AFTER MARKET TRUNK TAIL LIGHT COVER FOR 69 CHARGER

[almerkel]

I cannot find the resource for the after market tail light protector inside the trunk on a 69 charger.  Anyone know who does this?

[mikepmcs]

 

[Shakey]

Grab a copy of Mopar Collectors Guide, the company is in TN and they advertise each month.  Just under $200.00 USD.  My magazines are all at home.

[JimShine]

They used to be on eBay for a while. I remember them being on there atleast up to last fall. They were usually in the $150 range. I wonder why we don't see them on there anymore.

[grek]

As mentioned above, they're advertise in MCG.  I also saw them selling them at Carlise last year. 

Grek

[Mfr426]

I saw them at Carlisle last year. I've got to say that they dont look right to me. I ended up getting an original one even though it was a bit "rough" I liked the texture much better than the repop'd one.

[Just 6T9 CHGR]

RMC Components
P.O Box 97
Piney Flats, TN 37686

(423)538-5100
hemicuda@naxs.net

$189.00

[almerkel]

Thanks to all of you for the info.

[Brock Samson]

that's priceless!... 

[resq302]

FYI, I got one from RMC components and there are two verisions of the originals.  The only one being repro'd now is the narrow version but not the deep version.  What I am talking about is the area where the tail lights are on the plastic panel.  Mine is the deep version and would not fit with the narrow version.  There is like a 1" difference on the flat section where the tail light would go depth wise.  If I remember correctly, the deep version is something like 3 1/2".

[tan top]

sorry guys not trying to hijack this thread but does it also attach to the top of the welded on bumper support  bracket in side the trunk with 1 screw each side , i am sure i have seen this before some time ago , but my cover has not even got the plastic  flaps that would  be screwed on to them.don't look like they have been snapped off eather.

[resq302]

According to RMC components, the covers with the plastic tabs were only for 1970 model years and the screws were never installed due to no way being able acess the screws once the cover was installed.  Again, just going by what he said.

[tan top]

According to RMC components, the covers with the plastic tabs were only for 1970 model years and the screws were never installed due to no way being able acess the screws once the cover was installed.  Again, just going by what he said.

intresting     thanks for the infomation (resq302) 

[694spdRT]

According to RMC components, the covers with the plastic tabs were only for 1970 model years and the screws were never installed due to no way being able acess the screws once the cover was installed.  Again, just going by what he said.

My '69 is a very late build date and it as the two tabs and screw holes to match. 

[JimShine]

My '69 is a November 1968 production and still has the cover. Here is how mine used to mount (it broke).

[694spdRT]

I will have to go look at mine again...I am almost positive it attaches down by the bumper support.

[resq302]

The pictures that were shown are the holes that attach the cover just under the trunk lip.  From what RMC components told me, the holes were punched in the bumper floor brace but screws were never installed due to clearance of installing the screws with the way the tail lights were recesses into the trunk.  Again, I am only going by what RMC components told me and they could be wrong.  1970 versions had two little rounded tabs on the bottom of the plastic cover that angled out to the area of the bumper floor brace.  They tended to easily break off which made them look exactly look like a 1969 as those tabs were the only difference.

[bill440rt]

My '70 had the lower screws. You either need to use a stubby or right-angled screwdriver to attach them. Or, a ratchet with a Phillips socket.
I've never seen or heard of deep & shallow tail light covers before. If only a narrow version is being reproduced, then I would think it's safe to say it would not fit most, if not all other Chargers, right?? Otherwise, Dodge produced two different design tail lights?? Deep & shallow?? Never saw that, either.
Anyone else?

[resq302]

Bill, I pointed this out to Galen at the Mopar Atlantic Nats and he was suprised also.  Guess it is another one of those things like the long and short front bumper guards.

[bill440rt]

Brian,
I might be opening a can of worms here, & I don't mean to hi-jack this thread, but... I don't buy it.
Think about it: How many variations of this plastic trunk gizmo did Dodge make? Right now, we're up to FOUR versions:
1) Shallow with tabs.
2) Deep with tabs.
3) Shallow without tabs.
4) Deep without tabs.

Then, there's the smooth/rough grain scenario. Now, we have FOUR MORE variations of a plastic tail light cover thingy. Again, I think covers made between '69-'70 with & without the tabs is a viable argument. But all these different variations of one part, used only in two model years, doesn't make sense. And, they're only repro-ing ONE of them??

[resq302]

Bill, I agree with you but I found it strange that my original tail light panel that was cracked and all marred up fit where as the repro one (narrow) didn't fit.  Again, I am just going but my observations and what was passed onto me by RMC.  I did talk to people that had the repro ones on their cars at the Mopar Atlantic Nats and theirs fit fine yet they were narrower than mine.  Who knows what Mopar did back in the day.

[tan top]

According to RMC components, the covers with the plastic tabs were only for 1970 model years and the screws were never installed due to no way being able acess the screws once the cover was installed.  Again, just going by what he said.

My '69 is a very late build date and it as the two tabs and screw holes to match. 

   
                  i have got the holes in the bumper support brackets in the trunk , my 69  had build date of November 22nd  68, . so my tail light cover is deep with out tabs ,smooth grain, i am sure it is the original one it was built with.

[resq302]

According to RMC components, the covers with the plastic tabs were only for 1970 model years and the screws were never installed due to no way being able acess the screws once the cover was installed.  Again, just going by what he said.

My '69 is a very late build date and it as the two tabs and screw holes to match. 

   
                  i have got the holes in the bumper support brackets in the trunk , my 69  had build date of November 22nd  68, . so my tail light cover is deep with out tabs ,smooth grain, i am sure  is the original one it was built with.

Mine was built May 9, of 1969 and has the deep version with a fairly smooth grain (or could have worn smooth over the years).  It also has the screw hole locations in the bumper support brackets but no evidence of the tabs where they could have even broken off. 

Certainly a weird situation.

[JimShine]

According to RMC components, the covers with the plastic tabs were only for 1970 model years and the screws were never installed due to no way being able acess the screws once the cover was installed.  Again, just going by what he said.

My '69 is a very late build date and it as the two tabs and screw holes to match. 

   
                  i have got the holes in the bumper support brackets in the trunk , my 69  had build date of November 22nd  68, . so my tail light cover is deep with out tabs ,smooth grain, i am sure it is the original one it was built with.

Wow! Our cars are brothers! Mine was built November 25th. I will go take the panel out now and get some good pics of it and post them.

[Just 6T9 CHGR]

My car didnt come with one when I bought it.  The replacement I got has the lower tabs & my braces have the holes in them for screws.
There are however 2 extra holes in mine right on the top of the cover where the latch mechanism would be.....not the 2 on the verticle side of the cober but on the top horizontal side.  You can see it in this picture

As far as 2 different taillight housings, I have seen 2 different ones.

The difference is the "hood" of where the bulb socket goes into.   One is long & one is short.......this might be a factor in the shallow cover debate