Mike67
Well-Known Member
Favs- 66-70 b bodies, 67-68 Darts, 70 Cuda..
Least- k cars for sure, LaBarrons, Diplomats
Least- k cars for sure, LaBarrons, Diplomats
favorite and least favorite mopar
- Thread starter scottmann27
- Start date
Bladecutter
"Pursuit of Shape"
Brain fart....69 Charger 500 Hemi.
I'd put the Hemi under glass in domicile & put in a DOHC aluminum SB hooked to Tremec 6 spd......to IRS. Brembos or Wilwoods,,,6 pots in front, 4 pots in rear. In a perfect world.
I'd put the Hemi under glass in domicile & put in a DOHC aluminum SB hooked to Tremec 6 spd......to IRS. Brembos or Wilwoods,,,6 pots in front, 4 pots in rear. In a perfect world.
mopwrd340
Well-Known Member
Favorite is 69 super bee i like all bodys never really liked E bodys i like just about all mopars
least Favorite any k car with a carb most underpowered pos i have ever driven if they are fuel injected they are fine .
least Favorite any k car with a carb most underpowered pos i have ever driven if they are fuel injected they are fine .
BeeKool
Well-Known Member
B-Bodies only.
'68 Coronet R/Ts & '70 GTX are my favorite but love all 68-70 b-body's, not only badass but they are also absolutely gorgeous. I also like 66-67 Coronets and Satellites.
Least favorite would be 1st generation Chargers.
80s cars don't count, it's not like anew Omni or Horizon were ever countable
'68 Coronet R/Ts & '70 GTX are my favorite but love all 68-70 b-body's, not only badass but they are also absolutely gorgeous. I also like 66-67 Coronets and Satellites.
Least favorite would be 1st generation Chargers.
80s cars don't count, it's not like anew Omni or Horizon were ever countable
Bladecutter
"Pursuit of Shape"
He Who is never supposed to be mentioned here has the NICEST EVER triple black 70 Hemi 'Cuda 4 spd.....Scintillatingly Stellar!
Well it's a warmed factory 440 6 Pak. 4 Speed Pistol. Snug your belt and Pray.
Bladecutter
"Pursuit of Shape"
Challenger I don't jazz over...don't like the waistline peak on sides. 'cuda with clean sides I lean towards. Similar, but better sculpted, more rakish than Camaro.(& I think GM worked off the Goose) I always heard that wheelbase of Challenger is two inches longer than 'cuda. Myth?
Your Mom's 'cuda sure is coming along like a sweet song!
what exactly is a Chrysler Camaro
Bladecutter
"Pursuit of Shape"
The 'lore has gone beforewhat exactly is a Chrysler Camaro
- Local time
- 11:29 AM
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2012
- Messages
- 38,852
- Reaction score
- 141,537
- Location
- Granite Bay CA
Okay guys, get ready to be offended. 
I do not mean to hurt anyones feelings here, the following is just my opinion! I look at what I consider my favorites and have concluded that even with a 318, I'd love them.
I feel that the 1968-70 Chargers are the pinnacle of the Musclecar market. I friggin love these cars. I've only owned one in my 51 years and considering the price to buy and restore one, I'm lucky to have it. I would be happy to own a 68 Coronet R/T if I didn't have the Charger.
My least favorite? (Sorry, can't limit myself to just ONE) Here comes the harsh opinions......
I can't help but find almost everything built before 1967 to be on the NOT list. Can't help it. The odd styling just does not hit the right notes for me. I do like the 64 Sport Fury, the 65-67 Coronet and the Imperials of the 60s. I can appreciate the engineering of the cars I find ugly. The 60-66 Valiant and Barracuda models are on the NOT list too. They were solid and reliable but I cannot stand to look at them. The 1967 Model year was a huge improvement in the A body line, just like 1968 was for the B bodies.
Finally, I have to say that the 1971 b bodies were a big letdown after the success of the 68-70. I'd drive a 71-74 Charger before a 71-72 Road Runner though. The Dodge styling (Except for that odd quarter window) was more appealing to me. The 73-74 Road Runner was a nice looking car compared to the 71-72.
Let the bashing and red Xs begin!
I do not mean to hurt anyones feelings here, the following is just my opinion! I look at what I consider my favorites and have concluded that even with a 318, I'd love them.
I feel that the 1968-70 Chargers are the pinnacle of the Musclecar market. I friggin love these cars. I've only owned one in my 51 years and considering the price to buy and restore one, I'm lucky to have it. I would be happy to own a 68 Coronet R/T if I didn't have the Charger.
My least favorite? (Sorry, can't limit myself to just ONE) Here comes the harsh opinions......
I can't help but find almost everything built before 1967 to be on the NOT list. Can't help it. The odd styling just does not hit the right notes for me. I do like the 64 Sport Fury, the 65-67 Coronet and the Imperials of the 60s. I can appreciate the engineering of the cars I find ugly. The 60-66 Valiant and Barracuda models are on the NOT list too. They were solid and reliable but I cannot stand to look at them. The 1967 Model year was a huge improvement in the A body line, just like 1968 was for the B bodies.
