68,69, or 70 hottest?

[h76]

Been away from the charger market for awhile now. Just for curiosity looked up some ads for chargers across the internet, and noticed 68 chargers have really jumped in price. 69 and 70s still getting good prices, but what's the uptick on 68s?  Anybody else see the same thing?

[XH29N0G]

My guess is Bullitt and the classic being first with that body design.

[F8-4life]

Everybody loves a 68 charger and the market is a reflection of that.
The wild but yet refined styling can be matched by the only closest competitors, the 69-70 chargers.

[marshallfry01]

I think the 69 model is higher in price.  I see a lot of 68's for a decent price.  Every 69 I see that is for sale belongs in the Delusional Charger Seller thread.   

[JR]

Is there really that much of a price difference in 2nd gens? All things being equal, I haven't really noticed a discernable difference in any of them.

I think if you lined up an identically optioned car from each model year(68,69, and 70), in comparable condition, the appraisal would be pretty much even across all three.

If someone wants to take the time to pull up Haggerty's price guide for all three, I suppose that would be proof enough.

[Mopar Nut]

1969 is tops today!

[JR]

Wow. I never would have guessed. I stand corrected.

[alfaitalia]

Over here the 69 is always valued a little higher than a 68 and quite a bit higher than a 70. Brits generally are not a fan of the 70 nose.....me included. Like a lots of parts on American cars of the 70s and 80s they seem to have been designed to just appeal to the US market....which is fine as hardly any were imported to Europe where we have different taste in cars generally (smaller, more economical, better handling etc).

[ht4spd307]

wow MOPAR NUT  you really cut that off at the legs   69 is king

[Mytur Binsdirti]

  69 is king   

There's nothing like getting into a great 69.

[Dodge Don]

Add in 70 only high impact colors, pistol grip shifter, 6 pack and the other 70 only goodies and off the price climbs.  Mic drop 

[Lennard]

Add in 70 only high impact colors, pistol grip shifter, 6 pack and the other 70 only goodies and off the price climbs.  Mic drop 

Only if you care about such gadgets.

[maxwellwedge]

Gadgets - Lol!

I like them all.

[charger_fan_4ever]

i like all 3 years.

I bought my 70 r/t as a project 9 years ago.Just when AMD started coming out with mopar metal. Bought it because it wasnt on other side of the country. it was about 4 hours away. Was between that one and a 68 r/t 4 speed that had the dana picked already, so it had no diff no drivetrain and minimal interior parts and i think no front clip. It was $6k and the 70 i bought was 5k. Mostly complete except the rear trim panel. Mind you it needed the works for metal but a solid frame and unibody. The 68 was a crusty north eastern car too.

Looks like nowdays the same cars would have a 1 infront of the price.......

I didnt realize how the 70 has quite a few 1 off 1 year only parts. And if i new front sheet metal wasnt going to be offered i would have bought a 68-9.

That being said One would almost think in project state the 70 would bring less $$ then 68-9.

[darbgnik]

i like all 3 years.

I bought my 70 r/t as a project 9 years ago.Just when AMD started coming out with mopar metal. Bought it because it wasnt on other side of the country. it was about 4 hours away. Was between that one and a 68 r/t 4 speed that had the dana picked already, so it had no diff no drivetrain and minimal interior parts and i think no front clip. It was $6k and the 70 i bought was 5k. Mostly complete except the rear trim panel. Mind you it needed the works for metal but a solid frame and unibody. The 68 was a crusty north eastern car too.

Looks like nowdays the same cars would have a 1 infront of the price.......

I didnt realize how the 70 has quite a few 1 off 1 year only parts. And if i new front sheet metal wasnt going to be offered i would have bought a 68-9.

That being said One would almost think in project state the 70 would bring less $$ then 68-9.

I would tend to agree, as long as the buyer was educated. The hood and fenders not being reproduced really adds to the leg work, if said car needs those parts.

I talked to my Dad about his cars in those days, and he remembered, that back then, at least where he was, that if a car was 2 years old, it was undesirable. You had to have a new one, which is probably why body styles only lasted 2 to 3 years. Which also explains why the 70 was the lowest selling, sure they changed the style a bit, but it was mostly the same.

