Does the 1970 Dodge Charger look the way it does because....?

[bigred68]

 Hello! I was wondering (this may have been discussed before) if the 1970 Dodge Charger looks the way it does because of possible cost cutting measures of the day at Chrysler? I guess what I mean to say is; Did some bean counters and engineers at Dodge sit down and say; "Now, we've got the Chargers front end all changed up to create the Daytona, can we simply slap this huge chrome (love it or hate it) grill/bumper onto the front of the Charger and viol la, we've got our new Charger"? (aside from the other '69 to '70 model year changes) OR, Was the 1970 Dodge Charger front end styling already decided upon, and it was kinda just by happenstance that the Daytona nose would "fit" more easily and the "new" '70 style front sheet metal was rushed into production to still fall into the '69 model year? To go alittle further with my question, what "carryover" type things happened to the Roadrunner? (Superbird) Again, I'm sorry if this has been discused before, Thank you for your time!!

[Ghoste]

Maybe a little of both?

[Dodge Don]

The 70 model year upgrades were already planned by the time they figured out that the 69 Charger was a turd on the race track.

[Ghoste]

Thats a little harsh.

[captnsim]

But true...

[Ghoste]

Is it?  The issues occured on the high bank tracks, the 69 did as well on the short tracks as anything else.  How many of the long track races did the 70 win?

[Brock Samson]

the DAYTONA had '70 Coronet front fenders and was rushed into upgrade the Areo numbers pretty much at the 11th hour, in response to the Ford Talladegas- while the stock '70 front clip had been decided a couple years prior. It would seem the '70 loop bumper style would lend itself pretty well to the daytona nose but that wasn't the reason it had the loop bumper, several dodge models had loop bumpers begining in '70 and especially in '71, it was a style trend.
I had read that some features of the '70 charger were simplified to save costs so they could bring the base cost down, and i belive the rear of the car shows some amount of simplification in regards the trim being alot less pieces.
One thing i read that suprised me was just how early Detroit decided to forgo the High Performance packages and move in the direction of Luxury i belive it was a decision made several years prior to the emasculation of the Hi-Po Cars. as early as 1967 of so. but they allready had so much product in the pipeline it took 3-4 years before it actually took effect.

[Mopar2Ya]

How is changing anything = cost savings? 
Leaving the mass produced '69 front clip would have been cost savings. IMO.
I thought the SuperBird used Coronet fenders, not the Daytona?

[72charger440]

i thought that the daytonas had 70 charger fenders not 70 coronet ones. i thought the 70 coronet fenders were on the superbirds?

[Ghoste]

It has a Coronet fenders and hood on the Superbird, Charger fenders on the Daytona.

[captnsim]

Is it?  The issues occured on the high bank tracks, the 69 did as well on the short tracks as anything else.  How many of the long track races did the 70 win?

Did anyone race a non aero Charger in 70? I think the wing cars took 5 wins in 70??

[Brock Samson]

 OK,.. Thanks guys I stand corrected, but I do know the DAYTONA was worked out on a napkin and rushed to the track in some record amount of time. So in answer to the OP's question the Daytona came after the '70 charger was allready in the pipeline.

[Ghoste]

Is it?  The issues occured on the high bank tracks, the 69 did as well on the short tracks as anything else.  How many of the long track races did the 70 win?

Did anyone race a non aero Charger in 70? I think the wing cars took 5 wins in 70??

Many of the short track races were non wing cars.

[Dodge Don]

The 1970 Charger won 10 Nascar races in the 70 season. Daytonas had only 4 wins in total and 500s had 3 wins in total.

Bobby Isaac won the 70 championship with 8 wins in a 70 Charger and 3 wins with a 500....his Daytona NEVER EVER EVER won a race that year. Bobby Allison had the other 2 wins in a 70 Charger.

[69_500]

They Daytona was something that was in the works for a while, it wasn't exactly just cobbled together. It was pretty well planned out. Going back to around January of 69 they had a decent idea of what they were wanting to do with the Daytona. Although they already had ideas on the 70 Charger at that time as well, which is why the Daytona was originally slated for a 1970 model, but was rushed into the 69 model year to be allowed to race in the 69 season.

[Ghoste]

Thats true Don but its also accurate to state that the 70 never won a high bank race and the Daytona did.  Its also accurate to point out that even though Bobby didn't win a race that year in a Daytona, he did win one near the end of the season prior in one, the Texas 500 on December 7, 1969.

[TUFCAT]

I've said this before,  I love '70's Chargers. With that being said, I always wondered about the design of the 1970 tail-lamps. They look so much like the 1969 design was it really necessary?  At first thought, the '70 style tailight design appear less expensive to manufacture (taking money out of the product). If that was the case they could've kept carry-over 1969 tail-lamps. Those were the days when product changes happened every year, sometimes just for the sake of changing.  

[Dodge Don]

Thats true Don but its also accurate to state that the 70 never won a high bank race and the Daytona did.  Its also accurate to point out that even though Bobby didn't win a race that year in a Daytona, he did win one near the end of the season prior in one, the Texas 500 on December 7, 1969.

So what? Doesn't change the facts.

[Ghoste]

No, it doesn't change them.  "So what" doesn't change mine either nor does it dilute Issac's achievements in a Daytona which were just as impressive as his number of wins in a 70.  Look at how many pole positions and top five finishes he achieved in a Daytona.  The world speed records.  The facts should also stand that his 70 championship wasn't just based on the number of wins but his points and 1970 was finally his year of "think" when they got him to ease up a lot at the big tracks in the interest of finishing and improving his points.
The real fact is that we're both right.

[A383Wing]

 

......and the original question was?

[472 R/T SE]

I've said this before,  I love '70's Chargers. With that being said, I always wondered about the design of the 1970 tail-lamps. They look so much like the 1969 design was it really necessary?  At first thought, the '70 style tailight design appear less expensive to manufacture (taking money out of the product). If that was the case they could've kept carry-over 1969 tail-lamps. Those were the days when product changes happened every year, sometimes just for the sake of changing.  

In '70 the Feds mandated the reflectors in the tail lights as the only change.  IIRC there were some early '70's that still had leftover '69 non reflector tail lights installed.

[moparmark]

                Oh well,


                        The 69 Chargers look better anyway.



                Mark

[Dodge Don]

The real fact is that we're both right.

Maybe..if you believe not winning is just as good. Sorry I don't subscribe to that.

[Sublime/Sixpack]

In response to moparmark's statement; opinions vary.

[Ghoste]

The real fact is that we're both right.

Maybe..if you believe not winning is just as good. Sorry I don't subscribe to that.

Well if you're talking about winning a championship based on points and he scored some of those points by laying back then I guess thats what it takes huh?  If all he relied on for the championship were the handful of wins in the 70 then he would have been watching someone else collect the honors.  Petty had more wins that year for one, so from K&K's point of view was one car more important than the other?  I've asked before, which car did Issac score the most point in for 70?  I don't know btw.