1969 Dodge Charger Reviews

1969 Dodge Charger 500 426 hemi from North America

Year of manufacture1969
First year of ownership1997
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 426 hemi Manual
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 6 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 4 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.8 / 10
Distance when acquired72000 kilometres
Most recent distance86000 kilometres
Previous carAcura Integra

Summary:

Awesome

Faults:

New paint, new seat covers, new vacuum for the headlights, new radiator, new timing belt.

General Comments:

It's pretty nuts when you let loose on the freeway. Enough power to hurt your neck. I've gone through 3 sets on the rear in like 3 years. It's too easy to do lay down rubber.

Gas is pretty bad, but I mean what can you expect from a 426?

The cornering is average. but the straight aways are totally awesome.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 22nd September, 2005

1969 Dodge Charger R/T 426 hemi from North America

Model year1969
Year of manufacture1969
First year of ownership1984
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 426 hemi Manual
Performance marks 0 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
0.0 / 10

Summary:

Better than awesome

Faults:

The only problem we have had with this Charger was electrical, and the front head lights stopped opening, so I bought the part off eBay.

General Comments:

This car is the third Charger we have had in the family. We have the new 2006 with the SRT-8 6.1 Hemi. I think the new one is faster, considering the cornering of it is far more advanced, but it just doesn't feel like a muscle car should.

The 69 one I only drive in the summer. I love it for the straightaways. But it sometimes has problems shifting into 3rd? Does that mean I have to replace the whole tranny?

Oh, and in case you're wondering what other Charger we have, it is a 1966 440, but it doesn't run, and it is in storage.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 20th September, 2005

15th Mar 2010, 13:58

Just rebuild your tranny, it ain't hard bud.

1969 Dodge Charger R/T 440 Magnum from North America

Model year1969
Year of manufacture1969
First year of ownership2004
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 440 Magnum Automatic
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 10 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
10.0 / 10
Distance when acquired33000 miles
Most recent distance33000 miles
Previous carJeep Grand Wagoneer

Summary:

Great Looker, Gas Guzzler, Money Pit &FUN!!

Faults:

Let me start by saying I bought it after it sat in a driveway since 1980 with no engine and bad body rust...

Here's what I've either replaced or am soon to replace:

Rebuilt 727 TF 3spd Trans

Originally a 318 car now a 440

Both door skins

Both rear quarters

Hood

Brake System

Drive-shaft

Grille &rear valance panel

Paint

A lot of other cosmetic things.

General Comments:

I bought it for $250 and flat-towed it home behind my Jeep which was fairly interesting, pretty comfy except for the spring in the butt feeling.

I have yet to drive it, but I often sit behind the wheel and listen to the motor which is like being teased.

The heater and the air conditioner could be better, but what do you expect from a 40 year old car.

Really set low and it feels like a boat when you look out over that long hood.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 9th February, 2005

10th Feb 2005, 15:58

A Charger R/T that came with a 318 eh?

How do you rate reliability or performance on a car that you haven't even driven yet???

1st Mar 2005, 15:12

I was told that it had a 318 by the man I purchased it from so I made the mistake of believing him...

I gave it a 10 for reliability because I can rely on it to empty my pockets, I rated the performance because my brother had one so I know what to expect.

1969 Dodge Charger R\T 426 HEMI from North America

Year of manufacture1969
First year of ownership1999
Most recent year of ownership2002
Engine and transmission 426 HEMI Automatic
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.8 / 10

Summary:

A gas guzzling, family hauling, performance monster!!!

Faults:

Only thing I did was rip out the tired 383 and put in a 426.

General Comments:

This car is very cool, the performance from the HEMI is enough to give ya whiplash, the 4.10 will let the hemi burn off enough rubber to sealcoat a interstate.

This car does use a lot of gas, but a small price to pay to get this kinda performance.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 14th July, 2002

30th Jan 2003, 18:40

Take out the auto and put in the 4-speed. :)

17th May 2005, 22:39

No need to put a four-speed in it. For one thing, the Mopar torqueflites are excellent transmissions. And an automatic car is virtually as fast as a manual one.

22nd Sep 2005, 11:49

How does the hemi perform compared to the 383? and on the charger I think I would rather have an auto with a 727. you don't need a standard to haul with this car. and an auto with the right tranny is almost the same speed. I have driven a 440 the power is great, but I still have to drive a hemi.

25th Oct 2005, 19:31

Well, the original 383 was so tired it could hardly beat my buddies F150 with a 300 Straight 6. I've raced a 440 Car with the Hemi (both automatics) and he nudged infront of me to 60MPH, then I blew past him.

Average review marks: 7.0 / 10, based on 7 reviews