The low volume of 70's manufactured's effects on parts availability is also compounded by the fact that so many hood and fender sets were pillaged for Daytona clones....

I managed to find a set of fenders off of a member here in Arizona, my hood was thankfully good. But he knew their worth, same as me, so I think we both did OK.

[timmycharger]

  69 is king  

There's nothing like getting into a great 69.

Hence why his turbin is dirti  

[41husk]

69 also gets a bump for the built to race NASCAR 500 and Daytona models only being produced that year

[BDF]

69 also gets a bump for the built to race NASCAR 500 and Daytona models only being produced that year

Let's not minimize the '69 spring only colors, OK? 😁

[JR]

I wonder if the production numbers for each year have any effect on price.

Here's a list of production numbers I found on the graveyard cars website.



According to that, 68 is the most plentiful, and 70 is the rarest. I suppose its a matter of asthetics and supply and demand?

[Dodge Don]

The majority of folks that fell in love with the 2nd Gen body had already bought one in 68 or 69 and the 70 had to compete with the new E and A bodies as well as the other revamped B bodies.

[Kern Dog]

Is that chart right? I thought the 73 Charger outsold all other years? 1973 was a great year for the Chrysler Corp.

[marshallfry01]

And I always thought that there were 89,199 chargers produced in 69??  That chart has it closer to 70,000.

I remember reading somewhere that there were somewhere near 130,000 chargers produced in 68 as well.  I'm not saying I'm right, but those have always been the figures I have always went with. 

[Mopar Nut]

Is that chart right? I thought the 73 Charger outsold all other years? 1973 was a great year for the Chrysler Corp.

And I always thought that there were 89,199 chargers produced in 69??  That chart has it closer to 70,000.

I remember reading somewhere that there were somewhere near 130,000 chargers produced in 68 as well.  I'm not saying I'm right, but those have always been the figures I have always went with. 

Here's a correct chart.

[JR]

I guess in hindsight, I shouldn't be surprised graveyard carz has an inaccurate chart on their website. 

[Mytur Binsdirti]

I've said it before & I'll say it again...

1970 Grille:





1969 Grille:






1968 Grille:

[JR]

Different strokes for different folks.

Some people look at a 68 grille and see:

[VegasCharger]

Is that chart right? I thought the 73 Charger outsold all other years? 1973 was a great year for the Chrysler Corp.

Good catch KD

And good, more accurate chart Mopar Nut  

I always believed that 1973 produced around 118K Chargers. That dropped almost in half in 1974 but still out produced the 1970 as all 3rd gens did.

[Ghoste]

I haven't noticed a huge difference between the three for asking prices of late. 

[Dukeboy1965]

1969 all the way!

[moparstuart]

I've said it before & I'll say it again...

1970 Grille:





1969 Grille:






1968 Grille:

Perfect 

[Aero426]

There is no right answer.   They are all beautiful.   

[alfaitalia]

......yes they ARE all beautiful....well...all except the 70 obviously!....lol. Only joking...a bit.

[John_Kunkel]

Sure, they're all beautiful but the '68 is more beautifuler than the other.

[moparstuart]

Sure, they're all beautiful but the '68 is more beautifuler than the other.

[Fred]

68
That would be the reason I have one in my garage.  

[charger_fan_4ever]

i like all 3 years.

I bought my 70 r/t as a project 9 years ago.Just when AMD started coming out with mopar metal. Bought it because it wasnt on other side of the country. it was about 4 hours away. Was between that one and a 68 r/t 4 speed that had the dana picked already, so it had no diff no drivetrain and minimal interior parts and i think no front clip. It was $6k and the 70 i bought was 5k. Mostly complete except the rear trim panel. Mind you it needed the works for metal but a solid frame and unibody. The 68 was a crusty north eastern car too.

Looks like nowdays the same cars would have a 1 infront of the price.......

I didnt realize how the 70 has quite a few 1 off 1 year only parts. And if i new front sheet metal wasnt going to be offered i would have bought a 68-9.

That being said One would almost think in project state the 70 would bring less $$ then 68-9.

I would tend to agree, as long as the buyer was educated. The hood and fenders not being reproduced really adds to the leg work, if said car needs those parts.

