Real 70 Daytona found

[odcics2]

A few accounts of the car were seen at Dodge Main Executive parking lot from December 69 to late Feb 1970 by Andy D'Agostino former Chrysler employee who oversaw the transportation of several Chrysler show/press/road test vehicles as well as the RTS Caravan cars/displays, after that it fell off the radar never to be seen again...just like the B5 70 Daytona

Mike

Andy Agosta was the guy in charge of transporting show cars.   I know Andy. He was the guy that also took the Baker #6 Show Car to all the auto shows during the time it was supposedly racing on the track!   Can't be in two places at the same time. Cotton had two other Daytonas he raced during 1970.  Hmm, wonder where they went?     

[DAY CLONA]

A few accounts of the car were seen at Dodge Main Executive parking lot from December 69 to late Feb 1970 by Andy D'Agostino former Chrysler employee who oversaw the transportation of several Chrysler show/press/road test vehicles as well as the RTS Caravan cars/displays, after that it fell off the radar never to be seen again...just like the B5 70 Daytona

Mike

Andy Agosta was the guy in charge of transporting show cars.   I know Andy. He was the guy that also took the Baker #6 Show Car to all the auto shows during the time it was supposedly racing on the track!   Can't be in two places at the same time. Cotton had two other Daytonas he raced during 1970.  Hmm, wonder where they went?     

Ahhh...Agosta, I thought it was D' Agostino, ....old age strikes again!

[rainbow4jd]

I don't have a dog in this fight but I've been an OEM auto Manufacturer's rep for 32 years.    And I'll only share perspective NOT a definitive answer.  Misbuilt units were reasonably common back in the day as were "unique" cars where unexpected combinations of Powertrain and/or trim levels.    However, one thing that has remained consistent is warranty.   Manufacturer's have to ensure that warranty requirements and specs are documented  i.e. The warranty policy manual   So in light of that considered the following

IF it was intended to sell a 1970 Daytona, every Chrysler, Plymouth, and Dodge dealer in the nation would have gotten warranty coverage instructions regardless of whether they ever sold one or not.  Since all three brands were authorized to do cross brand warranty repairs.  Thus, a search of old warranty documents or repair shop manuals could shine light on this discussion.

Next consider parts supply.   Again under warranty laws Manufacturer's have to maintain a supply of parts for the duration of the warranty period and I believe current law says for 10 years post production.   I suspect but don't know if there was similar requirements in 1970 (I'm guessing a shorter time period).   So.... parts ordering guides would have been model year specific.    Thus, finding an old dealer parts catalog from 1970 or even 1971 should show 1970 Charger Daytona parts availability

Finally, consider dealer parts inventory.   Some dealers would have stocked replacement parts (others got stuck when the parts were returned by a body shop - "the insurance company totaled the vehicle" and Manufacturer's do not accept body part returns.   So consider WHAT do you do with a Daytona nose and wing in your inventory (regardless of HOW they got there)?

The new odds are highly likely you sell a conversion kit, leveraging several market factors.  1) a successful 1969 NASCAR season 2) Plymouth's having a wing car to sell and a Dodge dealer not haveing one - "Hey, you don't need to by a Plymouth. I can get you a 1970 Daytona with our conversion kit". 3) Dealers want to get rid of dead parts inventory because that results represents frozen capital

Considered the anecdotal window sticker with "conversion" language - and was that it known by anymore of the story - I would instantly view this as a "dealer added item" NOT a factory original

Finally, if there were legal issues involved with safety related items, like the headlights, there is ZERO chance they build something in violation of the law as they would not even allowed forbidden parts and systems to be in the plant    And even if you presume Creative did the install (taking it out of the plant environment) Chrysler would have issued a safety recall to modify the lights.  Reference the Kelsey Hayes wheels.  The liability to allow an "unsafe" car in the road is astronomical.

