68 round marker lights

[thereverend]

I have to be honest...I don't like the 68 round marker lights at all.  I heard them described as "whale eyes"...I agree.  Just my $.02 though

So, I've seen other 68's that just weld the holes shut...don't they have to have SOMETHING?  I know 69 only had reflectors, 70 had lights and retroflectors....but what's the story about nothing at all?  Isn't that illegal and asking for the red lights to come on in your rearview?

What have you all done?

[HANDM]

Most people wouldn't notice, same would go for the cops.........

[DTB]

I would say it probably depends on the state but on a car that old you could probably get away with it in most places. In the classic truck world the side marker lights are filled in pretty commonly. And there are plenty of Generals running around without markers.Personally I don't like the 68 markers either. I don't know if it's so much the shape as it is the placement being so high on the fenders compared to the 69 and 70 models.

[don duick]

yeah I dont like them either the 68 charger would be 100% perfect car without them. If I bought a 68 in good condition I would leave them. If I was doing bodywork and paint then I would weld the holes. As being Illegal I would take a punt and try my luck. If I got caught I would play dumb and say I did not know. What is the worst that can happen? a defect notice and then drill out the holes and install them.

[Ghoste]

It's one of the features I really like on the 68 model Dodge and Plymouth cars but if you can't live with them I wouldn't sweat the legality, I'm sure 95% of the police on the road today would have no idea.

[VegasCharger]

It's one of the features I really like on the 68 model Dodge and Plymouth cars but if you can't live with them I wouldn't sweat the legality, I'm sure 95% of the police on the road today would have no idea.

[Baldwinvette77]

I speak only for ontario, but they aren't required on 1968-1970  cars  and as for the 70's cars, i agree, noone would know or remember 

[Ghoste]

Are you certain? 

[myk]

It's one of the features I really like on the 68 model Dodge and Plymouth cars but if you can't live with them I wouldn't sweat the legality, I'm sure 95% of the police on the road today would have no idea.

I love the side markers on the 68's, along with every other feature of that year.  I'd argue that it's the best year of the 2nd gens...

[Ghoste]

What?  Based on a single cool feature?  1969 was the best year for styling so I guess I just don't understand your thought process here.

[kanadanmajava]

Here in Finland having red side markers is illegal so usually all side markers are disabled or removed from American cars (which is legal). The rear ones could be of course changed to orange bit it depends if you like to have as little lights as possible or the opposite. The orange front parking lights are also illegal here (but those you just cannot remove) but that shouldn't be a problem with Chargers.

The French guy who had an original European '68 Charger seemed to have red rear side markers in is car but hard to say if they were working. Its possible that the red ones were legal in other European countries.

[RECHRGD]

I love the side markers!  But if you want them gone, I see no legal problem at all.  They are not required on new cars, so why would police want to enforce a 46 year old, obsolete requirement.........

[bill440rt]

What?  Based on a single cool feature?  1969 was the best year for styling so I guess I just don't understand your thought process here.

     

I respectfully disagree.      Admittedly, the '69 is my least favorite of the 2nd gens, styling-wise. 

Love the round '68 side markers!!    They compliment the round tail lamps beautifully. Very classy design.
They cheapened out in '69 with plain reflectors. The '70 side markers also flow well with the front bumper and wide tail lights.

[Dino]

Are you guys still bickering over which one is the best?   

If you have to make the argument based on small design changes then I think it's safe to say they are all friggin' awesome! 

I loved my '68 and I love my '69, and at no time do I feel anything less than super stoked driving one of these beasts.

OP, I would doubt anyone would pull you over for ditching the side markers.

[Ghoste]

Nah, its just like brothers needling each other a bit. 

[Dino]

Ah yes, nothing like sibling rivalry.   

[MxRacer855]

I'm definitely a fan of the round side marker lights on the 68's... but if you chose to eliminate them, then I really believe you'll be fine. Cars these days are made to pass certain standards. Obviously cars back then didn't have to meet todays requirements, so it's difficult for a police officer to discern whether or not there is supposed to be something there in the first place.

Minor difference to the law, big difference to us if you love/hate them. I would definitely do what you want to without any regard for state law in this instance. It just seems so minor and trivial for something that makes such a large difference to the owner. Take antennas for instance... I can't stand it, so we eliminated it altogether. No regrets! 

