Quote:
Originally Posted by RS_COPO_Canuck
Vendor issues on the Challenger hoods. There were bulletins every month saying they will be available "next month".....they finally starting shipping them in April. Unlike it being standard on a Hemi-Cuda....it was always an option on the Hemi Challengers.
|
Yesterday was Super Bowl Sunday, so let’s make today SUPERCAR MONDAY! While there appears to be a bit of a lull in the action, ‘cause of the snow situation here in the Northeast, I thought it might be a good time for a bit more MoPar E-Body trivia.
So continuing on, & adding to, my Post #908 on p. 91 (re: ‘Cuda shakers), this is an addition to Jim’s above comment (#66 on p. 7), re Challenger shakers: Yes! …And, I wonder a bit about the WHY of those vendor issues, which I’ll explain. I’ve included a tri-fold dealer brochure from my collection, which was printed in January of 1970. It’s for the Dealer Sales Dept.. (I wish I had the comparable one for Plymouth, however, I’ve yet to locate it.) It includes the intro of Panther Pink (Moulin Rouge for Plymouth), and, Green-Go (Sassy Grass Green for Plymouth). (Those are actual big paint chips; not just printed colors!) (I should note that the fluorescent body striping was wild! I saw a beautiful Panther Pink Challenger R/T at MoPars @ Carlisle, circa 2000, which was featured in the display tent. If memory serves, the glowing fluorescent striping was bright orange & purple. It was amazing looking!)
Regarding the N-96 Shaker option (item #4), notice that it talks about 440-6 & Hemi, mentioning availability for 340/383-4/440-4 at a later date. Also, notice that it mentions the red “Air cleaner dome” for red cars. Even though the feature color of the ’70 ‘Cuda was red (therefore requiring the red shaker bubble), the feature color of the ’70 Challenger was Plum Crazy, so this would lead me to believe that it became a “corporate-E-body-across-the-board” kind of decision, so there would be less confusion at the factories.
Also, notice that the N-94 T/A hood (item #5) would soon be available for all of the aforementioned engines. I’m surmising, in part, that that was because of the Challenger shaker hood production “challenge.”
Which brings me to the question of “Why?,” re: the Challenger shaker hoods. During an impromptu & informal forum at MoPars at Englishtown (a.k.a. The MoPar Atlantic Nationals) one year, the Challenger shaker hood was the subject of that discussion among a number of serious E-body owners who were showing their cars (some of which had shakers). What I heard at that time, as well as saw when it was pointed out to us, was that it appeared that the Challenger shaker hood had, seemingly, insufficient, and/or ineffective crumple zones, when compared to that of the ‘Cuda’s. In a further comparison of the 2 cars, the Challenger has greater front end overhang, and, no header panel in front of the hood. What was said, was, when all of the above factors were combined, that the Challenger shaker hood (and, only the shaker hood), when in a front end collision at a particular impact angle & velocity, allegedly went through the windshield with a (you-guessed-it) potentially “undesirable” (to say the least) end result!
Also, for the 1971 model year ALL Challenger, and, ‘Cuda shaker bubbles were painted black Organisol (or, at least, that was what was “supposed” to be). Does anybody know of any exceptions on original/unrestored ’71 cars? Also, in 1970, was the possibility of a shaker bubble being painted Textured Argent or Black Organisol random?
As an addendum to the aforementioned paint color names (as well as other items), of the “Big 3,” GM seemed to be the most strict, corporate-policy-wise; Ford a semi-close second (the Boss 429 being an example; stellar engine though it was, it was under-carbed for the street because drivability was a notable consideration); and, Chrysler the least so. …And, although Chrysler was the most corporately lenient/progressive of them all, encouraging creativity & innovation, even they had their limits.
I would find it highly unlikely (read: impossible) that today the name “Green-Go” (say it fast) would fly. (This was the era of the Frito Bandito, which only lasted from 1967-1971, when heightened social consciousness led to the replacements Muncha Buncha & W.C. Fritos). …However, even then, certain other names would definitely not pass corporate scrutiny. When NJSteve, and, I attended the ’84 MoPar Nats. in Indy, some of the guys from Chrysler’s Engineering, and, Design Depts. were there. The forums were cool, and, following each, they’d hang around, and, “talk shop” for a bit. One of the design guys talked about names for colors which they’d talked about for fun, during the supercar era, which would never get past corporate. One was “Come-&-Get-Me-Copper.” (Does anyone remember the tv cartoon "The Dick Tracy Show” from the early 60s? (’Twas a show where stereotypical ethnic characters led to a quickly truncated showing of reruns in the early 80s.) “Come, and, get me copper!,” was often the refrain from the bad guys as the heroes gave chase!) However, even more offensive was the “other” name they had talked about for purple; not “Plum Crazy;” not “In-Violet,” but, wait for it…
…”Statutory Grape.”
…And, finally, may I draw your attention to brochure item #10: the “Custom-Grip” shifter. Yes! Our iconic “Pistol Grip” shifter was not only mentioned as this, but, in addition, I have earlier literature showing a photo of a prototype with white grips, with a different grip profile, and, what seems to be the original name: “Strip Grip!”
Ah, yes… The wild & wooly days of the supercar era…