Where to buy 69 charger tail light cover

[Daytona R/T SE]

I just ordered one of each from Summit Racing...

(Free shipping.)

https://www.oerparts.com/product/all-years/dodge/charger/parts/748830.html


https://www.oerparts.com/product/all-years/dodge/charger/parts/748831.html

We'll see what the differences are between'69 and '70. 

Stay tuned...

Very similar but you can see the differences....

Yes, These differences can be seen in the photos.

The dimension I'm most concerned with is the "depth" front-to-back.

There is a difference in the length of the "hoods" over the tail light bulbs/wiring.

This difference changed sometime during the 69/70 model years.

The plastic cover was changed to accommodate the change in the "hoods".

Was it late '69 ?

Early '70?



Nobody I asked could give me a 100% definitive answer, so I bought both.

[70 sublime]

Would the change be the same time the 70 tail lights got the extra square reflector in the middle of the lense ?

[Daytona R/T SE]

Would the change be the same time the 70 tail lights got the extra square reflector in the middle of the lense ?

I don't know.

Interesting point.

[Old Moparz]

Glad I snagged the cover I found at Carlisle last summer for $10.    My son was with me & doesn't really know parts pricing but knew it was a great deal. No damage, just some scuffs & scratches.

[hemigeno]

The cast taillight housings changed in early 1969 from what I can tell.  This has to do with the "eyebrow" or shroud that arches over the tail lamp socket inside the trunk.  That housing / eyebrow changed from a longer version (which required the deeper tail light cover) to a shorter version - probably about 1" shorter.  Once you notice the difference, you can tell them apart at a glance.  Whenever that housing changed, the tail light cover went to the shallow version at the same time.

The January-built R/T (assembled in St. Louis) I used to own had the long eyebrows / and deeper tail light cover, whereas most spring '69 cars (including most, if not all Daytonas) had the short housing / eyebrow and shallow cover.  '70s would have all had the shallow covers.

I don't recall whether 287970 / #501 has the short or long tail light housing, as that's a February car if memory serves correctly...  It might narrow down when the changeover occurred just a bit?  Hamtramck vs. St. Louis may also have played a role in the changeover date too.

Anyone else have original taillight housings in their car that can shed more light on this topic?

[69hemibeep]

I have one out of a 70 I can dig out for reference. It's cracked and brittle.

[Daytona R/T SE]

The cast taillight housings changed in early 1969 from what I can tell.  This has to do with the "eyebrow" or shroud that arches over the tail lamp socket inside the trunk.  That housing / eyebrow changed from a longer version (which required the deeper tail light cover) to a shorter version - probably about 1" shorter.  Once you notice the difference, you can tell them apart at a glance.  Whenever that housing changed, the tail light cover went to the shallow version at the same time.

The January-built R/T (assembled in St. Louis) I used to own had the long eyebrows / and deeper tail light cover, whereas most spring '69 cars (including most, if not all Daytonas) had the short housing / eyebrow and shallow cover.  '70s would have all had the shallow covers.

I don't recall whether 287970 / #501 has the short or long tail light housing, as that's a February car if memory serves correctly...  It might narrow down when the changeover occurred just a bit?  Hamtramck vs. St. Louis may also have played a role in the changeover date too.

Anyone else have original taillight housings in their car that can shed more light on this topic?

Good info, Geno.

It's all starting to make sense to me now.

I've got five or six original plastic tail light covers in various stages of decay.

Two of which are noticeably shorter by about 3/4"

For anybody who has tried to install a full sized 15" spare in the trunk of a Daytona, or C500, you quickly realize that an extra almost inch of wiggle room might be advantageous. 

I am curious to see if the differences in depth are made into the repops I just ordered, or did they just cut them differently to include those mounting tabs.? 

We'll find out, they're scheduled to be delivered on Monday.

Stay tuned.

[Daytona R/T SE]

My tail light cover panels arrived today.

The first thing I noticed is one of the boxes is taller than the other.

As Geno pointed out in his post above, the one listed for a '70 charger is not as deep as the one listed for a '69.