[69wannabe]

When I first bought my car it was and kinda still is a 68 and when I was running it that way as a 68 I liked the 68 marker's and had all of them working which I thought was an added bonus that they were actually working lights!!! I bought the car at a real deal running and driving for less than 4 grand but I really wanted a 69 model but for that price and me being very slim with what I could actually spend I paid the guy and drove it home. I had no problems with the 68 grille which looks great to me but them round taillights had to go!!! When I decided to do the conversion the taillights were the first thing to get changed. I drove it for several years with 69 taillights and a 68 grille in it and still sporting the 68 markers. Finally swapped out the grille and drove it a few more years with the 68 markers but they were rarely noticed unless it was a true mopar fan. Finally got the 69 rear valence and fenders and quarters to make the outside appearance all 69 features. If it's a 68 yeah I like the whale eye's because they are supposed to be there and they look good at night when they are working!!!

[bull]

It's hard for me to believe someone would hate the round markers enough to choose to endure the monumental hassle removing them would create.

[John_Kunkel]

1969 was the best year for styling

Repeated polls on this forum tell a different story.

[F8-4life]

69 marker lights look good mounted lower & rectangular, but they are cheap reflectors.
68 lights are more classy imo being actual lights w/ chrome bezels.
I like them both but I'm also glad the 68  lights match the rest of the car and same on the 69 , if that makes sense.

[JB400]

68 marker light= chrome pimple on a great looking body.   




                                                                                                       

[squeakfinder]

      I'm sure I've read someplace that they are not required. Now some trailers require them because of there length.

[F8-4life]

68 marker light= chrome pimple on a great looking body.

bs

[troy.70R/T]

I like them both ways. It does make the car look cleaner without them.

[Dino]

I always liked the side markers.  Both the aesthetics and the fact they actually work.  I need to change my 69 side reflectors into turn signals as well.  Wasn't there a kit for that?

I always loved 68's, especially the seat pattern.  Never was a big fan of the console top, but I can say the same for the 69 console with its fake wood.  Love the grille but again love the 69 grille as well, 70  little less but not enough to bitch about.   

The only part of the 68 I never really liked were the tail lights.  I don't dislike them as much as some seem to do but for me there's no contest with the 69 lights. 

Still, that's some serious nitpicking, I love both like nothing else.  The 70 would be my least favorite but it's still an awesome car that I would love to own.  I hate the door scoops though.   

[Ghoste]

Never heard of a kit to convert the 69 reflectors that way but there well could be. 

[Dino]

Maybe I'm bing overly optimistic. Sometimes it would be nice not having to build stuff myself and just order something.   

[Charger-Bodie]

Never heard of a kit to convert the 69 reflectors that way but there well could be. 

Someone made an les kit for them to be lights, but I don't know about turn signals.

I always liked the side markers.  Both the aesthetics and the fact they actually work.  I need to change my 69 side reflectors into turn signals as well.  Wasn't there a kit for that?

I always loved 68's, especially the seat pattern.  Never was a big fan of the console top, but I can say the same for the 69 console with its fake wood.  Love the grille but again love the 69 grille as well, 70  little less but not enough to bitch about.  

The only part of the 68 I never really liked were the tail lights.  I don't dislike them as much as some seem to do but for me there's no contest with the 69 lights.  

Still, that's some serious nitpicking, I love both like nothing else.  The 70 would be my least favorite but it's still an awesome car that I would love to own.  I hate the door scoops though.  

[Dino]

I'll just get some spare reflectors and the housings of something with a socket.  Hooking them up to the turn signal circuit is easy enough.  I suppose I can adapt 70 Charger turn signals but someone here did this with A body housings.  A383wing?

[Daytona R/T SE]

I bought the kit to make the '69 side markers light up.

It was over $300 bucks.

It sucked giant donkey balls. 

I sent it back.

I waited weeks and weeks for it.

They sent me junk.

I was pissed.





As far as making the side markers into turn signals...

Why ? 

[Dino]

For clarity.  Having only the tail lights and parking lamps signal is not enough.  I'd like some turn signals on the side as well.  I'm not going to spend hundreds on it though, it's not worth that much to me, but if I can get some actual use out of those reflectors by investing a few bucks and my time then I think it'll be worth it. I drive this car a lot and anything that helps people pay attention is a good thing.   

[Mytur Binsdirti]

I have to be honest...I don't like the 68 round marker lights at all.  I heard them described as "whale eyes"...I agree.  Just my $.02 though

From someone who's avatar features a hideous orange 69 Charger with a giant 01 the door, what else would one expect?   

[thereverend]

By "hideous" I think you mean "iconic".   

[Ghoste]

To be fair, your sig indicates you own a 68 so you must like them somewhat. 

[Ghoste]

1969 was the best year for styling

Repeated polls on this forum tell a different story.

Oh c'mon now, trusting polls is like following network news for unbiased current event coverage.   

[Mytur Binsdirti]

By "hideous" I think you mean "iconic".   

As iconic as the Charlie's Angels Mustang II.   