Finally, I have to say that the 1971 b bodies were a big letdown after the success of the 68-70. I'd drive a 71-74 Charger before a 71-72 Road Runner though. The Dodge styling (Except for that odd quarter window) was more appealing to me. The 73-74 Road Runner was a nice looking car compared to the 71-72.
Let the bashing and red Xs begin!
- Local time
- 11:29 AM
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2012
- Messages
- 38,852
- Reaction score
- 141,537
- Location
- Granite Bay CA
Did he do something to get banned from the site ?
Okay guys, get ready to be offended.
I do not mean to hurt anyones feelings here, the following is just my opinion! I look at what I consider my favorites and have concluded that even with a 318, I'd love them.
I feel that the 1968-70 Chargers are the pinnacle of the Musclecar market. I friggin love these cars. I've only owned one in my 51 years and considering the price to buy and restore one, I'm lucky to have it. I would be happy to own a 68 Coronet R/T if I didn't have the Charger.
My least favorite? (Sorry, can't limit myself to just ONE) Here comes the harsh opinions......
I can't help but find almost everything built before 1967 to be on the NOT list. Can't help it. The odd styling just does not hit the right notes for me. I do like the 64 Sport Fury, the 65-67 Coronet and the Imperials of the 60s. I can appreciate the engineering of the cars I find ugly. The 60-66 Valiant and Barracuda models are on the NOT list too. They were solid and reliable but I cannot stand to look at them. The 1967 Model year was a huge improvement in the A body line, just like 1968 was for the B bodies.
Finally, I have to say that the 1971 b bodies were a big letdown after the success of the 68-70. I'd drive a 71-74 Charger before a 71-72 Road Runner though. The Dodge styling (Except for that odd quarter window) was more appealing to me. The 73-74 Road Runner was a nice looking car compared to the 71-72.
Let the bashing and red Xs begin!
no need for bashing everyone is entitled to an opinion
stick to your guns that leaves more of the desirable one for the rest of us 
3rd gens handle better, have more desirable options and just look " bad *** " in any form you want to take them
Of course the favorite of mine is a 69 Roadrunner!!!Okay guys, get ready to be offended.
I do not mean to hurt anyones feelings here, the following is just my opinion! I look at what I consider my favorites and have concluded that even with a 318, I'd love them.
I feel that the 1968-70 Chargers are the pinnacle of the Musclecar market. I friggin love these cars. I've only owned one in my 51 years and considering the price to buy and restore one, I'm lucky to have it. I would be happy to own a 68 Coronet R/T if I didn't have the Charger.
My least favorite? (Sorry, can't limit myself to just ONE) Here comes the harsh opinions......
I can't help but find almost everything built before 1967 to be on the NOT list. Can't help it. The odd styling just does not hit the right notes for me. I do like the 64 Sport Fury, the 65-67 Coronet and the Imperials of the 60s. I can appreciate the engineering of the cars I find ugly. The 60-66 Valiant and Barracuda models are on the NOT list too. They were solid and reliable but I cannot stand to look at them. The 1967 Model year was a huge improvement in the A body line, just like 1968 was for the B bodies.
Finally, I have to say that the 1971 b bodies were a big letdown after the success of the 68-70. I'd drive a 71-74 Charger before a 71-72 Road Runner though. The Dodge styling (Except for that odd quarter window) was more appealing to me. The 73-74 Road Runner was a nice looking car compared to the 71-72.
Let the bashing and red Xs begin!
Least would be an Aries K woody wagon- no wait, if it's got a turbo, it's cool
OK, the Omni- no wait, if it's a GLH it's cool
OK how about a 73 Dodge Colts.
Like others here I was never a fan of the coke bottle Chargers until seeing this one on the new Mopar calendar. It's really haunting me.
- Local time
- 11:29 AM
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2012
- Messages
- 38,852
- Reaction score
- 141,537
- Location
- Granite Bay CA
3rd gens handle better?
Stock to stock? Maybe. I have never compared them. I modified my 70 with big torsion bars, anti-sway bars, Bilstein shocks, urethane bushings, frame connectors.....Handling is very important to me. These cars are all very similar underneath so what improves one car will improve others. You can make these cars handle well but some you just cannot make up for their exterior styling.
I don't expect nor want everyone to feel the same as I do.
Stock to stock? Maybe. I have never compared them. I modified my 70 with big torsion bars, anti-sway bars, Bilstein shocks, urethane bushings, frame connectors.....Handling is very important to me. These cars are all very similar underneath so what improves one car will improve others. You can make these cars handle well but some you just cannot make up for their exterior styling.
I don't expect nor want everyone to feel the same as I do.
Superb Bee
Well-Known Member
My favorite would DEFINITLEY be the 70' Coronet, in any trim, post car, hard top, convertible, 440, super bee, R/T, 500, I don't care, the car is awesome...