To me, the lack of paper trail is more damning evidence for it NOT being a factory car than for one.   Conversations, for or against, don't count for much

When all is same and done people still believe in what they want to believe.  Like unicorns that poop icecream

[DAY CLONA]

I don't have a dog in this fight but I've been an OEM auto Manufacturer's rep for 32 years.    And I'll only share perspective NOT a definitive answer.  Misbuilt units were reasonably common back in the day as were "unique" cars where unexpected combinations of Powertrain and/or trim levels.    However, one thing that has remained consistent is warranty.   Manufacturer's have to ensure that warranty requirements and specs are documented ............................

All fine and dandy if your talking standard production, but I think of the few 70 Daytonas built (3), regardless of when, why, for whom, or whatever reason fall into the same category that many of the factory/dealer built showcars fit/fall into, there was never any intention to go in to production, merely just the creation or continuation of a model, be it a one off styling exercise, or an extremely limited "production/offering" of a handful of models regardless of the source that built/supplied them

Most are hung up on the "validation" of the "1970" built cars, they don't fit the "conformity" that most need to accept them, and if you think the factory wouldn't build and/or authorize a one off vehicle or several for that matter that didn't conform to Federal Safety standards, and then sell them to the public, just look at the number of the Rapid Transit System factory authorized/built showcars that made it to private hands and street use

But at the end of the day, they're just machines, modes of conveyance, to be enjoyed for what they are, and what they do....  nothing more, nothing less

[ACUDANUT]

That is what Jerry told me. There were 3 70 Daytona's built.

[C500]

That is what Jerry told me. There were 3 70 Daytona's built.

I saw this in an article on Creative Industries recently too

[odcics2]

That is what Jerry told me. There were 3 70 Daytona's built.

Actually, and more accurately, there were 3 1970 Dodge Chargers that were modified in 1970 to somewhat resemble a 1969 Daytona. (sans plug & some "A" trim)

In the simplest form, they (be it 3, 15, or any other number after the fact) were the first "Daytona" clones.  This building of a "replica" after the fact continues even today.  Thanks to Mike for helping guys with parts to continue this tradition!    

[warmpancakes]

Next consider parts supply.   Again under warranty laws Manufacturer's have to maintain a supply of parts for the duration of the warranty period and I believe current law says for 10 years post production.   I suspect but don't know if there was similar requirements in 1970 (I'm guessing a shorter time period).   So.... parts ordering guides would have been model year specific.    Thus, finding an old dealer parts catalog from 1970 or even 1971 should show 1970 Charger Daytona parts availability

there is not or has there even been a Law in the USA that OEM have to supply parts other than emissions for warranty,  There is no 10 year rule,  Heck the Ford GT some parts were discontinued before the car hit lots,    OEMs only have to supply emission parts nothing else

[alfaitalia]

Its the law here (UK)....ten years min...but most go well beyond that. But I've no idea who would inforce it if the car manufacturers did not play ball! Some auto based Qango of a council in a dimly lit room somewhere no doubt!!! LOL!

[DAY CLONA]

Next consider parts supply.   Again under warranty laws Manufacturer's have to maintain a supply of parts for the duration of the warranty period and I believe current law says for 10 years post production.   I suspect but don't know if there was similar requirements in 1970 (I'm guessing a shorter time period).   So.... parts ordering guides would have been model year specific.    Thus, finding an old dealer parts catalog from 1970 or even 1971 should show 1970 Charger Daytona parts availability

there is not or has there even been a Law in the USA that OEM have to supply parts other than emissions for warranty,  There is no 10 year rule,  Heck the Ford GT some parts were discontinued before the car hit lots,    OEMs only have to supply emission parts nothing else

Actually there is a Federal statute that manufacturers are "obligated" to maintain collision parts for a minimum of 5 or 7 yrs if a vehicle has a warranty, I believe it was 3 initially (I don't know if it's still an active statute?), although it isn't really enforced, IIRC it came about in 67 or 69, some NORS wingcar parts were continued up to 1974, in fact the replacement Z bar that was offered as a collision substitute from 72-74 that has no lower reinforcement rib or angled depression, and is basically devoid of any "detail" was listed ironically as a "crash bar" by description in the Mopar Collision manual

The Emission parts supply requirement came about by 1972

[held1823]

there is not or has there even been a Law in the USA that OEM have to supply parts other than emissions for warranty,  There is no 10 year rule,  Heck the Ford GT some parts were discontinued before the car hit lots,    OEMs only have to supply emission parts nothing else

we spent many a day running service parts by the thousands at the Chrysler plant i worked for. these parts were indeed banked for availability long after the vehicle was out of production

[odcics2]

Found by simply asking Mr. Google:

"Parts"

A consequence is that vehicle manufacturers must be able to provide parts during the term of a warranty (if any) made at the time of sale. They need not make or stock these parts themselves.