[Ghoste]

Funny you mention that because my Ford buddies have as much love for the Mustang II as we do for Omnichargers. (one guy even was looking for one to buy and keep behind his shop and beat on it with a sledgehammer whenever he was frustrated or angry)  Yet, right now there seems to be a pile of 1:18 diecasts of that thing, somebody must love the Farrah Mustangs?

[Mytur Binsdirti]

Funny you mention that because my Ford buddies have as much love for the Mustang II as we do for Omnichargers. (one guy even was looking for one to buy and keep behind his shop and beat on it with a sledgehammer whenever he was frustrated or angry)  Yet, right now there seems to be a pile of 1:18 diecasts of that thing, somebody must love the Farrah Mustangs?

Even worse; try bringing up Dodge Shelbys to a Shelby Mustang guy. 

[wingcar]

REGULATION: FMVSS #108 for sidemarker lights and reflectors specifies amber front and red rear sidemarker lamps and reflectors. The regulation initially required lights OR reflectors on vehicles made after 1 January 1968. This was amended to require lights AND reflectors on vehicles made after 1 January 1970. These side-facing devices make the vehicle's presence, position and direction of travel clearly visible from oblique angles. The lamps are wired so as to illuminate whenever the vehicles parking and tail lamps are on.

At Chrysler they decided to do side marker lights in 1968. All vehicles except Imperial used the same side marker light design. Except for the difference in lens color they were the same lamp for the front fender and rear quarter panel. This simplification saved them a lot of money.

During the 1968 model year they got a new Product Development (Product Planning, Styling and Engineering) Vice President by the name of Leroy Bornhouser. They called him Bornie. Bornie took issue with the appearance of the 1968 side marker lights which he said looked like "whales' eyes." He ordered them to put side markers on the car in 1969 that were more attractive - more integrated with the sheet metal. So in 1969 they went to flush reflectors (no bulbs) that were a different design for each carline and each "crash program" to meet 1969 model production.

The 1969 reflectors didn't meet the amended 1970 standard which required lamps and reflectors so they had to design and tool the side marker indicators again.

[JB400]

Doesn't matter what is on the side if the driver doesn't use the turn signal.

[bill440rt]

The '68 Dodge side markers were different than Plymouth.
If you look closely the Dodge marker housings are "peaked" to flow with the body line.
Plymouth ones are smooth. 

[VegasCharger]

When I first bought my car it was and kinda still is a 68 and when I was running it that way as a 68 I liked the 68 marker's and had all of them working which I thought was an added bonus that they were actually working lights!!! I bought the car at a real deal running and driving for less than 4 grand but I really wanted a 69 model but for that price and me being very slim with what I could actually spend I paid the guy and drove it home. I had no problems with the 68 grille which looks great to me but them round taillights had to go!!! When I decided to do the conversion the taillights were the first thing to get changed. I drove it for several years with 69 taillights and a 68 grille in it and still sporting the 68 markers. Finally swapped out the grille and drove it a few more years with the 68 markers but they were rarely noticed unless it was a true mopar fan. Finally got the 69 rear valence and fenders and quarters to make the outside appearance all 69 features. If it's a 68 yeah I like the whale eye's because they are supposed to be there and they look good at night when they are working!!!

According to the highlighted bold red, if this was the sequence that you drove your charger, did you not have any reverse lamps during that span

[Ghoste]

Hey, yeah what he said. 

[thereverend]

Love the 68...just not the marker lights.   Since my car is currently in primer and body phase....I think they are going to be welded shut.   

They honestly remind me of those round reflectors we had at the end of our driveway so the school bus wouldn't it the ditch or the mailbox.   HAHA!

great discussion!

To be fair, your sig indicates you own a 68 so you must like them somewhat. 

[hatersaurusrex]

I put all new quarters/fenders on my '68 and am keeping the marker lights.  It's a personal preference thing - to me it looks more '60's classic muscle car' than an orange piece of plastic does.      In fact - If I had a '69 I'd delete the markers.  Just not a fan.

I think the chrome-trimmed ones on the '70 look the best of the three though - in terms of appearance and placement.  The '69 ones just look like an afterthought to me, whereas the '68 and '70 look like they're supposed to be there.

I do love the '69's taillights though - best looking ass-end of any Mopar period.   I also love the '68's round lights and think they go with the car - though I'm probably in the minority on that one (outside of other '68 owners).  Some people say it looks like a Chevy - big whoop.  They did make some nice looking (if not mostly boring) cars.   It also looks like a ton of other slick performance cars - Ferrari included.   There's a reason designers have revisited the 'four round tail lights' look over and over again - it's a classic look.

