There were four DMCL cars.

[mauve66]

great stuff. ive gotta watch this again this weekend and check some of this stuff out. one thing i love to do is with the dvr slow the train crash scene down frame by frame. pretty friggin cool.

For me the best part of that is the rear wheels leaping up off the road. That car hit HARD! The very next shot is at normal speed- the one with the train coming toward camera, passing to the right. THAT is how fast the train was going. Makes the crash that much more impressive that the crew had to 'wing it'.
When you get to the first Charger chase (the one with the billboard), note that everytime we see Fonda, he's driving the SE (silver wiper frames) and has the gloves on. But every shot of the stunt driver in the RT (black wiper frames), he's bare handed. Same thing occurs with the hi-po interceptor later on- Close-ups have the actor wearing black gloves, but looking back from inside the Charger, you see the stuntman is bare handed. OK, there's your homework. Have fun! 

Ok, thanks for that very detailed explanation. If the director says it's three cars then,  three cars it is. Can't argue with that. As for the '68, it was shown on the high road with '68 tailights. My guess as to why they installed '69 tailights in it was because they wanted to sacrifice the most battered and worthless car first and they needed to show the rear of the car with '69 lights.  There would have been plenty of time to do the install while they worked on the train pulley setup. The rear of that car was also shown limping into the walnut grove with a damaged wheel. It could have been damaged for real in an earlier take and was therefore undriveable but still a perfect candidate for the train scene or they simply loosened the lug nuts to make it look like it was crippled. So three cars it is but a fun debate anyway and we all learn more.

I love a civil debate myself. I love digging to hammer out the facts.

Re: the '68 tail lights, they can be made out just barely as the car crosses the bridge when the cop goes in the channel, too, tho it kinda appears they've painted the chrome rings black to reduce reflections that make it obvious its a '68. Ya gotta look HARD and freeze-frame is almost no help at all (see pic below)...

As for your theory of the tail lights for the train crash- makes perfect sense, I totally agree that is WHY they altered the car. But I'm still left befuzzled by the fact they used that configuration for that one short shot of the car crawling away with the damaged wheel. I recall the director also said that at times, there were two crews operating at times in different areas. As a theoretical example, while he was directing shots of the actors going through the motions of the Interceptor chase (all the inside-the-Charger shots) in the RT, the other crew might have been using the '68 for the dirt siding run, with the SE carrying the cameras, driving next to the cop car on the roadway. So, imaging both the RT and SE were busy elsewhere with the actors, that shot of the '68 crawling into the grove might have been done by the 'second unit', using the only car available to them that hour or day.

It's a question I never asked of the two guys I met with, but after all these years, such a minor shot might be long gone from memory anyway. Even the director recalls a few things that simply make no sense and could not have been (examples escape me at the moment), so in reality, yes, we CAN 'argue with that' in some instances. 

Oo, I was just going through behind-the-scenes photos, and noticed a car in the background (second pic). Seems to match the inserted shot of a '59 Chevy, yes? I think I found the El Camino! 

The last attached photo is for Bert. Who the frak are those people sitting all over your car, and why is that proper British woman flipping you the finger??? Note the antenna is extended all the way up, as it is in only one scene in the film (when it turns right and passes the farm truck while fleeing the imaginary police cars).

that proper british woman is friggin hot, even if she turned into a turn coat later on

[model maker]

Thats the crew and stars, the el camino is parked behind them. what i want to know is why my long antennae was used in the single shot of them rounding the right turn with the 2 field workers loading the pick up truck looking on ? I cannot find that antennae anywhere else. That antennae was stuffed in the trunk & poking out the rear seat side and went up between the passenger seat  & side of the door. maybe they were using it to communicate by real radio to the helicopter or the second unit filming elsewhere and needed the longer antennea to talk through the walnut grove to wherever  the others were, I am glad i kept that antennae.

[kikgas01]

I think they turned the 68 into a 69 for the shot with the weird taillights and I think that same car is the one that the train hit. Please post a screen cap of tha back of the car as the train hits it. Same car.

[jwramc]

I think they turned the 68 into a 69 for the shot with the weird taillights and I think that same car is the one that the train hit. Please post a screen cap of tha back of the car as the train hits it. Same car.

Nope. 69 side markers and the no Charger emblem on the C-pillars as it hits the train. It's the "SE" shown hitting the train.

[FastbackJon]

well as far as the headrest thing, it seemed to me that the headrests were removed for filming. at least in 1 car anyway. there are shots from the drivers side showing mary in the passenger side that had the mounting holes for a head rest. then from the back seat from deke looking forward there are mounting holes in the drivers seat. now of course as stated, those scenes could have been shot from any of the three cars.