Since the parts are so flexible, it was difficult to get an accurate measurement of the difference in depth.

It's at least an inch difference.

Also, the '70 has two more mounting tabs than the '69.

[b5blue]

The one with extra tabs matches my 70's. 

[Old Moparz]

My tail light cover panels arrived today.

They look nice, let us know how they fit & line up in the trunk. 

[Daytona R/T SE]

My tail light cover panels arrived today.

They look nice, let us know how they fit & line up in the trunk. 

It might be a while, but will do.

[doctor4766]

My tail light cover panels arrived today.

The first thing I noticed is one of the boxes is taller than the other.

As Geno pointed out in his post above, the one listed for a '70 charger is not as deep as the one listed for a '69.

Since the parts are so flexible, it was difficult to get an accurate measurement of the difference in depth.

It's at least an inch difference.

Also, the '70 has two more mounting tabs than the '69.

They look nice, but I notice how squared off they are compared to my original 1970 cover.
I haven't seen them like this before, so I'm surprised nobody has commented. I mean, would you use them in a high end resto? I suppose it's better than not having one at all.

[Daytona R/T SE]

They look nice, but I notice how squared off they are compared to my original 1970 cover.
I haven't seen them like this before, so I'm surprised nobody has commented. I mean, would you use them in a high end resto? I suppose it's better than not having one at all.

I'm not sure what you mean by squared off? 

Do you mean the ends?

For comparison, I'll post a couple of pictures of two of my originals, which with Geno's help, I now realize are for a late '69/'70.

Here they are at the local car wash getting 50+ years of filth, spider webs and mud daubers blasted off of them.

Let's see if we can spot the differences, old verses new.

   

Old:

[Daytona R/T SE]

 

New:

[doctor4766]

They look nice, but I notice how squared off they are compared to my original 1970 cover.
I haven't seen them like this before, so I'm surprised nobody has commented. I mean, would you use them in a high end resto? I suppose it's better than not having one at all.

I'm not sure what you mean by squared off? 

Do you mean the ends?

For comparison, I'll post a couple of pictures of two of my originals, which with Geno's help, I now realize are for a late '69/'70.

Here they are at the local car wash getting 50+ years of filth, spider webs and mud daubers blasted off of them.

Let's see if we can spot the differences, old verses new.

   

Old:

Look at the "roundness" of the corners on mine, particularly the corners on either side of the trunk latch.
Maybe it's the lighting/shadowing on the pics you put up, but they don't look as rounded

[Daytona R/T SE]

They look nice, but I notice how squared off they are compared to my original 1970 cover.
I haven't seen them like this before, so I'm surprised nobody has commented. I mean, would you use them in a high end resto? I suppose it's better than not having one at all.

I'm not sure what you mean by squared off? 

Do you mean the ends?

For comparison, I'll post a couple of pictures of two of my originals, which with Geno's help, I now realize are for a late '69/'70.

Here they are at the local car wash getting 50+ years of filth, spider webs and mud daubers blasted off of them.

Let's see if we can spot the differences, old verses new.

   

Old:

Look at the "roundness" of the corners on mine, particularly the corners on either side of the trunk latch.
Maybe it's the lighting/shadowing on the pics you put up, but they don't look as rounded

OK, now I think I understand what you mean.

At some point when I get some time, I'll dig out my original '70 covers and compare them side by side with the new ones.

[Daytona R/T SE]

As promised, pictures of my old, scruffy, original late 1969/1970 tail light covers.

[b5blue]

Better than mine! 

[doctor4766]

As promised, pictures of my old, scruffy, original late 1969/1970 tail light covers.

So, side by side, are they close?
(And don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to be picky, I'm actually very happy that someone is finally making them available)

[Daytona R/T SE]

As promised, pictures of my old, scruffy, original late 1969/1970 tail light covers.

So, side by side, are they close?
(And don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to be picky, I'm actually very happy that someone is finally making them available)

I think they are very close. 

Close enough for my junk, anyway.