[69wannabe]

When I first bought my car it was and kinda still is a 68 and when I was running it that way as a 68 I liked the 68 marker's and had all of them working which I thought was an added bonus that they were actually working lights!!! I bought the car at a real deal running and driving for less than 4 grand but I really wanted a 69 model but for that price and me being very slim with what I could actually spend I paid the guy and drove it home. I had no problems with the 68 grille which looks great to me but them round taillights had to go!!! When I decided to do the conversion the taillights were the first thing to get changed. I drove it for several years with 69 taillights and a 68 grille in it and still sporting the 68 markers. Finally swapped out the grille and drove it a few more years with the 68 markers but they were rarely noticed unless it was a true mopar fan. Finally got the 69 rear valence and fenders and quarters to make the outside appearance all 69 features. If it's a 68 yeah I like the whale eye's because they are supposed to be there and they look good at night when they are working!!!

According to the highlighted bold red, if this was the sequence that you drove your charger, did you not have any reverse lamps during that span

Thats correct, no reverse lights for several years and hardly anyone noticed. The taillights and grille are the biggest identifier's for most people that don't know all the real details between the two year models. They work now tho.... 

[69wannabe]

At that time it was a general lee and alot of them cars were done the same way with no reverse lights so it worked fine with the uniform!!!!

[bull]

I'm a firm believer in the notion of leaving the cars alone, especially when it comes to body design. If someone does not like something about a 68 compared to a 69 or 66 or 70, whatever, fine, leave it alone. If you want your 68 to look like a 69 sell it to someone who likes 68s and buy a 69. If you want your Dodge to look like a Ford, sell your Dodge and buy a Ford. Easy.

[Ghoste]

 100%!!!!

[VegasCharger]

I'm a firm believer in the notion of leaving the cars alone, especially when it comes to body design. If someone does not like something about a 68 compared to a 69 or 66 or 70, whatever, fine, leave it alone. If you want your 68 to look like a 69 sell it to someone who likes 68s and buy a 69. If you want your Dodge to look like a Ford, sell your Dodge and buy a Ford. Easy.

AMEN to that BULL

Thats correct, no reverse lights for several years and hardly anyone noticed. The taillights and grille are the biggest identifier's for most people that don't know all the real details between the two year models. They work now tho.... 

Thanks for the clarity

[fy469rtse]

Dino,
i did mine , when lights are on , leds functioning led tailights , just beautiful, love the side marker lights
hated that they were just reflectors
went to a lot of trouble to put mine in , see if you can tell  what model chrysler product i used , very close in appearance to the chargers size shape, although i think the sides lack a bit of bling , so chrome plated the bezels,
will post some photos soon and update my thread     

[69wannabe]

I'm a firm believer in the notion of leaving the cars alone, especially when it comes to body design. If someone does not like something about a 68 compared to a 69 or 66 or 70, whatever, fine, leave it alone. If you want your 68 to look like a 69 sell it to someone who likes 68s and buy a 69. If you want your Dodge to look like a Ford, sell your Dodge and buy a Ford. Easy.

Not necessarily that easy, I was looking for a 69 when I ran across my 68. Even in the late 90's a running and driving 69 charger was very hard to come up with for a decent price. I bought my charger at a deal but it still was in need of work even though it was a running and driving car. A standard charger/non R/T with nothing matching under the hood and the tranny wasn't matching either. When I bought it I had every intention of making it what I wanted it to be and with the deal I got it for and all the work it took and parts I still got less in it than trying to come up with a 69 that is as good as what I got now. I'm very happy with the car now and pleased with how the conversion turned out. If it was all matching number or an R/T I would not have done the conversion on it but it wasn't.

[bull]

Nobody said it was easy. I searched for at least a year before I bought my car and I almost bought a 69 before that. Not easy but it happens all the time.

[8WHEELER]

Nobody said it was easy. I searched for at least a year before I bought my car and I almost bought a 69 before that. Not easy but it happens all the time.

A 69      but there would be no side marker lights   



Dan

[bull]

I'm glad it didn't work out. The seller pulled the rug out from under me but it worked out for the best.

[8WHEELER]

I agree.

Dan

[69wannabe]

Nobody said it was easy. I searched for at least a year before I bought my car and I almost bought a 69 before that. Not easy but it happens all the time.

Bull, I noticed that your 68 is 1 of 74. You still have the 2 barrel on your 383 4 speed?? Mine was also a 68 383 4 -speed with a 2 barrel carb. Like I said it had the wrong year 383 and non matching tranny and bellhousing. I tossed the 2 barrel carb as soon as I got it home, had to have a 4 barrel carb with the 4-speed!! Like I said before if it was a matching number car I would have kept it a 68 but it wasn't so it is what it is now...