Giant sports car ?

[myk]

Yes, the wheelbase was quite a bit longer then the GM intermediates like the Chevelle but still a mid size car.

To me, these cars are NOT that big.  I think the world's just gotten too used to driving around in econo-boxes...

[Ghoste]

I totally agree with you.

[challenger70]

While a bit shorter, e-bodies are a bit wider.  Neither is really "smaller", just bigger in different areas.

[1974dodgecharger]

Yes, the wheelbase was quite a bit longer then the GM intermediates like the Chevelle but still a mid size car.

To me, these cars are NOT that big.  I think the world's just gotten too used to driving around in econo-boxes...

Yup, they look big but in reality not so big as folks think they are.

[don duick]

they are not that big on the inside either.

[Ghoste]

A lot more room inside than a Duster or Mustang or any of that ilk.

[Mike DC]

 
 
Line up a row of guys between 6' and 7' tall, and a 6'0" guy in the row looks short.  That doesn't mean 6'0" is really a short height in the big picture.  

Chargers aren't huge compared to a lot of the popular musclecars, and they are downright small compared to many modern cars & trucks.  But they still aren't small IMHO.  



A real sports car doesn't have much excuse to weigh over 3000 lbs.  Especially not when its age allows it to avoid modern regulations and luxury options.  

Chargers are sporty passenger sedans, not sports cars.  

[Lord Warlock]

While i wouldn't mind seeing a downsized version of the 2nd gen, I'm not sure how it would be possible without ruining the looks overall.  The 2nd gen by far has been the sexiest car i've owned. The stealth I also have is also pretty sharp to look at but its as heavy as the charger is even if it is a couple feet shorter.

[hemihead]

An A - Body Dart is what people think is a big car today . Chargers back then were considered Mid - Size .
As far as looks go , I had a 70 Charger as my first car but I prefer my 73 . Cleaner and more aerodynamic .

[Tilar]

I want to barf every time I see this.

Aint that cute!! 

All kidding aside, although I'm not a fan of that car I have seen a lot worse.

[don duick]

yeah I remember many years ago I didnt think of it being that big as I also used to like chevy impalas,  Plymouth furys and galaxies. Recently, I had it parked and surrounded by Japanese cars, at that particular moment it just looked so long.

[myk]

Not that big; length, width, height, not much has changed over the years IMO...

[Cooter]

And people wanna get bent over the DOH 'destroying' 2nd gen Chargers.......
This abortion should never have been created while eating shrooms.

[Dino]

The size is just right.  A bit cramped in the backseat but that's a small price to pay, find shorter friends.   

The rear quarters alone are over 7 feet long and it's these things that makes it look so damn sexy.  Think of it as a 6' + supermodel.  Those legs just go on and on.   

If the Camaro was longer and had more smooth lines, it would be a way more attractive car.  Just like the fastback Mustang looks so much better because of the long rear deck which the plain stang never had.  Those long lines make a car.  Think of all those futuristic 40-50's cars.  Long lines make it hot.

You can change the wheels and some details here and there, but it's very easy to go too far on a 2nd gen and mess it up. 

[Ghoste]

And people wanna get bent over the DOH 'destroying' 2nd gen Chargers.......
This abortion should never have been created while eating shrooms.

True.  Of course the GL can still claim legions of fans, this abortion was only loved by its creator and even he doesn`t want to keep it. 

[1974dodgecharger]

Not that big; length, width, height, not much has changed over the years IMO...

Sure looks fckin cooler thats for damn sure....

[Mike DC]

 
The shortened '68 wasn't really a terrible idea.  I think they had some good ideas about where to shorten the car but they took too much out in those places when they did it.  I would be curious to see how it might look with more like 1/2 or 1/3rd as much removed in all those same places. 

[Ghoste]

I know how it would look. 

Some things are just right the first time and all of these schemes to booger up the 2nd gen Charger really amount to mustaches on the Mona Lisa as far as I'm concerned.

[ws23rt]

Yes, the wheelbase was quite a bit longer then the GM intermediates like the Chevelle but still a mid size car.

To me, these cars are NOT that big.  I think the world's just gotten too used to driving around in econo-boxes...

I agree they are not big but seem so because the average size car these days is smaller and we have grown accustom to them.

When these cars were new they were called mid sized.

[TPR]

I think you can't improve on perfect.
The 2nd Gen is the longest and widest car I've ever driven and I like it that way.
When I had my house built back in '05, my main priority was to make sure my garage was at least 5.2832 metres [208 inches].
It took me another seven years to put a Charger in that space, but I'm glad I thought ahead.
TPR

[UH60L]

It's funny, I was talking to a friend about this the other day.  Back when I was a kid and decided I had to have a '68 or '69 charger, I really never realized how big of a car they were.

It wasn't until I climbed in and drove mine home from Utah to Oregon that it hit me.  The quarters were huge and made it hard to see looking in the side mirror, and with the interior mostly stripped out it felt like I was sitting in a huge tin can.

I think, as others have stated, the size is perfect for the styling.  You couldn't change one without screwing up the other.

As a side note, I've gotten into a few arguments with people about a certain new sedan and the number of doors it should have, and a common response is "it just wouldn't look good with two doors because it the doors would be too long, and big cars look strange with two doors".  So I point out that a '69 charger is 7.8 inches longer than the current sedan...and it looks great with just two doors.....

On the flip side, I personally think small/little cars look funny with 4 doors.....because....they're small, which my mind associates with sporty...

So, size and design, there is definitely a huge correlation, and I think they got it perfect with the '68 to '70.  I think they got it pretty good with the '66 to '67 and '71 to '74 too, but the second gen...there's just something sexy/beautiful/intimidating/WOW about them!

There are a few things in life that I get excited about the way I did when I was a little kid, and the second gen charger is one of them.  I've been known to pull a U-turn and chase/follow/and "give huge grinning thumbs up at" a second gen charger.  I've almost crashed my car because of spotting one.  It's funny, my wife and kids will spot them now too, and come home and tell me all bout it, color, R/T badges, which way it was headed....  :-)

[myk]

Not that big; length, width, height, not much has changed over the years IMO...

Sure looks fckin cooler thats for damn sure....

I should take a new group photo, now that the Charger's finally had it's body and paint done...

[don duick]

nice collection Myk, of course charger looks the best, even in that condition

[Mike DC]

 
I think part of the reason for this whole topic is because Mopar never quite nailed the ponycar market.  Not like the Camaro, the Firebird, the Mustang, or the Cougar.  


An ideal ponycar needed to be mostly based on the small car platform for a few different reasons. The Mopar A-bodies were nice cars in 2dr form but they never got the kind of dedicated cool car that the other brands had.  The styling just wasn't quite there.  The Darts are a little bit too conservative/utilitarian.  The pre-1970 Barracudas had too much of the early/mid-1960s Mopar look (which has aged badly IMHO).  


Mopar's stylists did a great job with the E-bodies, based very heavily on the B-body platform.  But the cars still aren't really shaped quite right because of the underlying proportions.  The proportions were better on the B-bodies and the stylists hit the ball out of the park on the '68-70s.  
 

[Ghoste]

I think they nailed it, they just came in too late.  Mopar had two bad styling experiences that nearly killed them, the Airflow series and the downsized 62's.  It made the company frightened to take the lead in my opinion and they got a bad habit of waiting to see what GM would do.
68-70 Charger being an exception.
Its all just a theory though.