News:

It appears that the upgrade forces a login and many, many of you have forgotten your passwords and didn't set up any reminders. Contact me directly through helpmelogin@dodgecharger.com and I'll help sort it out.

Main Menu

Seen this picture before?

Started by Drache, January 07, 2015, 10:39:09 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Drache



Can't be a real Daytona unless I'm mistaken in seeing '70 R/T Door Louvers  :shruggy:
Dart
Racing
Ass
Chasing
Hellion
Extraordinaire

tsmithae

It looks like a clone to me, trunk lid looks full-length... I could be mistaken tho.
Check out my full thread and progress here.

http://www.1970chargerregistry.com/mboard/index.php?topic=119.0

Drache

Just happened across another picture of a different car

Dart
Racing
Ass
Chasing
Hellion
Extraordinaire

Drache

Found a picture of another '70 Daytona Clone

Dart
Racing
Ass
Chasing
Hellion
Extraordinaire

A383Wing

the first pic may be a real Daytona with 70 door scoops...notice pillar chrome...and I don't see the trunk lid leading edge cut out like a full lid..also, no 70 rear side marker light

65post

That was posted on facebook not long ago.If I am not mistaken by a previous owner?
Previously owned Daytona XX29L9B423239 - f8 - white int. - power windows.

hemigeno

Quote from: Drache on January 07, 2015, 10:39:09 PM


Can't be a real Daytona unless I'm mistaken in seeing '70 R/T Door Louvers  :shruggy:

Is the front sway bar the '69 or '70 style?

:scratchchin: :scope:

While originals may not have been quite as impossible to obtain "back in the day", the front wheel lip mouldings do not look short enough to have been regular Charger mouldings straightened to fit the Daytona valence contour/profile.


6bblgt

good call, that's a '69 sway bar!

Moparpoolman

Quote from: Drache on January 07, 2015, 11:27:22 PM
Just happened across another picture of a different car


looks like the "watermelon Daytona" in black and white

hemi68charger

There have been many occassions back in the day where people put '70 sccops on '69's because they look cool........... My guess it's an original XX29..........
Troy
'69 Charger Daytona 440 auto 4.10 Dana ( now 426 HEMI )
'70 Superbird 426 Hemi auto: Lindsley Bonneville Salt Flat world record holder (220.2mph)
Houston Mopar Club Connection

daytonalo

On the first pic the right rear sail panel can be seen clearly showing no plug

wingcar

Quote from: daytonalo on January 08, 2015, 07:59:33 AM
On the first pic the right rear sail panel can be seen clearly showing no plug

That's what I was thinking.....
1970 Daytona Charger SE "clone" (440/Auto)
1967 Charger (360,6-pak/Auto)
2008 Challenger SRT8 BLK (6.1/Auto) 6050 of 6400

TUFCAT

Quote from: hemi68charger on January 08, 2015, 07:35:41 AM
There have been many occassions back in the day where people put '70 sccops on '69's because they look cool........... My guess it's an original XX29..........

I agree. Those '70 door scoops were just plain cool.....and I can totally understand why somebody would add them to a '69 Charger back in the day.  :yesnod:

Quote from: A383Wing on January 07, 2015, 11:37:36 PM
the first pic may be a real Daytona with 70 door scoops...notice pillar chrome...and I don't see the trunk lid leading edge cut out like a full lid..also, no 70 rear side marker light

I think A383Wing might have nailed it.  :think:  Take a close look at the position of the decklid on the red car.

It appears to be a Daytona lid when viewing the rear position of the decklid, and perhaps looks like a Daytona lid "should look" when open?  And one more thing... wouldn't a Daytona decklid appear to end a bit past the sail panel from this angle (like the photo shows) rather than hidden by the sail panel on a normal Charger....?

FJMG

I am not convinced that is the right rear sail panel but more a reflection of an roofline/ fascia of an adjacent building. Seems too low to me? :shruggy:
You can almost believe you see the top corner of the aero window though.