I talked to my Dad about his cars in those days, and he remembered, that back then, at least where he was, that if a car was 2 years old, it was undesirable. You had to have a new one, which is probably why body styles only lasted 2 to 3 years. Which also explains why the 70 was the lowest selling, sure they changed the style a bit, but it was mostly the same.

The low volume of 70's manufactured's effects on parts availability is also compounded by the fact that so many hood and fender sets were pillaged for Daytona clones....

I managed to find a set of fenders off of a member here in Arizona, my hood was thankfully good. But he knew their worth, same as me, so I think we both did OK.

On the flip side you have the lower production #'s more rare crowd. But if we look.at haggerty price #s it appears as though this is a case where more rare doesn't equal more desirable.

[GreenMachine]

I started out looking for a '68, but found a good deal on a '70 and bought it. The '70 really grew on me, it definitely has a nicer interior. I never understood why they designed the glove box door to swing up in '68/'69, you can't see what's in there unless you lean down, but they fixed that by '70 along with numerous other things. I'd still love to have a '68 and a '69 though.

[DAY CLONA]

I started out looking for a '68, but found a good deal on a '70 and bought it. The '70 really grew on me, it definitely has a nicer interior. I never understood why they designed the glove box door to swing up in '68/'69, you can't see what's in there unless you lean down, but they fixed that by '70 along with numerous other things. I'd still love to have a '68 and a '69 though.

I agree the 70 is more refined, much better interior, esp the seats, a pistol grip makes it even better, the 70 front end body styling IMHO is much more refined and sleeker in appearance than the 68/69 front bumper "design" that looks like an afterthought, and you can't beat the look of the 70 only racing mirrors in body color

[alfaitalia]

I agree that the 70 interior is an improvement over the 68/9. But I don't think I could ever love that front end like I do the others. It's a UK thing I'm sure but no cars here had a bumper that was going right and the nose so it just looks wrong to us...especially as the rear bumper is conventional in design.

[Offblue]

Did you not see the photo of the pretty lady? 68 wins ... and keeps winning.

[alfaitalia]

Trying hard not to be politically incorrect......but if the 69 was a pretty girl the 68 is her slightly featureless and planer faced sister. I've always thought the 68 was great (and I would have one tomorrow) then they perfected it for 69. Then the bosses said they need to change it for 70 and they.....well made the 70 model....trying too hard to be different imo. At the end of the day they all share the same great shell (near enough)...are all great cars...and I'm glad there are fans of all three years.

[moparstuart]

 

[fizz]

I think that it is obvious that the 69 was the designers intent. The taillights and marker lights look like an after thought on the 68, like they made the changes to allow for the 68 to be different than the 69, and when they changed the 69 for the 70 model year, it was to transition to the 71 model year. I own a 70.

[Charger-Bodie]

I think that it is obvious that the 69 was the designers intent. The taillights and marker lights look like an after thought on the 68, like they made the changes to allow for the 68 to be different than the 69, and when they changed the 69 for the 70 model year, it was to transition to the 71 model year. I own a 70.

The lights an afterthought? Have you ever looked at them? They all match they are all round. I like all three years but that's a point of view I've never heard before.

[Offblue]

I think that it is obvious that the 69 was the designers intent. The taillights and marker lights look like an after thought on the 68, like they made the changes to allow for the 68 to be different than the 69, and when they changed the 69 for the 70 model year, it was to transition to the 71 model year. I own a 70.

No no no no no ... no, all of the 68s features were designed to POP/stand out, the 69s grille and taillights look like the 68s second removed "simple" cousin (sorrynotsorry), not to mention the taillights make it looks like the car is falling asleep, which is what it makes me do when i see it. Nothing "unique" about the 69 

[Dodge Don]

To me the split grille on a 69 makes it look weak....somehow to me it makes the car look smaller and less muscular. The 68 open grill looks meaner/tougher. Perhaps that is why they went back to an open grille for 70 which to me looks the best of the bunch. The way the front fenders curve, the less wimpy hood scallops, nicer interior, the rear taillight trim etc. The only thing 69 improved on were the better tail lights which carried to 70 and the bumblebee stripe was better but in my opinion ruined by having the R/T on it....I much prefer the 70 version.

