Question for an E body fan

[FY1 Charger]

I'm tossing around the idea of getting a challenger or a 'cuda, I know the basics for the cars but what how many models where avaliable in 1970? For the challenger was there just the base, the SE and the R/T? For the 'cuda was there just the barracuda, the gran coupe and the 'Cuda? Or are the barracuda and the cuda the same model? Another thing I heard was that the 340 engine was the best for the power to weight ratio the E body platform. Any help and clarification would be appreciated, thanks.

[Alaskan_TA]

'70 Challenger - Base, 340, R/T & R/T SE plus convertibles models of all but SE.

Mid-year introductions were the Coupe & T/A hardtops.

'70 Barracuda - Base, Cuda, Gran Coupe plus convertibles models of all.

Mid-year introductions were the Coupe & AAR hardtops.

(edited per the posts below)

[6bblgt]

there are Gran Coupe convertibles (BP27) for 1970 - 

[Alaskan_TA]

True. I had the hardtop stuck in my head. I'll see if I can edit that above.

Thanks Dan.  

(edited)

[Mytur Binsdirti]

I owned a very nice 1970 RT/SE 440-6 4-speed 4:10 Shaker car 30 years ago. In the E-body world, It doesn't get much better than that (except for a Hemi), but that was the 1st and last E-body I've ever owned. That tells you what I think of them.

[Mopar Nut]

1970 is the best year for a Challenger and 1971 is the best year for a Cuda if you can find one.

[69 OUR/TEA]

I owned a very nice 1970 RT/SE 440-6 4-speed 4:10 Shaker car 30 years ago. In the E-body world, It doesn't get much better than that (except for a Hemi), but that was the 1st and last E-body I've ever owned. That tells you what I think of them.

I have a friend who calls them shit-can E-bodies . They look nice , but drive/ride like shit . Yet the big craze about owning one .

[FY1 Charger]

I owned a very nice 1970 RT/SE 440-6 4-speed 4:10 Shaker car 30 years ago. In the E-body world, It doesn't get much better than that (except for a Hemi), but that was the 1st and last E-body I've ever owned. That tells you what I think of them.

Why don't you like them? Like I said I'm only tossing around the idea I'm not heart set on one so I would like to hear all the pros and cons of them. They aren't cheap and I don't want to regret buying one when I could pick up another charger.

[Alaskan_TA]

I have had them all, A, B, E & C bodies too, they all drive just fine.

[polywideblock]

    being from oz and never having driven/rid in one , I'd always assumed that E body's  would drive/ride like a  3rd gen B body  

                   have always wanted a 71   challenger

[viper r/t]

I owned a very nice 1970 RT/SE 440-6 4-speed 4:10 Shaker car 30 years ago. In the E-body world, It doesn't get much better than that (except for a Hemi), but that was the 1st and last E-body I've ever owned. That tells you what I think of them.

I have a friend who calls them shit-can E-bodies . They look nice , but drive/ride like shit . Yet the big craze about owning one .

Especially compared to B bodies.

[Patronus]

You should get one if you like turning left and right.

[hemi-hampton]

Don't forget the Deputy Model. LEON.

[Mopar Nut]

I owned a very nice 1970 RT/SE 440-6 4-speed 4:10 Shaker car 30 years ago. In the E-body world, It doesn't get much better than that (except for a Hemi), but that was the 1st and last E-body I've ever owned. That tells you what I think of them.

Why don't you like them? Like I said I'm only tossing around the idea I'm not heart set on one so I would like to hear all the pros and cons of them. They aren't cheap and I don't want to regret buying one when I could pick up another charger.

I had a 70 Challenger SE that drove just fine, wished I still had it, sold it to move West.

[skip68]

It's all preference and taste.   

[Mike DC]

            
The E-bodies were built with shitty quality when they were new.  The B's were much better.  

Whether that makes a difference 40 years later, when a decent example of either model will have been hand-built by restoration . . .  that's a different matter.  The individual car you get has more to do with it than anything else by this age.  

