Unrestored daytona anyone heres

[nascarxx29]

http://justacarguy.blogspot.hu/2012/10/an-unrestored-1969-dodge-daytona.html

[JB400]

Wish it was mine   Maybe someday

[nascarxx29]

Seat belt clips on top of console Brake lines facing fender 

[maxwellwedge]

Never, ever seen those seat belt clips on a console....looks sorta homemade. Anyone else?

[hemi68charger]

Never, ever seen those seat belt clips on a console....looks sorta homemade. Anyone else?

Yeap,,, seen them on C-bodies with console........  Wow.... I'm marking this day in my calender !  

I used to ( or maybe still do up in the attic ) a black version I got out of a '70 Polara convertible with a console automatic ( A long time ago !! )

[moparstuart]

Never, ever seen those seat belt clips on a console....looks sorta homemade. Anyone else?

Yeap,,, seen them on C-bodies with console........  Wow.... I'm marking this day in my calender !  

I used to ( or maybe still do up in the attic ) a black version I got out of a '70 Polara convertible with a console automatic ( A long time ago !! )

[Ghoste]

So now the question becomes, did that car somehow get a C-body console from new or was it modified later on? 

[nascarxx29]

Ive seen those on front of the seats and pair on front edge of backseat.I knda recall seeing them on C Bodys .But C  body console were longer I think back half came off
http://compare.ebay.com/like/150244718268?_lwgsi=y&ltyp=AllFixedPriceItemTypes&var=sbar

[WINGIN IT]

Not only that, how does the dashpad and instrument cluster get so baked ( it almost looks melted    ) and the seats are pristine?  Seat covers?

[nascarxx29]

http://www.cbodydrydock.com/forum_viewtopic.php?5.24158.0 Those on the unrestored car show rivets or screws on the top C body doesnt

[JB400]

Considering the Daytona was an upscale of an upscale car, it wouldn't surprise me if c body parts ended up on them

[Ghoste]

I disagree.  It was an homologation car slapped together as quickly as possible to get them on the "shipped" list and if anything a money loser for Dodge on a unit basis.  Unlikely they would add upscale parts from an unrelated car line.

[nascarxx29]

The superbird did get a C body hood latch

[JB400]

Sorry, but I'm going to disagree with your disagreement.  The 500 was just thrown together at the last minute.  The Daytona was more refined.  While racing was more on the minds of most, I'm sure the sales department had their fair share in what went on in these cars.  They had to know right off the bat they would be a flop sales wise.  So why not throw in a few luxury touches to make it more appealing.  Besides, these cars cost a little bit more to buy than a standard Charger or even a 500.  More luxury for the money?

[cdr]

notice the lic plate 668 AMD,THE DAYTONA WAS NOT A FLOP IN SALES ! only the copy cat was 

[pettybird]

Machado will know whose car this is...it's a SoCal owner.  Those pics are at Spring Fling.


It's a cool car.  The couple times I'd seen it they had Mopar "driver's education" placards on it. 

[Golden-Arm]

chrome shift knob.

[hemigeno]

Sorry, but I'm going to disagree with your disagreement.  The 500 was just thrown together at the last minute.  The Daytona was more refined.  While racing was more on the minds of most, I'm sure the sales department had their fair share in what went on in these cars.  They had to know right off the bat they would be a flop sales wise.  So why not throw in a few luxury touches to make it more appealing.  Besides, these cars cost a little bit more to buy than a standard Charger or even a 500.  More luxury for the money?

I'm not sure where you got your information from, but it does not at all coincide with what I've researched of the Daytona's developmental process.

As for the seatbelt clips, console stowage clips were mounted on 1969 C-body consoles but not on B-body versions.  You have to dig into the parts book to see the distinction, but it's there.  While it might suit some folks' argument to say "you never know what might have happened with Chrysler back then", the problem with arguing that this is a factory-installed console has to get around the fact that Hamtramck did not make C-body cars in '69.  So... not only would there had to have been a shortage on the Hamtramck line of blue B-body consoles at the exact moment this car's interior was being installed, but a shipment of C-body consoles would had to have been mis-directed to Hamtramck and accepted by the plant's parts procurement employees.  Maybe it's because I'm from Missouri and all, but I'd have to know a bit more about the history of that car before signing on to the "It's a factory-installed console" petition.