FJMG

But..........
I do wear glasses.

daytonalo

Get better glasses as orange paint can clearly be seen on passenger side inner sail panel  :icon_smile_big:

hemigeno

I'm with Robert/FJMG on this one.  What might otherwise look like red paint on that passenger's side area is, IMHO, a reflection of the guy's shirt standing next to the car.  If it was red paint from the inner face of the flying buttress/sail panel, the size of the sail panel area for the tunneled rear window would be much larger than a normal Charger's.  That would be disproportionate, to me anyway.

Because of the contrast between black interior and the lighter-colored house siding in the background, the reflection does still give us the boundary of the window opening -- which from that angle/viewpoint would be about the same profile for a Daytona/C500 back glass window opening.... and (admittedly) something close to what a non-fastback Charger's sail panel profile would be... which is why I won't criticize Larry or anyone else for disagreeing.

:Twocents:

daytonalo

Notice the black headliner ? It stops @ orig non aero  backlite

hemigeno

Quote from: daytonalo on January 09, 2015, 11:11:54 AM
Notice the black headliner ? It stops @ orig non aero  backlite

In my opinion, that's too big of an area for it to be the inner face of the sail panel, which wasn't that large... again that's just my opinion.  I think it's just the reflection of the guy's shirt.  If they'd only have had digital cameras back in the day...

While it's not exactly the same angle/perspective, below is a picture in which you can see the sail panel area.  Visible, but not as large as what is inferred by the original photo.



DAY CLONA

Quote from: hemigeno on January 09, 2015, 10:42:04 AM
I'm with Robert/FJMG on this one.  What might otherwise look like red paint on that passenger's side area is, IMHO, a reflection of the guy's shirt standing next to the car. 



Agreed, just blow the pic up and you'll see it's a reflection of the guys shirt in the window, nothing more.....it's a "Daytona", or possibly a 500 modified, or..?

GOTWING

i have this pic on my FB page also under "back in the day pics". I also wondered if it was the real deal.

odcics2

Quote from: Moparpoolman on January 08, 2015, 06:02:48 AM
Quote from: Drache on January 07, 2015, 11:27:22 PM
Just happened across another picture of a different car


looks like the "watermelon Daytona" in black and white

It is.  One of the set of 3-4 different angles out there. 
I've never owned anything but a MoPar. Can you say that?

DAY CLONA

Quote from: odcics2 on January 09, 2015, 04:06:28 PM
Quote from: Moparpoolman on January 08, 2015, 06:02:48 AM
Quote from: Drache on January 07, 2015, 11:27:22 PM
Just happened across another picture of a different car


looks like the "watermelon Daytona" in black and white

It is.  One of the set of 3-4 different angles out there.  



Yep...there's the large color poster with the Chrysler photo studio logo, 2 black and white front and rear shots of it in the Hamtramck holding yard (above photo), one over exposed black and white shot where the car appears almost black in color, and there's 2 black and white photos (drivers side front and passenger rear) of the car outside at Cobo Hall, plus I was given another pic of it at an ISCA event in Michigan (late 69/early 70) on display with the "new for 70" panther pink Dodge promo Challenger convertible display, along with some Mr Norms cars and assorted other "new for 70" Chrysler factory displays/cars...so that makes about 7 vintage photos of the car to date...it fell off the "radar" shortly after February 1970 according to those that saw it last at Dodge Main in the Executive parking lot

Mike

TUFCAT

Mike, did you ever find out why (or who) it was originally built for?  :scratchchin:  A car like that had to have a purpose - at least you would think.  Have you ever tracked down the plate numbers to find out who might have had those numbers in '70. Sometimes dealer plates can tell a story based on the numbers, like when issued, possibly where, and to what company.

For example, the 395 may have been issued to a particular dealer or company, and the suffix numbers "33" would ascend for each plate issued to that dealer

DAY CLONA

Quote from: TUFCAT on January 10, 2015, 01:30:38 PM
Mike, did you ever find out why (or who) it was originally built for?  :scratchchin:  A car like that had to have a purpose - at least you would think.  Have you ever tracked down the plate numbers to find out who might have had those numbers in '70. Sometimes dealer plates can tell a story based on the numbers, like when issued, possibly where, and to what company.

