27th Mar 2005, 21:15

The 79 300 was, if you take the time to look at the specs. about mid performance point of the first 300's until about 59. The 79 is more like the 55 than most other 300's with respect to limited number of options and color choices. It also performed in the upper performance range for 79, the LRE Dodge pickup, the Vette and the Firebird were about the only US production vehicles that out performed it. It still has good lines and character. The bottom of the barrel IMO are the tens of thousands of 99 thru 04 300 M front wheel drive cars. Chrysler never changed the letter designation and did not keep the M series in keeping with the old letter cars, just sales hype.

14th Apr 2005, 16:20

First, the fwd 300M, despite the name, does not even merit comparison to the rwd 300's, even the non-letter versions like your 1979. And frankly the 300C they are selling now has too many doors, but DaimlerChrysler is reportedly deemphasizing the coupe body style.

As far as the 1979 300 outperforming most other American cars that year, that's not saying much. 1979 was hardly a pinnacle of American automotive performance.

13th Mar 2006, 15:04

My '79 300 drives like a bat out of hell, just a few upgrades like carb and intake, as well as headers and exhaust and the 360 small bock will dominate main street. I forsee this car being a collectible in the future as it is the very last B-body. Mopar Muscle Forever.

14th Apr 2006, 10:25

I have owned a '79 300 for about ten years and I think it is as good as any 300 but the Hurst and the Original two years. It turns on like a sledgehammer (modified), looks like a million bucks, and is already a classic. Those who cut these cars down are not really thinking, because they are absolutely true to what the original 300 was meant to be, 'The Beautiful Brute'. Mine is gaining in value every day, and it does go as well as just about any car from the era it was made. Would you say a '79 Z28 isn't a real Z28 because it won't run as hard as a '69 Z28?

22nd Jul 2006, 22:36

My 300 got a few performance upgrades like headers, dual glass packs, Edelbrock intake and 650cfm carb. The engine hasn't been touched for the 120,000 miles on it and it just screams. 0-60 times around 7 seconds. The 727 shifts as hard and fast as a manual (especially with a shift kit). This car dominates main street and makes all the new Mustang guys cower in fear. B-bodies forever. Mopar for Life.

11th Mar 2007, 08:00

This car dominates main street and makes all the new Mustang guys cower in fear.


Heh, in your dreams, buddy.

11th Mar 2007, 11:18

I bet you don't even know what this car looks like. A rear-wheel drive, 360 4-barrel with 727 AT certainly has potential, once you clear away the smog strangulation.

23rd Mar 2007, 18:23

You guys are so funny!!!

My husband has been dragging around this car for 20 years waiting to restore it.

It is sitting across street from house. Everyone refers to it as the statue.

His comment to my entry is, "I am glad you are getting a thrill off of my misery.

I asked him why he has been holding on to this car this long, his comment was, "Because once you drive it, you can never let go of it". You would think he was talking about a woman.

Can somebody pimp my husband's ride??? (Smile)

24th Mar 2007, 10:16

Yeah, that sounds like a great challenge! I once did take up a similar calling for a lady with a '75 Dodge Charger Daytona. Yanked the 318, and put in a rebuilt 360, with the better '72 cylinder heads, headers, Edelbrock dual plane intake, Holley 4-barrel, and Direct Connection ignition. That was a heck of a nice running car at the end. Your 300 had the same engine as the Dodge Lil' Red Express truck, which believe it or not was the fastest production vehicle for 1979. Restore it!

24th Mar 2007, 10:22

Yeah, buddy, but at least it isn't a dime a dozen like the same played out Mustang that has been around forever. Back in '79, this Chrysler would have smoked the hell out of the same year Mustang. That probably still makes you mad.

26th May 2007, 22:05

The 1979 Chrysler 300 was factory rated at 195 Horsepower, however the National Hot Rod Association rated the same car at or around 256 Horsepower. Chrysler downplayed the actual power these cars produced, probably to appease the insurance companies. When I drive mine, I don't actually see the Mustang boys looking too afraid since they have similar power in lighter cars. My 1979 Chrysler 300 still goes like the proverbial bat out of hades, so I love it...

17th Jun 2007, 02:53

Ah yes, horse power. If you're going to talk HP then you need to compare apples to apples. I'm sure that many of you don't know that 1972 HP ratings went from net to gross, the means from crank to wheel. So there was a great drop because there is a lot of power lost in the driveline. But the other key factor is in Mopars little game of 'advertised' HP. If you do some research you'll find out that the numbers Chrysler was putting out starting in the 60's were not necessarily the real deal. They did like to understate the numbers for various reasons.

The most famous example of this is the famed Hemi, 425 horse net is really an insult. That number was pulled out of the blue by Mopar engineers so the government wouldn't bar them from selling the 426 Hemi. The engine dyno that they were testing on in 63 was capable to 600HP, the Hemi maxed it out! The other telltale is that from 64 through 71 (8 years) there was no improvements made to gain more power, the HP ratings never changed from the original 'advertised' 425.

14th Jul 2007, 12:00

The 1979 through 1993 Mustangs were built on the FOX body frame of the Ford Fairmont.

17th Jul 2007, 09:23

The 300 currently on eBay right now is the real deal. However, it is a Canadian car with a 300 appearance package, which was available in Canada only. Essentially, it looks like a 300, but has regular Cordoba parts underneath. It's a 2 barrel, no tachometer, no leather, single exhaust, and no handling package. You could order a Cordoba with this package and do it up as you wish. You could add on power seats (you couldn't get this on a proper 300) and do up the car with any available Cordoba suspension pieces that were offered. I wonder how many were made?

27th Jul 2007, 05:24

My 79 300 actually has a driver's side power seat, the reason being that it was made for the Canadian market and did not need the same exhaust system the United States cars used. Otherwise, it is the same car as the one sold Stateside, the hot 360 backed by a 727, the beefy rear-end and suspension, and the full option package. Like a lot of Mopars, just about anything could and did happen during production...

9th Sep 2007, 08:44

I'm buying a 300, what should I put in it that could increase the power without leaving me with no lunch money.