If I had to choose my preference in order is:

1 - 70 Charger R/T
2 - 71 Charger R/T
3 - 68 Charger R/T
4 - 69 Charger R/T

Would love a Daytona (shares fender/hood look from 70)....but I find the 69 Charger 500s boring as hell.

Still though, the second generation body design is still the most gorgeous ever. Although the 71 Charger R/T is stunning.

[RCCDrew]

I agree that the 69/70 taillights look much better than the 68. The round taillights always looked to me like they were stolen from a corvette. The 69/70 are unique and different than any other car. Otherwise I can appreciate each of the cars for their differences. Hi back seats, low back seats, door scoops, any grille, I love them all.

[Fred]

Horses for course!     

[smithenhiven]

68 Good
69 Better
70 Best

I'd take any of those years, but glad I own a 70.

[Lennard]

68 Good
69 Better
70 Best

I'd take any of those years, but glad I own a 70.

I already have an electric razor in my bathroom drawer,  so I'm glad to own a '68 and '69 Charger.

[VegasCharger]

I already have an electric razor in my bathroom drawer,  so I'm glad to own a '68 and '69 Charger.

[dual fours]

I always thought concerning the second generation Chargers, that third times a charm.
I do not have air conditioning, so my 70 is hotter then all those with AC.

[6pkrtse]

Growing up I have always loved the 68-70 Chargers. 69 always seemed to be my favorite. My first car was a 70 Charger at 15. I have had many 68-70's over the years, something like 15 or so & now I like the 70's more than the 69's due to options, paint colors, lower production numbers so there are less around etc. I still want one of each 68,68 & 70 in my garage all at once someday.

[Evoking]

Couple of things.

1) ALL of those values are way off for concours Chargers in the open market. They bring more.   

2) When I was shopping for a 68 they were ways more $. I thought it had something to do with being the only year to have the round tail lights.  In any case I found the part big muscle car, part Ferrari execution out back especially fetching.

3) when most people compare the somewhat anonymous look of the 69-70 rear to the chromed rings AND learn there is only one year to get them = halo year to general public.

What I've observed anyway.

[70B5Cuda]

I own a 68 and a 69 and I used to not like the 70 Grill/bumper , but the more time I spend looking at the 2nd generation chargers, the more I realize that I love every aspect of 2nd generation Chargers. I like some features (taillights, grilles) more then others, but no one year has everything I like best.....so my next best option is to own one of every year! They won't all be show cars; in fact, I gravitate more and more toward weathered/patina'd Mopars.... but I will own one of each so I can enjoy them without comparing and contrasting.

From watching/dabbling in the market, the 1969s are more rare and somewhat more valuable then the 1968, all things being equal. The 1970's are obviously behind the 1968/1969 in value but that being said, I don't see that many 1970's for sale. I've seen several really solid 1970 (non-R/T) rollers (no drivetrain) with seats, presentable grill, and all exterior sheetmetal sell for $8-10K.

[Mopar Nut]

Couple of things.
2) When I was shopping for a 68 they were ways more $. I thought it had something to do with being the only year to have the round tail lights.  In any case I found the part big muscle car, part Ferrari execution out back especially fetching.

People can ask what they, It's what they sell for is what counts.

I own a 68 and a 69 and I used to not like the 70 Grill/bumper , but the more time I spend looking at the 2nd generation chargers, the more I realize that I love every aspect of 2nd generation Chargers. I like some features (taillights, grilles) more then others, but no one year has everything I like best.....so my next best option is to own one of every year! They won't all be show cars; in fact, I gravitate more and more toward weathered/patina'd Mopars.... but I will own one of each so I can enjoy them without comparing and contrasting.

From watching/dabbling in the market, the 1969s are more rare and somewhat more valuable then the 1968, all things being equal. The 1970's are obviously behind the 1968/1969 in value but that being said, I don't see that many 1970's for sale. I've seen several really solid 1970 (non-R/T) rollers (no drivetrain) with seats, presentable grill, and all exterior sheetmetal sell for $8-10K.

When I sold my 68, one guy who wanted it, said he wanted to change it into a 69. I refused the sale!