It just seemed so different back then, split wrap around bumpers, real muscle car quart panels, melted together with an option of hoods either the new style of the power bulge or the old school dual scoops giving it a breath of the old GTX into it. And if you were into the cartoon side of the cars you had the BEE, if you were more reserved and into the serious muscle car you had the R/T, want to take the family on a trip across country in comfort and style you had the 500, budget comfortable grocery getter -440 with a slant (wagon, 2 door, or 4 door), and if you lived near the beach you could get the convertible in any of the above flavors (minus wagon and 4 dr of course).
I think the bumpers always drew me to the car, from the day I seen the first black and white pictures in the weekly new paper dealer ship adds at Crown Chrysler in late 69.. All the other companies were shaving bumpers down, look at the Camaro, corvette, mustang, torino, cougar, gto (hardly had a bumper to look at), all besides maybe the grand prix with that god awful center bumper house, look at all the cars from 70, the cornet is nice.
The charger in 70 is also really nice and my favorite charger year, I always say the best charger is one with 70 nose and doors and 68 tail lights..
As far as the worst thing Chrysler made, I would say I am with the majority of what I like that being 68-70 b and 70-74 e, that being said pre 68 I am not a fan of and 69 and down barracudas as pretty low on my list of cars I would like to drive to school...
Then of course everything they made from 74 to 94 was a hideous mess, either too boxy or too round, too slow or too slow. I think Chrysler missed a big part of the business by turning its back on performance all together through them years, them gross little 4cyl turbo cars don't count.
In the late 80s when performance was starting to come back gm was doing the g and b bodies, as well as the vette, even ford had the stang, I would have liked to see a clean strong Charger and road runner, they wouldn't have been able to compete with the Camaro or vette, but they could have put a dent in the monte and grand national sales..
A 360 with a bit more compression, cleaned up head, and a little cam (5.9hp to compete with 5.0hos and 5.7s), in a 3200lb 2 door, with some clean long lines, bucket seats, and console. AND IF THEY MADE IT AVAILABEL IN A MANUAL, game over.
5.9l manual 2 door bucket seat dodge I would have bought it..
It just seemed so different back then, split wrap around bumpers, real muscle car quart panels, melted together with an option of hoods either the new style of the power bulge or the old school dual scoops giving it a breath of the old GTX into it. And if you were into the cartoon side of the cars you had the BEE, if you were more reserved and into the serious muscle car you had the R/T, want to take the family on a trip across country in comfort and style you had the 500, budget comfortable grocery getter -440 with a slant (wagon, 2 door, or 4 door), and if you lived near the beach you could get the convertible in any of the above flavors (minus wagon and 4 dr of course).
I think the bumpers always drew me to the car, from the day I seen the first black and white pictures in the weekly new paper dealer ship adds at Crown Chrysler in late 69.. All the other companies were shaving bumpers down, look at the Camaro, corvette, mustang, torino, cougar, gto (hardly had a bumper to look at), all besides maybe the grand prix with that god awful center bumper house, look at all the cars from 70, the cornet is nice.
The charger in 70 is also really nice and my favorite charger year, I always say the best charger is one with 70 nose and doors and 68 tail lights..
As far as the worst thing Chrysler made, I would say I am with the majority of what I like that being 68-70 b and 70-74 e, that being said pre 68 I am not a fan of and 69 and down barracudas as pretty low on my list of cars I would like to drive to school...
Then of course everything they made from 74 to 94 was a hideous mess, either too boxy or too round, too slow or too slow. I think Chrysler missed a big part of the business by turning its back on performance all together through them years, them gross little 4cyl turbo cars don't count.
In the late 80s when performance was starting to come back gm was doing the g and b bodies, as well as the vette, even ford had the stang, I would have liked to see a clean strong Charger and road runner, they wouldn't have been able to compete with the Camaro or vette, but they could have put a dent in the monte and grand national sales..
A 360 with a bit more compression, cleaned up head, and a little cam (5.9hp to compete with 5.0hos and 5.7s), in a 3200lb 2 door, with some clean long lines, bucket seats, and console. AND IF THEY MADE IT AVAILABEL IN A MANUAL, game over.
5.9l manual 2 door bucket seat dodge I would have bought it..
mmissile
Well-Known Member
Challenger I don't jazz over...don't like the waistline peak on sides. 'cuda with clean sides I lean towards. Similar, but better sculpted, more rakish than Camaro.(& I think GM worked off the Goose) I always heard that wheelbase of Challenger is two inches longer than 'cuda. Myth?
Your Mom's 'cuda sure is coming along like a sweet song!
Challenger is longer in wheelbase. My first nice car was a 71 Challenger with a 383/auto. B5/black/black, with a T/A hood, and big and little Ansens. I dug that car, as a kid.
XMAN JR
Well-Known Member
I can say that I have restored or help restore 67-73 A bodies, 62-71 B bodies. I have done 1 E body & I will never do another. Things are more expensive ( if you can believe it ) & fitment on things are not that good. I should say I will never do another for myself. Was not impressed
68 Charger Rings All The Bells!! Nothing Finer!!
Similar threads