Vehicle makers could choose not to do so, but then they would be required to provide a replacement vehicle or a full refund of the vehicle cost. In practice it is usually more cost effective for makers to procure replacement parts to effect a warranty repair.

A further consequence is therefore that replacement parts are also available to people who do not have a warranty claim.


Bottom line - Parts need to made or available during the warranty period.   Any smart auto maker will make whatever parts they can sell for profit, beyond that.  It's a business case.   

Where would every car maker store piles of parts for every model they made for 10 years?   

[odcics2]

That is what Jerry told me. There were 3 70 Daytona's built.

Actually, and more accurately, there were 3 1970 Dodge Chargers that were modified in 1970 to somewhat resemble a 1969 Daytona. (sans plug & some "A" trim)

In the simplest form, they (be it 3, 15, or any other number after the fact) were the first "Daytona" clones.  This building of a "replica" after the fact continues even today.  Thanks to Mike for helping guys with parts to continue this tradition!    

Back to the thread, after getting side tracked.   

[alfaitalia]

Found by simply asking Mr. Google:

"Parts"

A consequence is that vehicle manufacturers must be able to provide parts during the term of a warranty (if any) made at the time of sale. They need not make or stock these parts themselves.

Vehicle makers could choose not to do so, but then they would be required to provide a replacement vehicle or a full refund of the vehicle cost. In practice it is usually more cost effective for makers to procure replacement parts to effect a warranty repair.

A further consequence is therefore that replacement parts are also available to people who do not have a warranty claim.


Bottom line - Parts need to made or available during the warranty period.   Any smart auto maker will make whatever parts they can sell for profit, beyond that.  It's a business case.  

Where would every car maker store piles of parts for every model they made for 10 years?  

They don't.......they make them/have them in batches as they need them. No one would seriously suggest that anyone would try and guess how many of a certain part they might need over the next ten years and make them all in one go!!! You can buy brand new genuine VW Golf parts going right back to the Mk 1 of the 70s...all have current production dates on....easy to see on plastic parts. And I'm sure many other makers are the same. The ten year law applies here so not just in the warranty period. Don't forget that many/most parts are not even by VW or whoever (when I worked with VW there were over a 100 parts suppliers  to the factory...prob more now)....so as long as that plastic moulding company (or whoever) keeps the CAD design or the mould or template, they can make more parts whenever the manufacturer needs them.


Sorry odcics2.....BOT !!

[odcics2]

The set up fee for dies can cost more than the parts themselves...  Especially large sheetmetal parts.
So, guess you'd store the dies or molds for 10 years?  Certainly, re-tooling every time you need parts isn't the way to go.    

[Aero426]

Daytona specific sheet metal has been difficult since the early days of the cars.     It doesn't make any sense for anything but a one time run with some extra service parts figured in.      

Oh, you want a replacement rear window plug?   If you need one of those, you have bigger problems.  

You want a nose assembly in 1973?   The car would get totaled, or if you couldn't find a nose, they'd put a 70 Charger clip on it.    

You ever hear of someone filing suit against Chrysler because they couldn't get a nose for their super special 500 unit limited edition car?    I didn't think so.    

[odcics2]

Some of you may know Dick Padovini.
He told me that he saw NOS Daytona nose cones being crushed for tax write offs in 1979. 
He was right there with cash in hand and couldn't buy one.   

[DAY CLONA]

Daytona specific sheet metal has been difficult since the early days of the cars.     It doesn't make any sense for anything but a one time run with some extra service parts figured in.      