Yes.  Also worth noting that most of the interior shots were a car with ac.  The number of speaker grilles in the dash will change aorund abit as well.

(This reply was typed up before Bert's last note about the headrests)

Both the faux RT and the likely SE were AC cars. The fastest way to spot which car interior we're in is either the wiper frames (black is the RT, silver is the SE) or the tops of the front seat (silver headrest mounts are the SE, no mounts is the RT). Another way (usually shots of Deke alone in the back) is the oblong factory sticker on the quarter glass. If it's about an inch from the bottom, centered on the glass- that's the RT. If it's pushed way back into the rear corner, that's the SE.

It's interesting that these two cars seemed to swap jobs at some point in the filming. I've been trying to form a logical chain of events, like what scene is filmed before what other scene, to figure out the reason for the swap (the interceptor chase is cut together from scenes filmed in a very different order). Generally, the bulk of the interior shots of the actors are in the SE while the exteriors tend to be the RT (often with the SE driving alongside with cameras mounted on it- check the reflection in the RT's door mirror). But for about 1/3 of the Charger's half of the film, we see the SE from outside, and the cast is in the RT. As for the 68, that car is used only for exteriors, and just a couple of those (clearly they knew it was risky to show it TOO often, too close due it's differences).

Something must have occurred (perhaps several things at different times, and they swapped back and forth several times) to force the swap(s). I think some of it may have been maintenance/collision repairs affect availability day-to-day, but also the need to be in two places at one, filming different scenes with two separate camera crews. As a ficticious example, the RT could be with cast sitting at the flea market filming interior shots ("look what I got you!") while the SE was carrying a camera alongside the '68 on the dirt siding, approaching the 'good sailor' bump and dunk chase (this particular example is unlikely as the two locations are VERY far apart- easy 40 minute ride which spreads them out too much to react for and assist each other if needed).

Certain shots are obvious about where they belong in real-time sequence. The very first shot of the SE at the flea market is a very late shot, as the air dam and grille/hood misalignment shows. The RT pulling away from the same spot minutes later is one of the car's first uses as it is extremely straight and clean. The 'dirt tracking scene' during the interceptor chase was filmed before most of the rest of that chase because after it and for a while before it, the left quarter panel is punched inward...but entering the dirt road, the quarter is undamaged.

The shot of the brake pedal just before that quarter gets squashed... well, that's a later shot, probably of a crewmember wearing Larry's pants and shoes, sitting in the '59 El Camino workhorse. The director likely had a last minute though to get that shot but the Chargers were unavailable... perhaps already wrecked and junked (SE and 68) or sold (RT).

My working theory is something like this: The faux RT simply was the better looking car externally, thanks to the RT badging and clean body (especially the grille area). The SE had the cleanest interior (keep that cast happy) and not having the best grille and no RT badges, was intended to avoid close-ups or lingering exterior shots. But the RT was also the dominant stunt car, most often doing the high-speed, hairy stuff.

All this complicated back and forth is the norm even for big-budget films...even more confusing. I've always found it insulting when a movie about actors and movie-making will show an extended scene being shot- even a car chase, and we're shown it as if the whole chase is filmed by a zillion cameras mounted all over the city and it's all in one take. Bullitt's chase would have been about an hour long and utterly boring if this were the case, because what we are shown as being a continuous chase in a continuous chain of nearby locations was actually filmed all over the place, jumping miles each time the cars made a turn. It's as if they turned left at the Empire State building in New York and were then shown stopping in front of Wrigley Field a moment later. DMCL did the very same thing.

If you have and use Google Earth, you can import the attached file to give you my list of known locations, in the order they appear in the film.

Wow, and I thought I was obsessed with details. Not a bad thing, I just think someone really needs to go through all of these posts and archive off what we do know, including all of Bert's posts. I did a bit of research into the three cars a few years ago that seems to have fallen to the back of the forum and is now being "re-discovered".

"New" discoveries for the discoverer can be fun, but I think if someone were to archive all of this information off, either on wikipedia or on some kind of definitive DMCL Charger website, then we'd save time and have a backup of the info in case the site went down and posts were lost (it has happened before... kind of).

Here's another older thread where we discussed much of the same information...

http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php/topic,39803.msg446232.html#msg446232

[kikgas01]

Can anyone post screen caps of the train/charger please.

[jwramc]

Here ya go.

[jwramc]

"New" discoveries for the discoverer can be fun, but I think if someone were to archive all of this information off, either on wikipedia or on some kind of definitive DMCL Charger website, then we'd save time and have a backup of the info in case the site went down and posts were lost (it has happened before... kind of).

