Musclecar Dealers & Low Production Factory Freaks

[old5.0]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: njsteve</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 442w30</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not sure why a Six Pack Bee would be considered a freak.
</div></div>

Because it's a 1972. Official production of the Six Pack/Six Barrel engines ended in 71. But Chrysler initially advertised the motor as available in the 72 model year but then killed it prior to official release, though several early pilot, preproduction cars made it out of the gates and into private hands. </div></div>

I think he was referring to a 71 Bee, Steve.

[69hurstSC]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: njsteve</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 442w30</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not sure why a Six Pack Bee would be considered a freak.
</div></div>

Because it's a 1972. Official production of the Six Pack/Six Barrel engines ended in 71. But Chrysler initially advertised the motor as available in the 72 model year but then killed it prior to official release, though several early pilot, preproduction cars made it out of the gates and into private hands. </div></div>

Not to drag Steve back into this (OK, maybe just a little) but if hes calling them preproduction and pilot cars than I'm not betting against him.

[gts340]

So far I want every car shown in this thread.

[442w30]

How could they not be built for consumer consumption when they were released by the factory?

The T/A is a car that was never built. The Six Pack was.

[69hurstSC]

Pilot cars are not the same as factory production. Maybe your confused, were talking about 72 Chargers not 71.

[442w30]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 69hurstSC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Pilot cars are not the same as factory production. Maybe your confused, were talking about 72 Chargers not 71. </div></div>

A car built after the first day of production could hardly be called &quot;pilot.&quot;

The fact is that there are a few surviving 1972 Mopars built with Six Packs that were built within the first two weeks of production.

[442w30]

You can also see from this bulletin that the engine option had yet to be killed:


http://www.hamtramck-historical.com

[69hurstSC]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 442w30</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You can also see from this bulletin that the engine option had yet to be killed:


http://www.hamtramck-historical.com
</div></div>

Good stuff, thanks for posting. As you know Dodge and Plymouth were two different animals. Just look at the fact that 440-4 71 Bee's were built yet no 440-4 Road Runners have been found.

[442w30]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 69hurstSC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Good stuff, thanks for posting. As you know Dodge and Plymouth were two different animals. Just look at the fact that 440-4 71 Bee's were built yet no 440-4 Road Runners have been found. </div></div>

The reason why no 440 Super Commando Road Runners have been found is because they were not built per production records. The 440 Dodge thing was an anomaly, not some renegade Dodge product. It's an issue of marketing because the 440 Magnum Super Bee would have cut into the sales of the Charger R/T with the same engine, which was standard in that model.

There really isn't a circumstance where one engine was available on a Dodge but not a Plymouth. Sure, maybe the 'Cuda had a 340 but the Challenger R/T did not - the 340 was available on the base Challenger - but for the most part they offered the same things.

[69hurstSC]

The 80 1969 Badger Javelins