Comments: 1-15, 16
Lots of things. It was a Premier American Pony Car that was driven hard and required restoration.
This was a project car that my Dad helped me restore. It was Rallye Red with black vinyl interior. The Rallye package had heavy duty suspension with front and rear sway bars, and torsion bars up front. The 4 wheel drum brakes should have be outlawed on a car this powerful.
The 340 engine was a free revving brute with a huge Carter AFB 4 barrel carburetor on top and the internal construction of a racing engine. The big 727 Torqueflite tranny was indestructible and had a slap-stik floor shift that allowed manual control for maximum performance. Air entered the twin scoops in the hood and left via a 2-1/2 dual exhaust system that let everyone know a very strong V8 was under the hood. It throbbed at idle and roared under full power.
It had tremendous power at any speed and could shut down most anything except a big block Corvette.
Handling was better than a Mustang or Camaro of the day. The torsion bars up front added to the neutral cornering ability, and oversteer could be corrected with the throttle.
A 3.55 Posi rear end provided excellent traction under power and still allowed a top end of close to 130 mph.
The interior was great. Rallye intrument cluster with 150 mph speedometer, 8,000 rpm tach and gauges for oil pressure, temp, fuel and alternator. A rallye clock topped it off.
The high back bucket seats were very supportive and comfortable, but were sticky in the summer. Like most its peers, the interior was all vinyl and it had no A/C.
Surviving Challengers in R/T and Rallye trim are worth big money today.
Only 80,000 Challengers were made from 1970-1974, and after '72 not many had performance trim from the factory. The Challenger was a great looking car for its day and lived a short life due to smog and fuel efficiency regulation. Chrysler chose to exit the pony car market with the Challenger's exit in 1974.
Interesting review, but the writer is incorrect on a couple points:
1) Total production of the Challenger from 1970-1974 was far more than 80,000. More than 80K were built just in the 1970 model year, although production never came close to that figure in any of the remaining years. Total production for the five model years was around 180,000.
2) The last year for real performance was 1971 because starting with the 1972 models, compression ratios had to be reduced to allow the use of low-lead (and later on, no-lead) gasoline, per federal government requirements.
3) The reviewer's car may not have had a/c, but it was available with some of the performance engines.
All in all though, a well-written review, and if Dodge ever decides to resurrect he Challenger name for a new model, suspect the version they will hope to evoke memories of is this one, not that Mitsubishi-built "sports coupe" that was sold from 1978-1983 as the Challenger "imported for Dodge". However, due to the Challenger space shuttle disaster, maybe they won't ever use this model name again...
An interesting rebuttal. The Challenger built by Mitsubishi was not mentioned, because I never considered it a Challenger after owning an original. After 1971 no big block engines were offered in the Challenger from the factory. In 1972 the 340 engine was the most powerful engine offered in the Challenger and was one of Chrysler's most power engines, giving up only 40 hp to the detuned big block engines of the day.
Reviewing old road tests shows that because of the added weight of the big block engines, with no increase in aerodynamics and no extra gearing, the 340 engine provided nearly equal acceleration with no handling penalty. The extreme weight bias of the big block Challengers decreased handling ability and increased understeer in a big way. Also, the big block Challengers from '70 and '71 had no rear stabilizer bar which was standard on the 340 Challenger and greatly increased road holding and cornering power.
Having owned a 340 Challenger I can say that the reports were true. It was a very quick, nimble machine for it's day. They all should have had power front disc brakes as standard gear. The unassisted drum brakes on mine were terrible, and would be considered borderline dangerous today.
Production numbers were severely limited, Chevy made more Camaros in any given year than Dodge made Challengers.
Sure, Dodge made fewer Challengers than Chevy made Camaros, but Challengers are not particularly rare even now.
And Dodge is bringing back the Challenger, but not until the 2009 model year. It will be a coupe based on the Magnum/300 platform and intended to compete with the Mustang (and maybe the Camaro if it has reappeared by then)
"Everything old is new again"
I wish I kept mine. But finding body parts for the "E" body Challenger today is on the order of a religious crusade. In 1980, just 6 years after the last Challenger was made, rear bumpers were no longer available new, as was true with other details. I got a lot of stuff used. Since many Challenger's ended in wrecks that was tough. Corrosion was legion, as was on other Mopars of the day, and added to the toil of finding good original parts. For awhile after-market stuff was available in the 80's, but nothing holds value like original stampings.
Anyone holding a pristine example today has a potential financial windfall.
The information on the Dodge Challenger has been interesting and informative. I have owned a 73 Rallye 340 with a 727 and a Stap Stick since new. Its original and numbers matching.
First of The 727 is a great transmission, very reliable and works well with the Slap Stick.
Mine has disk brakes up front (drums in the rear) and it made a big difference back then. Stopping power is still good and was exceptional by the standards back then. As one person noted this is a light car with the 340 and handling was much better than the big blocks. I believe that front discs were standard on the 73' Rallye 340.
