Random Pics
- Thread starter Jack Meoff
- Start date
7T8 Custom
Well-Known Member
I`m gonna have to go with top.
Aspen500
Well-Known Member
Honestly, neither of them appeal to me but if I had to choose,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,top.
My choice is the ‘66/67 Charger headlight doors. The cover is on one side and headlights on the other side so if headlights were to turn on with doors closed, the light would be facing the rear of car. Either way (open or closed), it matches the grill.
The park lights are off in the second picture.
I’ve had a ’68 Charger, which used a pair of vacuum motors to open/close the headlight doors (a pretty simple design) and still have a ’70 Chrysler 300 that has an electric motor that operates the electric headlight doors.
This not my car (mine still needs restoration).
What I think is different (for the '70 300's), is the headlight doors and grill are both made of cast iron – which is not something you see now days.
BudW
The park lights are off in the second picture.
I’ve had a ’68 Charger, which used a pair of vacuum motors to open/close the headlight doors (a pretty simple design) and still have a ’70 Chrysler 300 that has an electric motor that operates the electric headlight doors.
This not my car (mine still needs restoration).
What I think is different (for the '70 300's), is the headlight doors and grill are both made of cast iron – which is not something you see now days.
BudW
Aspen500
Well-Known Member
I am forced to go with Chrysler Corp of course! OK not forced, I think Chrysler did it best. My favorite is the '78/'79 Magnum (and St. Regis). Technically not HIDDEN headlights but cool anyways.
I also think what they look like when open plays into favorites. Some look good closed but horrible when open. Chrysler seemed to have more that looked good on or off.
Can't forget the '65(?) Riviera with the clam shell hidden stacked headlamps also.
I also think what they look like when open plays into favorites. Some look good closed but horrible when open. Chrysler seemed to have more that looked good on or off.
Can't forget the '65(?) Riviera with the clam shell hidden stacked headlamps also.
Trey
Well-Known Member
Between the 70 RR and '70 Charger I'd have to go with the Plymouth. Now if it was '69 models it would definitely be the Charger. IMO the '69 Charger is one of the best looking cars ever built. Of the hide away headlight cars I like the look of the Charger best - and I'm a Ford guy. The Camaro is actually an RS/SS, the RS is the only one that came with hideaways. The 67-69 Camaro (and the '65 Riviera) had headlight covers that pivoted side to side rather than up and down like most other manufacturers at the time. I believe Chrysler went to electric motors for the hideaways in '70, about the time everyone was getting away from that design cue. That '70 300 is the first one I've seen with a vinyl top. Great looking c-body.
Trey
Well-Known Member
Ah... the old Bullitt conundrum. Great movie. It ended better for the Mustang... I just think the Charger looked a little better in '68. The Bullitt Mustang just sold a couple months ago for 3.4 mil plus buyers premium.
My personal opinion is that all manufacturers put out their best models in 1969. Mustang, Charger and Camaro, even AMC had the AMX that year. I wished I had one of each.
My personal opinion is that all manufacturers put out their best models in 1969. Mustang, Charger and Camaro, even AMC had the AMX that year. I wished I had one of each.
Last edited:
Aspen500
Well-Known Member
I'd be happy with either car but given the choice of only one, it'd be (of course) the Charger.
Aspen500
Well-Known Member
Fast and Furious car with the cut-off wearing country girl of Hazzard.
XfbodyX
Well-Known Member
Bud isnt your grille a combo of cast aluminum and a mix of cast al and abs on the doors?
Cast iron would be crazy heavy and whole lot of other things.
Id love a 300 but too costly for me.
Cast iron would be crazy heavy and whole lot of other things.
Id love a 300 but too costly for me.
The '70 300 grill weights a good 25+ pounds. The two headlight doors weigh over 5 pounds each.
The front bumper assembly with grill and headlights attached is more than I can carry - back when i was a spring chicken (or however that term goes . . .)
The New Yorker grill and doors are all plastic.
The pre-'74 Imperials used cast iron for grills a few years, and some of those weight in at a good 50+ pounds each. I don't understand why - but it is what they used.
The texture looks like cast iron. I'm not sure what they used to finish it. It doesn't look like paint nor powder coat.
BudW
The front bumper assembly with grill and headlights attached is more than I can carry - back when i was a spring chicken (or however that term goes . . .)
The New Yorker grill and doors are all plastic.
The pre-'74 Imperials used cast iron for grills a few years, and some of those weight in at a good 50+ pounds each. I don't understand why - but it is what they used.
The texture looks like cast iron. I'm not sure what they used to finish it. It doesn't look like paint nor powder coat.
BudW
Oldiron440
Well-Known Member
Gotta love that old Chevelle, a few years back at drag week on his last pass for the week he stood it on the rear bumper for half the track.
7T8 Custom
Well-Known Member
That all looks so familiar. Probably because I spend most of my working life fixing material handling equipment just like that. Operators are all the job security I need.