E-bodies are a short-wheelbase version of the B-body. So they are wider & more durable & heavier than most "ponycars" like Camaros or Cougars.  The wider & more durable parts aren't bad.  The heavier part is.  





Engine-wise?  

Anything will handle better with a lighter motor, even a huge C-body fullsize.  Anything will run stronger with a bigger motor, even an A-body compact.  The question is where you draw the compromise line.    


It's generally accepted that putting a big-block (383/400/440/426) motor into a compact A-body is bad for anything except drag racing.  The balance is quite bad, there isn't enough room for stuff in the engine bay, and the small-block (273/318/340/360) motors are enough to make A-bodies into good sports cars without all that trouble.  So A-bodies like small blocks.

It's generally accepted than a fullsize C-body needs the power from the big-blocks just to move around comfortably and drive like the luxury car it was intended to be.  And if you wanted handling then why on earth did you buy that model?  So C-bodies like big blocks.


As for B & E-bodies . . . they can go either way. Most people still lean towards bigger motors on the B's but with the E-bodies there are fans in both camps.  The factory made hot R/T's with big blocks and hot T/As with small blocks, and both are considered desirable cars now.  



The stock iron 426 Hemis were too heavy to make a good weight balance in anything. The factory only ever built those street motors to legalize them on racetracks, and they gave the racers Hemis with aluminum heads/intakes.

[Troy]

I'm tossing around the idea of getting a challenger or a 'cuda, I know the basics for the cars but what how many models where avaliable in 1970? For the challenger was there just the base, the SE and the R/T? For the 'cuda was there just the barracuda, the gran coupe and the 'Cuda? Or are the barracuda and the cuda the same model? Another thing I heard was that the 340 engine was the best for the power to weight ratio the E body platform. Any help and clarification would be appreciated, thanks.

I, personally, like small block E-bodies. They're shorter than B-bodies so when you throw a few hundred extra pounds up front it screws with the handling - and it's not like these cars handled great in the first place. The Barracuda is slightly shorter than the Challenger as well. I had a 318 Barracuda and it was a lot of fun. I have a 440 Challenger and it wallows around on back roads like a pregnant pig - but it's a lot of fun in a straight line. I have never driven my 340 Challenger as it's still under restoration. Road tests from "back in the day" showed that a 340 (4bbl) was about as fast in the 1/4 as a 383 and much quicker when you had to turn. We drive a lot on the highway and my dad prefers the B-bodies for "cruising". They seem more stable (less twitchy) and soak up the bumps better.

Troy

[Alaskan_TA]

One thing about quality on the E vs. B topic.

For 1970 models, LA made both at the same time. Same people, same assembly line, so how could quality possibly be better one over the other? 

[ACUDANUT]

The 71's are worth their weight in Gold.   A Challenger Convertible or a 'Cuda are the highest priced Cars every Produced.

[Mike DC]

       

For 1970 models, LA made both at the same time. Same people, same assembly line, so how could quality possibly be better one over the other?

That's assembly quality.  

What about the parts the workers were assembling, both the design and the tolerances?  

[Alaskan_TA]

What would be different? The various models shared vendors (the places that supplied parts), engines & transmissions were made at the same plants, rear ends, electrical parts, tires, wheels etc.

[Mike DC]

          
It's not the drivetrains & suspensions that were junk.  It was the E-specific parts like the whole body & interior.  The E-body program was rushed out to production and they were incorporating a few new things like the side interior panels too.  

Ask people who were around these cars when they were new (and are not too biased on the subject).  This is not a rare opinion.  



I'm not saying E-bodies are categorically pieces of shit.  I'd love to have a decent Challenger or Cuda.  But fit & finish was not their strong point as they left the factory. 

By modern standards, EVERYTHING made back then was shit, when you get right down to it. 


