early May, but after an order snafu, it didn’t show up until almost Thanksgiving 1974, one of the very last ’74s, on a truck with an identically equipped ’75. I’m so happy that car survived in Las Vegas, restored with a stroked 440 engine. The original 360 was rebuilt and is in a crate in the owner’s garage, ready to be sold with it, if/when he ever sells it. I wish I had the cash to make him an offer he couldn’t refuse.
I love this generation Dodge Charger. I don’t mind patina as long as it doesn’t penetrate into the rest of the car. And that everything mechanical is properly maintained like it should.
I like the yellow color a lot , I think it adds to the optimism aspect .
I vividly remember the original Chargers coming out , I got a ride when hitch hiking in Boston in one from two girls , as they pulled away from the curb I noticed the ignition switch hanging mangled from under the dash board and realized the car was stolen , a fact the driver gleefully copped to , I got out shortly missing a chance for some free trim .
This one isn’t too far gone to be saved but it’ll need someone with deep pockets and willingness to work long and hard .
I hope it gets saved as I too like survivors .
It’s kind of sad that not everyone remembers their first vehicle fondly .
-Nate
Don’t have to remember my first car. I still have it.
Some thoughts and recollections. When I bought a ’70 ‘cuda in 1981 for $1,600, I briefly considered a ’67-’69 Barracuda, and a ’68-’70 Charger first. In 1981, that ’70 was only 11 years old; today’s equivalent to a 2006 (hey, we’re only 5 days from 2017). Back then (1981), and for a decade or so later, those ’71-’74 Chargers seemed to me like stretched out and tacky cartoon cars (I thought the same, though a little less so, about the Mustangs of that era, the ones with extreme fastbacks and oversized tail lights, etc.) Then, something happened to my tastes with the passage of time. I saw one like the ’74 featured in this article parked at the side of the road with a For Sale sign asking $1000, and would have bought it if I hadn’t been in such debt (should have kept the ‘cuda, I wonder what it would have cost now?) Now, I’m into ’57-’61 Mopars, which creeped me out when I was a kid in the early to mid 60s. As far as rust, it comes with age–right?–like hair loss and wrinkles. I like survivor cars–restorations are kind of like the equivalent of Botox, face lifts, tummy tucks, and plastic surgery.
Did a Google search for Hickman High School and Fieser (the personalised numberplate) and came up with one Sammy Fieser, who is a sophomore and a member of the school’s lacrosse team. It would be interesting to hear how he obtained the car, and what he plans to do with it in the future.
I just came across this… I’m Sammy Fieser! My dad owned that charger for over 30 years, and I loved driving it to school back in 2016. He sold it to one of my friends from school, who is planning on rebuilding it. I haven’t seen it in a while, but I hope it is doing well out in the world. Glad I found this article!
1969 is the best year ,imho, for the “Charger”.
Walking down my old street in late 1976 one would see our 1977 Monte Carlo, a 1972 Gran Torino, a 1976 Cordoba, a 1974 Charger SE, a 1976 Buick Regal…and a Hillman Minx! It is amazing in retrospect just how popular these ‘intermediate’ 2 door coupes were
Joe Dirt immediately sprang to mind seeing this clapped out mopar. This is what hed drive in real life, cause even its clapped out state his charger daytona was worth a small fortune
The Daytona took me completely out of that movie!
@Matt ;
No worries, you’re one of the few who likes what they likes and who cares about what others think…..
In 1976 I was well out of high school and it’s craziness, I was driving 1940’s and 1950’s cars and trucks along with an old beat to shit ex L.A.P.D. Harley-Davidson PanHead .
Everyone told me I wasn’t cool so what ? .
The ‘cool kid’ drug dealer from high school let his dog use his 197? Hemi Charger to sleep in, he wasn’t cool anymore , he was rich but also drug addled .
I doubt he’s even still alive .
-Nate
The testosterone fueled R/T of 1971 mellowed into a vinyl-topped,…SE”
FWIW, SE trim and vinyl tops were available even during the “muscle era” ,1968-70. Not all old Chargers were the “hi-po” Hemi/440 versions. Just as some think “all Plymouth Dusters were rocket sled/muscle cars”, forgetting [or not knowing] the many with slant 6’s.
Not only that the SE could be equipped simultaneously as a R/T in those years, and the 440 was still available exclusively with the Rallye OR SE trims.
Hood ornaments and opera windows and vinyl tops weren’t anathema to performance. We associate the broughamy PLC era as a time of low performance but it was simply a shift in cosmetics, coinciding with skyrocketing insurance costs, the fuel crisis, unleaded gas and tightening emissions is why we corollate them together, but its not as if a PLC buyer in the 70s wouldn’t have liked a 390 horsepower(adjusted for gross) 440 6 pack Cordoba in 1975, they didn’t want the drawbacks of it, and the manufacturers simply couldn’t produce engines like that anymore.
In an alternate universe had these factors coincided 5 years earlier people might regard the 69 Charger, Chevelle, Mustang etc as malaise designs and prop up the early-mid 60s iterations as the ultimate Muscle cars. In another alternate universe where these factors never happened we might have regarded cars like the Charger SE R/T as well as the Monte Carlo SS, Grand Prix SJ, Cutlass Supreme SX, and whatever else could have existed as stunning Duesenbergesque baroque high performance machines.
It’s just a matter of perception, just like you point out that most regular Chargers and Dusters were in reality docile, their rare high performance peers elevate their status – a rising tide lifts all boats.