Oh, you want a replacement rear window plug?   If you need one of those, you have bigger problems.  

You want a nose assembly in 1973?   The car would get totaled, or if you couldn't find a nose, they'd put a 70 Charger clip on it.    

You ever hear of someone filing suit against Chrysler because they couldn't get a nose for their super special 500 unit limited edition car?    I didn't think so.    

Agreed, vehicles of a special nature/purpose whether a warranty was in effect or not were given no consideration for future parts availability and or service, the automotive manufacturer's estimated life expectancy was on average 3 years for the majority of regular production vehicles...

If getting wingcar service parts was a chore even back in the day, imagine the dauntless task of finding components for the 68 Hurst Super Stock HEMI Darts/Cudas back in the day

[held1823]

i was personally involved in the manufacturing of non production-line parts for Chrysler corporation vehicles at the new castle machining and forge plant. we did this for practically every suspension part produced at the plant. i know the total numbers banked varied depending upon a specific part's risk of failure, as well as the popularity of the specific vehicle(s) that part was intended for. i do not recall a specific time period (3, 5, 10 years, etc) being part of the requirement for any particular part, although the service part production total for lower front control arms for LH bodies was astronomical for 1998-early 1999 models, due to a sealing failure of the lube-for-life ball joint. the assemble line for these LCA modules was down this main aisle on the right. LCAs were packed for one of three specific uses- production, warranty, and service. warranty parts were packed into steel boxes like the ones seen in this photo, rather than the molded plastic dunnage that production line components were shipped in. once enough parts were produced for the warranty issue, thousands of additional parts were produced and packed in steel boxes (like the warranty ones), but with ridiculous amounts of VCI paper placed over, under, and around every possible surface. these particular parts were destined for storage, necessitating the use of the rust barrier paper

chrysler procured the vast majority of its parts from outside vendors, each of which may well have set their own policy regarding how many (if any) parts to build for future use, but i know for a fact that this Chrysler plant produced them for exactly that purpose. find one with blue paint dabs (third shift color) and it's likely to have passed though my hands.

[nascarxx29]

not for a 70 Daytona or any muscle car ad on there lot .But found dealer ad for parsons dodge 1970 newspaper  http://i975.photobucket.com/albums/ae240/Wingcars69/18274855_10207236189422326_6383971553626965315_n_zpsyklixzpg.jpg

[rainbow4jd]

I'm actually digging the discussion on parts supply chain more than whether the "3" 1970s are "real or not".

That being said, thanks to Held1823 on his detail on the stock pile of production parts for warranty purposes.  I was going to jump in on the "predicted failure" calculation, but he beat me to it.  IF you have a warranty, a manufacturer has to be able to meet the terms of the warranty for its stated time period.   If they can't its pretty bad - like VW falsifying emissions kind of bad.   You basically would have to buy the car back from the customer and probably pay damages and some attorney fees.   Post warranty, the laws may be muddy - but from a practical standpoint - you can buy the vehicle from the customer at a fair market value (and again pay damages and some attorney fees) because you know you will lose in court if it goes that far.   

Back to the Topic

I realize a few vehicles are non-conformists (like Turbine Chryslers) that "in theory" could escape the factory.   But (my opinion only) I think its far, far, far more of a stretch in belief to ignore the most likely and common scenarios than the far-fetched "what ifs"

1969 Daytona was an "aero car" - clearly the 1970 Daytona is not (no back glass does hell with the aerodynamics) - so at best its an appearance package (unless you argue "mock up", "prototype").

Dodge dealers had access to 1969 "conversion" materials - noses, etc. etc. that would require NOT to have the vehicle shipped to Creative before dealer delivery.

Dodge dealers did not have a vehicle to sell and compete with the Superbird.  They probably wanted one!

Dodge dealers could "sell" a converted car because those have VINS and MSOs - AND THAT IS THE KEY IMO - prototypes don't get sold through dealers, they get sold out the back door of the factory.  OR, might get sold at a "factory auction" at the very best as a USED car.   The reason they don't get sold as new is a) new vehicle warranty and b) they are usually put together with bailing wire and twine ; probably don't meet safety rules - which is a a really, really big deal.   Dealers don't want to deal with them - from both a hassle and a liability standpoint. 