Biggest problem I have had over the 30+ years has been with the front end components. The Torsion Bar suspension was in my opinion a little overrated.
Actually the knock on Mopar Pony Cars were that they did not handle as well as the other's from Ford and GM.
They looked great, had lots of power, however hadling was not their strong suit.
Actually, Torsion bars are not overrated. The Porsche 911 used them for years. The Anti-dive characteristic in braking and neutral cornering made them a viable alternative to coils, which cannnot be adjusted for wear or ride height like torsion bars can.
The Challenger was a bigger car than the Mustang and Camaro of it's day. It definately handled better than the Mustang. The Camaro was a smaller and ligher car than the Challenger and Mustang and handled very well for the technology then.
Having owned a 70 340 4spd convert from 73 until a few years ago, I would agree that they should have all had power disc brakes. Mine could top 140 and really needed more than the manual drums.
That aside, the handling was wonderful. Set up a turn, bring the wheel back to center and drive with the throttle. I did drive a few big blocks over the years, and while the power was impressive, they felt quite heavy on the front end.
I have owned a 1972 Challenger 340 (non Rallye model) 4 speed car since 1989. It is a great car. My car does have power assisted front disc brakes and stops and handles well. The power of the 340 is legendary. The Hurst pistol grip shifted A833 Chrysler 4 speed is without doubt the best manual I have every driven. My car has been modified with gas shocks (dampers), 17" x 8" alloy wheels with 235/45x17 tyres. Further the engine is now a high compression modified engine to produce even more power than when it left the factory. It is a truly great car, a classic high performance Mopar muscle car.
I bought a used '72 Challenger back in '74 when I was young - it only had 41,000 miles on it and I paid $2499 for it. It was the "340 4-barrel", with a Torqueflite 727 3-speed automatic transmission. I liked the car because not too many guys had Challengers compared to Camaros and Stangs and Chevelles, but it was really without substance when compared to the other pony-cars of that era. (If you did not live and drive during that era you have little idea what you are talking about.) Cars like the GTO, Shelby, Road Runner, Daytona Charger, The Judge etc. were everywhere and difficult to recken with. The Challenger 340 was NOT any faster ot better handling than a small-block Camaro or a 351 Mustang. The torsion bar suspension was immature in its design. It only had 225hp because the new no-lead gasoline restrictions required re-engineering the engine so it would run on unleaded fuel, so it was pretty much a "dog" compared to the pre-'72 model years. I was once outran by a Chevelle 350 TWO-Barrel! Still, it was fun and classy and peppy enough for a 14 second quarter mile and girls loved it of course. Mine was red with black vinyl top and black interior. It had 4-wheel drum brakes and I almost crashed the car more than once due to lack of braking power.
I have just purchased a 72 Challenger with the 340 4 barrel
4 speed. Does anyone know how many 4 speeds Dodge made in this year. It is hard to find out this information
Thanks.
I have the #s somewhere, but for now check out a book by Mike Mueller. Called something like Mopar Muscle Cars. It'll give you a breakdown of the # of cars made etc... off the top of my head, for 1972 there were something like 6,902 Rallye cars made, that includes 340 and 318 Rallye cars, automatic and manual. I think something like 3,900 340/auto Rallye cars were made that year. Again, just off the top of my head.
This is an interesting topic. Compared to previous years, the 340 Challengers were on the doggy side as someone mentioned. For that year though, I feel that they held their own against the competition. As the Dodge Ad for that year reflect, it's not all about the speed and power any more, but rather a total package of car.
It was the first year that the 340 got electronic ignition, so no more playing with points. My car's 340 is still intact from the factory, never been rebuilt with about 106k miles, and can use regular unleaded due to it's lower compression, about the only positive thing about the 8.5:1 compression that I can think of.
Being a '72, versus the more valuable '70-'71 cars, I can enjoy driving it to the local grocery store or bring my son to his soccer games without having to worry about driving an "investment" car that I worry about every time I drive it for fear of getting hit.
It still has the classic lines of the other years and actually finding a '72-'74 car is getting more difficult to find one cheap. Go search craigslist locally for Challengers and you'll see. You might be able to find a deal.
Here's a nice forum for Challengers and Barracudas that I belong to:
Www.cuda-challenger.com.
Actually '72 was the first year for electronic ignition. My '72 has it and has it coded on the fender tag.
My second car was a brand new 72 Challenger 340. The power was unbelievable!! The day I hit the 500 mile mark I decided it was time to open it up and see what she would do. 147 mph and blew away a Camaro in the process. Could have gotten more, but was running out of straightaway. No I was not too smart in those days!! It was an unreal feeling to drive that car. Loved the slap stick and used it a lot!
I have a 1972 Dodge Challenger with a 340 and a torqueflite 727 3 speed automatic that turns 3000rpm at 60 mph. and running 3.55 gears. Is there a transmission that can be interchangeable with a 4th gear which would lower the rpm's
on the top end, but still have the early gears to get off of the line. If there is something like that can I be emailed to dew46@windstream.net.
Thanks.