For example, the 395 may have been issued to a particular dealer or company, and the suffix numbers "33" would ascend for each plate issued to that dealer


Tufcat,
You are correct as to the plate identification, I just never found anyone with records that far back, the plate was a Michigan 1969 issue


Mike

69DAYTONASE

Quote from: DAY CLONA on January 09, 2015, 12:27:44 PM
Quote from: hemigeno on January 09, 2015, 10:42:04 AM
I'm with Robert/FJMG on this one.  What might otherwise look like red paint on that passenger's side area is, IMHO, a reflection of the guy's shirt standing next to the car. 



Agreed, just blow the pic up and you'll see it's a reflection of the guys shirt in the window, nothing more.....it's a "Daytona", or possibly a 500 modified, or..?

Quite a few indicators here that it's a real Daytona IMO. The A pillar molding, front wheel well trim, trunk lid. I really don't get why anyone would cover up those nice door scallops with a scoop that is rather plain in comparison :scratchchin:
"My other car is a farm tractor"

DAY CLONA

Quote from: 69DAYTONASE on January 10, 2015, 08:45:04 PM
I really don't get why anyone would cover up those nice door scallops with a scoop that is rather plain in comparison :scratchchin:





personally, I've always prefered the 70 Charger R/T styling over the more plain 68/69 styling ques, the dual door scallops always appeared as a distraction to the coke bottle side profile of the car, the 70 scoop helps define/highlight the rear qtr transition into the front portion of the vehicle, plus makes a great place to have an R/T emblem! ;D

charger_fan_4ever

Funny originally the wing cars had a hard time moving off the lots. Because of this im surprised of the cloning back in the day.

Davtona

Quote from: DAY CLONA on January 10, 2015, 09:04:55 PM
personally, I've always prefered the 70 Charger R/T styling over the more plain 68/69 styling ques, the dual door scallops always appeared as a distraction to the coke bottle side profile of the car, the 70 scoop helps define/highlight the rear qtr transition into the front portion of the vehicle, plus makes a great place to have an R/T emblem! ;D

Yes I like the 70 door scoops also. Great place for RT emblems. But if you start talking Hemi cars the perfect place for the Hemi emblems on these cars was on the doors between the scallops. 70 Hemi cars emblems looked like they were just stuck there for lack of any place better. Hemi emblems looked like they were made to go between the door scallops on the 68 & 69 doors.

Redmanf1

That is a MI dealer plate.


Nelson


Quote from: DAY CLONA on January 10, 2015, 01:41:37 PM
Quote from: TUFCAT on January 10, 2015, 01:30:38 PM
Mike, did you ever find out why (or who) it was originally built for?  :scratchchin:  A car like that had to have a purpose - at least you would think.  Have you ever tracked down the plate numbers to find out who might have had those numbers in '70. Sometimes dealer plates can tell a story based on the numbers, like when issued, possibly where, and to what company.

For example, the 395 may have been issued to a particular dealer or company, and the suffix numbers "33" would ascend for each plate issued to that dealer


Tufcat,
You are correct as to the plate identification, I just never found anyone with records that far back, the plate was a Michigan 1969 issue


Mike

odcics2

Quote from: TUFCAT on January 10, 2015, 01:30:38 PM
Mike, did you ever find out why (or who) it was originally built for?  :scratchchin:  A car like that had to have a purpose - at least you would think.  Have you ever tracked down the plate numbers to find out who might have had those numbers in '70. Sometimes dealer plates can tell a story based on the numbers, like when issued, possibly where, and to what company.

For example, the 395 may have been issued to a particular dealer or company, and the suffix numbers "33" would ascend for each plate issued to that dealer

The original B&W photos, which I have, were in a folder marked "McCurrys Daytona".
Got those at a flea market.  I did not know who "McCurry" was back then!   :brickwall:
The original large blown up color 'poster', was hanging in Chrysler Photographic.
I was given that when they were updating their decor. 

Mike - how about sharing that Autorama photo you have??
I've never owned anything but a MoPar. Can you say that?

wingcarenvy

I think I see vinyl top trim on the left C pillar.