So, just to my ears alone - even the "Doctor Story" (the guy who wanted one) is a Dealer Conversion.     For Chrysler to undertake the money to create "one offs" at the factory - versus a Chrysler exec calling their dealer buddy and saying "Hey, could you fix up a Daytona for a friend of mine?"  just doesn't make financial sense.  (PS I have have personally made "buddy" calls all the time.  "Hey, if you can.... I'll make sure you get allocated a couple of  XXXXX vehicles out of the Regional Manager's pool to help you cover the costs")

Anyway - I'm not here to throw stones at anybody's unicorn.   I'm still convinced I saw two elves out of the corner of my eye when I was about 7 years old.

[odcics2]

Were there 1970 Daytonas built. No.
Were at least three 1970 Chargers converted to appear somewhat like a 1969 Daytona? Yes. 

[wingcar]

Will we ever really know the complete story.....?   Perceptions and opinions are what we are left with........

[Beep Beep Dave]

I'm actually digging the discussion on parts supply chain more than whether the "3" 1970s are "real or not".

That being said, thanks to Held1823 on his detail on the stock pile of production parts for warranty purposes.  I was going to jump in on the "predicted failure" calculation, but he beat me to it.  IF you have a warranty, a manufacturer has to be able to meet the terms of the warranty for its stated time period.   If they can't its pretty bad - like VW falsifying emissions kind of bad.   You basically would have to buy the car back from the customer and probably pay damages and some attorney fees.   Post warranty, the laws may be muddy - but from a practical standpoint - you can buy the vehicle from the customer at a fair market value (and again pay damages and some attorney fees) because you know you will lose in court if it goes that far.   

Back to the Topic

I realize a few vehicles are non-conformists (like Turbine Chryslers) that "in theory" could escape the factory.   But (my opinion only) I think its far, far, far more of a stretch in belief to ignore the most likely and common scenarios than the far-fetched "what ifs"

1969 Daytona was an "aero car" - clearly the 1970 Daytona is not (no back glass does hell with the aerodynamics) - so at best its an appearance package (unless you argue "mock up", "prototype").

Dodge dealers had access to 1969 "conversion" materials - noses, etc. etc. that would require NOT to have the vehicle shipped to Creative before dealer delivery.

Dodge dealers did not have a vehicle to sell and compete with the Superbird.  They probably wanted one!

Dodge dealers could "sell" a converted car because those have VINS and MSOs - AND THAT IS THE KEY IMO - prototypes don't get sold through dealers, they get sold out the back door of the factory.  OR, might get sold at a "factory auction" at the very best as a USED car.   The reason they don't get sold as new is a) new vehicle warranty and b) they are usually put together with bailing wire and twine ; probably don't meet safety rules - which is a a really, really big deal.   Dealers don't want to deal with them - from both a hassle and a liability standpoint. 

So, just to my ears alone - even the "Doctor Story" (the guy who wanted one) is a Dealer Conversion.     For Chrysler to undertake the money to create "one offs" at the factory - versus a Chrysler exec calling their dealer buddy and saying "Hey, could you fix up a Daytona for a friend of mine?"  just doesn't make financial sense.  (PS I have have personally made "buddy" calls all the time.  "Hey, if you can.... I'll make sure you get allocated a couple of  XXXXX vehicles out of the Regional Manager's pool to help you cover the costs")

Anyway - I'm not here to throw stones at anybody's unicorn.   I'm still convinced I saw two elves out of the corner of my eye when I was about 7 years old.

I agree 100%. If a unicorn does exist it will have to come with all the right documents to back it up. So far none have presented themselves.

Dave

[Beep Beep Dave]

Were there 1970 Daytonas built. No.
Were at least three 1970 Chargers converted to appear somewhat like a 1969 Daytona? Yes. 

I agree with what we know of as of today. Its weird that nothing has really surfaced on the Watermelon car. It would be neat to hear the story behind it.

Dave