Taillight panel emblem question

[69bronzeT5]

I was looking at a picture of Troy's Daytona and I have a question now. From what I understand, all Daytonas and 500s started off as R/Ts. Now my question is, why did they put the stock '69 Charger script and arrows emblem on the taillight panel instead of keeping the R/T emblems. I mean, why go through the work over an emblem?

[tan top]

 think there was a thread about this if i remember before ! or might of been on the old site , i  wondered why also !  forget now , or i'm getting confussed with the V88 emblems 

     

[hemi68charger]

The Daytona and 500 were completely different models,,,,, base Charger, Charger SE, Charger R/T, Charger 500, Charger Daytona. The designers figured they would put/make the model designator/emblem/callout somewhere else. So, the "Charger" script would remain normal "Charger"...  That's my theory..........

Troy

[Charger-Bodie]

http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php/topic,61990.0.html

[hemigeno]

From what I understand, all Daytonas and 500s started off as R/Ts.

That's true in one sense and not true in another... C500/Daytona cars were equipped identical to R/Ts from a mechanical/performance standpoint, but were intentionally not trimmed out at the Hamtramck Assembly Plant the same on the outside (forget the missing grille, etc).  Simply put, C500s and Daytonas were not R/Ts and therefore were not "supposed" to get R/T emblems.  As Troy stated, they were considered a separate and distinct model.

It is a very common misconception that R/Ts were randomly pulled off the line and sent to Creative for conversion.  That absolutely, positively did not happen.  These cars, from Day One (actually from BEFORE Day One) were intended to be a 500 or Daytona.  Mistakes happened and a few cars did get R/T emblems, but that was not the norm.

There's some more in-depth discussion in the thread link that Brian/1Hot gave.

[Ghoste]

From before Day One includes the 500's coded as "XS"? 

[hemigeno]

From before Day One includes the 500's coded as "XS"?  

... which with the exception of a few oddballs all have Sales Code A11 on the tag, and with only probably the Jerry Service prototype exception, also have a 925xxx Special Order number?

(had to finish your question for ya, Ghoste)


Yep, before Day One.

[hemi68charger]

...

Yep, before Day One.

Is that covered in the Book of Genesis?

1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth (and Mopars)...  and the gathered waters he called "seas." God saw that it was good.   

Troy

[Ghoste]

Yeah, I was just being a smartass with the "XS" thing before someone else did (or I'd have done this  instead of this  )

That kind of humor really only works in person doesn't it?


On a more serious note, does anyone know what is actually coded on Jerry's car?

[nascarxx29]

Daytonas were intended to be converted .They didnt pull 69 RTS as said .Though they might have taken a actual RT to construct 287970 as to its sequence number  .And I ve seen some actual 69 RT with the 287 vin prefix.Id think that car you have the R/T holes in the tail panel

[BROCK]

Slightly off topic.  In 1970 there was a version of R/T that purposely got the Charger + Arrow
emblem on the rear from the factory.




The SE version.

[THE CHARGER PUNK]

Slightly off topic.  In 1970 there was a version of R/T that purposely got the Charger + Arrow
emblem on the rear from the factory.




The SE version.

correct me if im wrong but im pretty sure and 70 r/t se car still got the ''charger r/t'' on the back just like the doors and grille, makes no sense whyd it would have a regular ''charger-arrow '' emblem back there.-MATT

[nascarxx29]

Didnt the 70 get that finish panel.That went over the existing tail light panel

[hemi68charger]

Slightly off topic.  In 1970 there was a version of R/T that purposely got the Charger + Arrow
emblem on the rear from the factory.




The SE version.

No... If it was equipped with the A34 "SE" option, the only exterior emblem change was the "SE" script inlew of the "Charger" on the roof pillar. The rear taillamp panel still would have had the "Charger R/T".. More than likely, the original panel was changed out for one in better condition. Of course, there's ALWAYS the possibility of a factory screw up.

[nascarxx29]

http://www.musclecarrestorations.com/gallery2/v/Chrysler/Completed/Dodge-Charger-70-000/70chrg03.jpg.html

[BROCK]

Thanks for the link nascarxx29

We did a poll of R/T SE cars over on the 70Registry.  The Arrow won.  I'll
be glad to believe the R/T emblem is correct on the back, because I took
the arrow off (panel & all) & swapped it for the R/T version back in 83

[hemi68charger]

Thanks for the link nascarxx29

We did a poll of R/T SE cars over on the 70Registry.  The Arrow won.  I'll
be glad to believe the R/T emblem is correct on the back, because I took
the arrow off (panel & all) & swapped it for the R/T version back in 83

What?....... Paste that link here.........  If it's a Charger that's NOT a R/T, then yes.......  Johnny '70 v-code sunroof R/T SE is a perfect example, "R/T" on the tail panel.......

Troy

[BROCK]

Troy, I just spent an hour walking down memory lane & couldn't find it. 

Johnny is cool.  Glad to see him come back around!

I prefer the R/T emblem & have it now (again?)

Sorry for the hijack guys.

[69_500]

Side note here, but me and Gene were just discussing some of this yesterday when up in Michigan looking at his car. Which is coming along very nicely I might add. As far as the oddball C500's go that are XS everywhere, they also have one other thing in common. None of them that I have seen so far have the A11 on the fender tag either. The only thing that makes one note that they are true C500's is the sequential VIN other known C500's and the VON which starts with a 925.