Were 66'-67' faster then 68'-70'?

[cavemanno1]

A friend of mine just bought a '67 charger with 383 727.Looking at that back window design got me thinking if they were actually faster ,if everything equal, then second gen chargers just because of that window!

Not that it matters but just curious!

Apologise in advance for the stupid question!

[ODZKing]

My understanding was that for 66 that was about as aerodynamic as they could get.  In fact if I remember the story, the purpose of the spoiler on the 66 in NAscar was because the back end was lifting up ... not enough down draft.  I would think weight would weigh in there as well, first gens are a heavy car!  My 67 (w/383) weighs more than my 73 (w/400hp)

[wingcar]

As a side note...The '66 Charger was the first "stockcar" allowed to use a rear spoiler by NASCAR.  Because of the rearend lift issue the cars had.....

[Ghoste]

If you look at the 1st gen in profile you'll notice the 66-67 is shaped much more like an airfoil than many other fastbacks.  At about 180mph the car would begin to lift off which made it not very conducive to running any faster.

[BROCK]

So, if they had replaced the C500 floor/trunk with an
inverted version of the 66/67 fastback roof section....
would we still have seen a Daytona wing developed? 

Silly what-if question

I for 1 am glad the wing was the solution for counter
balance of the excess front down force that beautiful
nose creates

[Ghoste]

As a side note...The '66 Charger was the first "stockcar" allowed to use a rear spoiler by NASCAR.  Because of the rearend lift issue the cars had.....

And it also became the first American production car to receive a spoiler.

[A383Wing]

My car above is the yellow one with spoiler...the "other Charger pic" I stole from "somewhere" else

[Baldwinvette77]

jesus... concept cars were scary things in the 60's 

[Ghoste]

It's okay, they kept tweaking it until it was perfect and after that went to production.