 

[Pete in NH]

         
It's not the drivetrains & suspensions that were junk.  It was the E-specific parts like the whole body & interior.  The E-body program was rushed out to production and they were incorporating a few new things like the side interior panels too.  

Ask people who were around these cars when they were new (and are not too biased on the subject).  This is not a rare opinion.  



I'm not saying E-bodies are categorically pieces of shit.  I'd love to have a decent Challenger or Cuda.  But fit & finish was not their strong point as they left the factory. 

By modern standards, EVERYTHING made back then was shit, when you get right down to it. 


 

I would have to agree with these comments, I was around back then. Chrysler made a big deal out of the introduction of the new E body in 1970. For 1970 they did make quite a splash when they replaced the old A body based Barracuda and for the first time Dodge had a "pony car". 

When I bought my 71 Charger in late 71 I would not have even considered an E body car. Compared to the B bodies the E body interiors came off looking cheap and filled with ill fitting plastic. I had no problem with the tried and true drive trains and suspension systems but the interiors were really poor in comparison.

The new E bodies were clearly a rush job. Chrysler just could not compete with the pony cars from Ford and GM with the earlier A body Barracuda and the E bodies were a " catch up" effort and they clearly showed it.

After the 1970 introduction year they didn't sell well at all and its those low production numbers that make them desirable today. Its too bad because I still think they were very attractive cars but back in their day the build quality was not good and people saw it.

[stripedelete]

Don't forget, Chrysler was circling the drain in 1970 - albeit large circles.  By '73 the circles tighten up.  The rest is history.

[FY1 Charger]

Interesting, I didn't know the E body platform was a rush job. I found a decent one with a 440 in it, I might go look at it this Saturday.

[ACUDANUT]

I don't believe it was a rush job at all.  Only a E Body hater would say such a thing. 

[Alaskan_TA]

The E-body car designs were in the works at least as early as 1968.

[Ghoste]

The only thing rushed was production when the moment came.  They were right to do so but wrong to do it. 

[ACUDANUT]

if it was a rush job, explain how a 71 Hemi ' Cuda is worth a Million bucks

[Pete in NH]

The E-body car designs were in the works at least as early as 1968.

Even starting as early as 1968, that's not a lot of time for a 1970 model year release which really means the fall of 1969. I think today it's easy to forget what the car design process was like. The bodies were modeled as full size clay models and then lofted by very skilled tool and die makers to hard tooling dies to stamp out panels. There had to be an incredible amount of skill and time involved in that process. Today computers produce design drawings and transfer them to tooling with precision that could only be dreamed of in the 60's.

I'm not an E body hater by any means. I think they were and still are very good looking cars. I'm just saying in their day I would not have bought one compared to a B body.

[Mike DC]

   
Exactly.  Pointing out downsides of a car does not mean you hate it and think it's worthless. 

IMO all our muscle cars are too heavy.  They have hundreds of pounds of cast-iron in places that should be aluminum.  Their solid axles suck for anything besides drag racing.  Etc.  But I'm still on this site every day. 


As for the E's being worth so much?  So are wing cars.  Wing cars were even more rushed/sloppy jobs that did one thing well and bunch of other things worse.  I still think wing cars are cool. 

[stripedelete]

explain how a 71 Hemi ' Cuda is worth a Million bucks

fixed

[HPP]

My dad bought his Road Runner new in late '68. My Uncle got out of the Navy in late '69 and was so impressed with the Plymouth's performance, he went down and bought a new Challenger. While he could deal with the Plymouth outrunning his Dodge in a heads up race, he never did like all the squeaks and rattle the E body had compared to the B body. He sold it after a couple of years. My Dad had the Plymouth until the day he died.

if it was a rush job, explain how a 71 Hemi ' Cuda is worth a Million bucks

Scarcity and time.  The automotive press thought the '71 Cuda was ugly and because of the recession that year, the buying public agreed it was ugly enough to not spend the tight money supply on it. Sales figures dropped significantly, inadvertently contributing to its low production numbers. At the same time, no one was aware it was the last gasp of gross HP numbers that everyone liked to quote. Combine those conditions with decades of rose colored memories, and prices go through the roof.