I tried adding a pile of info to the DMCL Wiki page, but some dismissive douche decided that the movie is minor/cultish and didn't deserve to waste so much text, so they deleted 99% of it... to keep us in our lowly place. Like Transformers needs more f**king space. 

[nvrbdn]

that windshield lower trim is still in good shape in that pic. soon to be trash though.

[jwramc]

Hey, the train took a beating, too! 

In fact, check the shot of it approaching just before the collision...AND the opening shot of the film as well. BOTH show that corner of the locomotive is already sporting the damage done by the Chargers. YUP, they filmed those shots AFTER the crashes. DOH!!

[Ghoste]

My early '69 car (December '68 build), did not come with headrests and it also has the small bumperettes. Berts R/Tish car also had small bumperettes indicating an early car which may not have had headrests. The "SE" in the film had large bumperettes indicating a late car meaning headrests were likely mandatory.

Depending how late of course, as I don't believe the two things happened simultaneously.  I had a January build 69 once that had the mandatory headrests but small bumper guards.

[kikgas01]

Thanks jwramc. I will try to find the one now of the back on fire.

[Ghoste]

My understanding also is that locomotive is on display somewhere to this day.  Has anyone seen it recently and does the damage still exist?

[kikgas01]

I just watched it and my thoughts are that the one the train hit was the one with the funny taillights.

[jwramc]

My understanding also is that locomotive is on display somewhere to this day.  Has anyone seen it recently and does the damage still exist?

The locomotive on display (deteriorating, incomplete and unrestored) at WPRM in Portola is the #506 of the ST&E Railroad. It is the loco used on the saturday they crashed the '68 car..which didn't explode and the footage went unused. The museum is mistaken when they state it appears in the film.
http://www.wplives.org/locomotivepages/wp506.html
Only the #505 actually shows up in the movie (which was still at ST&E's yard in Stockton. CA when I visited in May 2010).

[jwramc]

I just watched it and my thoughts are that the one the train hit was the one with the funny taillights.

Again, no. Note '69 Side markers. The funny tail lights are on the '68 that they destroyed the day before without it exploding.

Here is the car fire being extinguished after filming. Note the reverse lights in the valance and the '440' marking is VERY rearward...where the 68 side marker WOULD be...but it isn't there, because the 68 had the '440' painted just forward of the side-markers. This car is the pseudo-SE.

[nvrbdn]

thats a pretty cool pic. hadn't seen it before.

[jwramc]

I think it's one of the stills on the Supercharger Edition DVD (if you have the newer version packaged with Race with the Devil, you've got a stripped-down version of DMCL and MUST find the Anchor Bay version from 2005).  

Here's another one, followed by a movie shot of the SE from behind (again, note the reverse lights).

[nvrbdn]

i dont have the race with the devil set. thought about ordering it. i have an older one by itself. tic toc tac face. comes with the book with the pic's that i see on the posters. guess i need to look at the special features and not just watch the movie.

[jwramc]

You've got the good one.

[Ghoste]

Yes, you must always watch the special features.

[nvrbdn]

i know, but when i watch it im always narating to the wife. like i just showed her the sailor scene and said "whats wrong with this shot" she actually said "hey, thats a 68" im proud of her.

[model maker]

The side marker on the back is shown just as the car lifts up in the back. My Charger had the big dent in the left rear quarter panel. After i had the body work done the body line was lost in that area & it was just flat the body man apparently did not take pride in in his work. One other thing i remember from the front end damage was the red paint was from a spray can and  by the way they must have sprayed it, there was some of the red overspray inside under the hood area by the radiator support area. I think they sprayed rust colored primer & not paint.

[model maker]

GHOSTE, you have a PM message.
bert

[FastbackJon]

"New" discoveries for the discoverer can be fun, but I think if someone were to archive all of this information off, either on wikipedia or on some kind of definitive DMCL Charger website, then we'd save time and have a backup of the info in case the site went down and posts were lost (it has happened before... kind of).

I tried adding a pile of info to the DMCL Wiki page, but some dismissive douche decided that the movie is minor/cultish and didn't deserve to waste so much text, so they deleted 99% of it... to keep us in our lowly place. Like Transformers needs more f**king space. 

Yes, wikipedia is bad for that. You need two or three people on your side to undo their changes. It's the power of numbers that helps there. For the longest time I had a long list of Chargers used in Movies on wikipedia and certain people kept removing it, and I kept putting it back up, until IMCDB.org came around, and then I didn't care too much.

imdb.com might be another good place to post movie locations.

Concerning the three Chargers. I'm still sticking to the point that only two were damaged in the front, the RT and the 68 car. I read this was done by backing a truck up into them. I believe the non-RT '69 that was towed into the train in the movie wasn't damaged in the front. Maybe this is why they didn't put a camera on the train looking down at the collision?