Cool car nonetheless!!!

[JB400]

Sorry, but I'm going to disagree with your disagreement.  The 500 was just thrown together at the last minute.  The Daytona was more refined.  While racing was more on the minds of most, I'm sure the sales department had their fair share in what went on in these cars.  They had to know right off the bat they would be a flop sales wise.  So why not throw in a few luxury touches to make it more appealing.  Besides, these cars cost a little bit more to buy than a standard Charger or even a 500.  More luxury for the money?

I'm not sure where you got your information from, but it does not at all coincide with what I've researched of the Daytona's developmental process.

As for the seatbelt clips, console stowage clips were mounted on 1969 C-body consoles but not on B-body versions.  You have to dig into the parts book to see the distinction, but it's there.  While it might suit some folks' argument to say "you never know what might have happened with Chrysler back then", the problem with arguing that this is a factory-installed console has to get around the fact that Hamtramck did not make C-body cars in '69.  So... not only would there had to have been a shortage on the Hamtramck line of blue B-body consoles at the exact moment this car's interior was being installed, but a shipment of C-body consoles would had to have been mis-directed to Hamtramck and accepted by the plant's parts procurement employees.  Maybe it's because I'm from Missouri and all, but I'd have to know a bit more about the history of that car before signing on to the "It's a factory-installed console" petition.

Cool car nonetheless!!!

I'm in Missouri as well. I'm not one that is obsessed with these cars either.  I don't know where which car was made or what not or the fender tag code for every option, but I'm saying it wouldn't surprise me what options came on certain cars.  But, sense factory documents are a little rare on some subjects, it wouldn't surprise me if there are factory oddballs, especially if it was originally built for a exec or some other official.  .

[Aero426]

Machado will know whose car this is...it's a SoCal owner.  Those pics are at Spring Fling.

Correct.  He was standing in one of the photos of the car I saw somewhere.     I think he commented it was a "known about" car, just unrestored is all.       

[TheAutoArchaeologist]

If you guys need bigger pictures, my friend grabbed the pictures of the car and has the full size ones on his flickr page.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8193/8110896363_910bcf72bd_o.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/54867420@N08/sets/72157625247714594/with/8110896363/

Ryan

[Ghoste]

Sorry, but I'm going to disagree with your disagreement.  The 500 was just thrown together at the last minute.  The Daytona was more refined.  While racing was more on the minds of most, I'm sure the sales department had their fair share in what went on in these cars.  They had to know right off the bat they would be a flop sales wise.  So why not throw in a few luxury touches to make it more appealing.  Besides, these cars cost a little bit more to buy than a standard Charger or even a 500.  More luxury for the money?

I'm not sure where you got your information from, but it does not at all coincide with what I've researched of the Daytona's developmental process.

As for the seatbelt clips, console stowage clips were mounted on 1969 C-body consoles but not on B-body versions.  You have to dig into the parts book to see the distinction, but it's there.  While it might suit some folks' argument to say "you never know what might have happened with Chrysler back then", the problem with arguing that this is a factory-installed console has to get around the fact that Hamtramck did not make C-body cars in '69.  So... not only would there had to have been a shortage on the Hamtramck line of blue B-body consoles at the exact moment this car's interior was being installed, but a shipment of C-body consoles would had to have been mis-directed to Hamtramck and accepted by the plant's parts procurement employees.  Maybe it's because I'm from Missouri and all, but I'd have to know a bit more about the history of that car before signing on to the "It's a factory-installed console" petition.

Cool car nonetheless!!!

I'm in Missouri as well. I'm not one that is obsessed with these cars either.  I don't know where which car was made or what not or the fender tag code for every option, but I'm saying it wouldn't surprise me what options came on certain cars.  But, sense factory documents are a little rare on some subjects, it wouldn't surprise me if there are factory oddballs, especially if it was originally built for a exec or some other official.  .

I don't need to be from Missouri, I just plain don't think it is the factory one.

[JB400]

In Missouri tradition, Show Me that it's not the original   Anything is possible

[Ghoste]

Well I can see where this is going so you are right, its likely factory.

[JB400]

For the record, I rescued a console out of a 70 Fury 3 that had those on there at one point. I'll probably fill the holes in before I stick in my 69 unless I can find a pair.