[Mike DC]

 
Car guys tend to like more extreme styling & engines than the mainstream public does.  Same with limited-editions.  

Plymouth struggled to sell 1970 Superbirds by later in the run.  It turned out there were only so many buyers interested in wing cars and a lot of them had already bought Charger Daytonas.  
 

[Bronzedodge]

If memory serves, in 70 Cudas and Challengers with 340s came with 15" wheels.  The factory was marketing them as a handling pkg, knew they would be better with the small block.

If you're looking at a project, some years are harder to restore than others.  I'm thinking of 71 Challengers in particular, like 70 Chargers.  One year only fenders, grille, etc.    Friend of mine in another club has a 71 Challenger, I think there may be a difference in the front valence too?  Not sure.

As far as your original question:

Cuda VIN BS23 or BS27 for 'verts
Barracuda VIN BH23 or BH27
Gran Coupe VIN BP23 or BP27

Challenger VIN JH23 and JH27 for 'verts
Challenger VIN JH29 for the SE cars, non RT
Challenger RT VIN JS23 hardtop, JS27 for the 'verts  and JS29 for the R/T SE's

[303 Mopar]

I restored a '71 Challenger (best year IMHO) and am blessed enough to currently own a '70 Cuda along with my '68 Charger.  They are all good, but my Cuda kills the Charger in handling because it is smaller.  However, I have had both at car shows and cruise-ins and the Charger gets way more attention.  A lot of people have no idea what the Cuda is, I think because it does not have the notoriety of the Charger. 

I love both cars for different reasons.  If you are serious about buying an e-body or want to know more facts check out cuda-challenger.com.  Great guys with a loads of information.

[Troy]

If memory serves, in 70 Cudas and Challengers with 340s came with 15" wheels.  The factory was marketing them as a handling pkg, knew they would be better with the small block.

Much like a lot of other things Mopar did, that requirement didn't last long! I'd have to verify the Cudas but the Challenger A66 (340 4bbl) package only came with 15" wheel for a very short time before they tossed that idea in the trash (even though all the printed sales/reference material was already printed). It still had the HD suspension and brakes though. The AAR and T/A were a completely different story of course.

Troy

[Alaskan_TA]

First page before the A66 package was released - http://www.hamtramck-historical.com/images/dealerships/DealershipDataBook/1970/old/116.jpg


Revised page with A66 mentions 14" tires. http://www.hamtramck-historical.com/images/dealerships/DealershipDataBook/1970/70_Challenger0024.jpg

[Bronzedodge]

I stand corrected.     Thought that was for the entire model year.

[6bblgt]

& of the ~6000 1970 340 'Cuda hardtops (BS23H0) just over 25% had E60-15 RWL POLYGLAS GT tires

[FY1 Charger]

303 mopar, your cars are gorgeous. I've visited that website once or twice, i might have to visit it more.

My next question is why are their fog lights on the bottom of some Cuda's, is that only for the AAR because of Trans-Am racing?

[6bblgt]

Fog Lights are STANDARD equipment on ALL '70 'Cudas (BS23 & BS27, AARs included BS23J0B) , they became an OPTION on Barracuda & Gran Coupe mid-model year 1970.

For 1971 Plymouth e-body line they were an OPTION, no longer STANDARD on 'Cuda.

[ACUDANUT]

For those that come across theses "shitty built and too heavy E-bodies" for sale. Please send them my way. THANKS

[maxwellwedge]

I owned a very nice 1970 RT/SE 440-6 4-speed 4:10 Shaker car 30 years ago. In the E-body world, It doesn't get much better than that (except for a Hemi), but that was the 1st and last E-body I've ever owned. That tells you what I think of them.

Yes - This car......I sold it but may get it back.....beautiful combo.

PS everyone - All Mopar's are cool.

[Mytur Binsdirti]

Memories...............