Early build E-body-differences - Moparts Forums

Register Log In Moparts Forums Moparts Restoration & A12 Forum Early build E-body-differences

Print Thread

Page 2 of 3

1

2

3

Re: Early build E-body-differences [Re: DetMatt] #649691 03/25/10 08:17 AM 03/25/10 08:17 AM
Joined: Oct 2006 Posts: 4,165 Florida C cataclysm80 master
cataclysm80 master C Joined: Oct 2006 Posts: 4,165 Florida	Quote: Quote: early cudas did not come with rear swaybar. My nov. `69 buiLt A66 Challenger has no rear swaybar as well. My June of 70 'Cuda does have the rear sway bar. (on the broadcast sheet and everything) Rear sway bars came out sometime before the trans am program in the spring of 70. Tav

Re: Early build E-body-differences [Re: cajunmopar] #649692 03/25/10 08:22 AM 03/25/10 08:22 AM
Joined: Oct 2006 Posts: 4,165 Florida C cataclysm80 master
cataclysm80 master C Joined: Oct 2006 Posts: 4,165 Florida	Quote: The rear interior panels also have a different hole location near the quarter glass. I'd love to hear more info on this. I know my August of 69 Challenger has that screw hole going into the front of the sail panel area. I think most 1970 models are that way. I know the 71 models have that screw positioned a few inches more forward on the car going in towards the quarter window glass. (I'll try to post a pic during lunch today.) Did this changeover happen sometime during the 70 model year? When? It's making it hard to find rear panels that will go onto my car. Tav

Re: Early build E-body-differences [Re: cataclysm80] #649693 03/25/10 10:24 AM 03/25/10 10:24 AM
Joined: Jan 2003 Posts: 542 7 70RT mopar
70RT mopar 7 Joined: Jan 2003 Posts: 542	I came across a salvage yard Oct '69 built Challenger base model that had a couple of thin spring steel flats (approx 5" l x 1.5" w) that apparently were installed in the corner or the front bumper to hold the rubber inserts in place. They mounted underneath one of the bumper bracket nuts. Has anyone else come across these? I'm thinking it was an early build thing that was dropped later in 70. I believe that they may have gone away when the factory started scalloping the V-slot they cut into the bumper wrap around for the rubber insert. Comments?

Re: Early build E-body-differences [Re: 70RT] #649694 03/25/10 12:45 PM 03/25/10 12:45 PM
Joined: Jul 2005 Posts: 774 SE Wisconsin, USA RP's R/T's super stock
RP's R/T's super stock Joined: Jul 2005 Posts: 774 SE Wisconsin, USA	Those bracket in the front bumper are something I had never heard of, and I've pulled apart a fair share of Challengers. I saw them at a swap meet for the first time a couple of years ago. Rare pieces, but I can see why they left them off. I have later version of the rubber bumper inserts that have adhesive on them.

Re: Early build E-body-differences [Re: cataclysm80] #649695 03/25/10 03:39 PM 03/25/10 03:39 PM
Joined: Jun 2009 Posts: 434 sweden C cuda-sweden mopar
cuda-sweden mopar C Joined: Jun 2009 Posts: 434 sweden	Quote: Quote: Quote: early cudas did not come with rear swaybar. My nov. `69 buiLt A66 Challenger has no rear swaybar as well. My June of 70 'Cuda does have the rear sway bar. (on the broadcast sheet and everything) Rear sway bars came out sometime before the trans am program in the spring of 70. very interessting as im trying to figure out witch month my 222655 cuda is built,i know its not going to be spot on the day. i red i think on hamtramck-site a bulletin that said that rear sway bars where introduced" at the first of the year" does that mean january/1 ? Tav

Re: Early build E-body-differences [Re: cuda-sweden] #649696 03/27/10 02:30 AM 03/27/10 02:30 AM
Joined: Oct 2003 Posts: 2,320 South, FL cudaized top fuel
cudaized top fuel Joined: Oct 2003 Posts: 2,320 South, FL	Quote: ...im trying to figure out witch month my 222655 cuda is built,i know its not going to be spot on the day. 1970 `cuda = SPD should be C17 Wed or C18 Thu (I'm guessing the 18th) THE Actual build day is anyones guess. Ola

Re: Early build E-body-differences [Re: cudaized] #649697 03/28/10 10:40 AM 03/28/10 10:40 AM
Joined: Jun 2009 Posts: 434 sweden C cuda-sweden mopar
cuda-sweden mopar C Joined: Jun 2009 Posts: 434 sweden	Quote: Quote: ...im trying to figure out witch month my 222655 cuda is built,i know its not going to be spot on the day. 1970 `cuda = SPD should be C17 Wed or C18 Thu (I'm guessing the 18th) THE Actual build day is anyones guess. Ola hej,sorry i got it wrong. the number is 222665 whats your guess on that one.im no good with the spd thing,as what does C stand for/what month?please make a guess on my 222665 nr,pretty please

Re: Early build E-body-differences [Re: cuda-sweden] #649698 03/28/10 10:58 AM 03/28/10 10:58 AM
Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 714 USA L Lawn Monkey super stock
Lawn Monkey super stock L Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 714 USA	What is the earliest build date? My JS23VOB October 69 build date does not have torque boxes, and no cut outs in trunk lid

Re: Early build E-body-differences [Re: cuda-sweden] #649699 03/28/10 11:28 AM 03/28/10 11:28 AM
Joined: Feb 2010 Posts: 79 Finland CarelianCuda member
CarelianCuda member Joined: Feb 2010 Posts: 79 Finland	Quote: as what does C stand for/what month? 1970 models: 8 = August 1969 9 = September A = October B = November C = December 1 = January 1970, etc......... It's possible at difference between VINs is even 10 000 with the same SPD. B07 / 0B182xxx http://cudaworld.com/adDetail.php?cat_id=9&sub_id=0&ad_id=2342 B07 / 0B192xxx http://cudaworld.com/adDetail.php?cat_id=9&sub_id=0&ad_id=2303 Interesting thing of those tags is also at there are no J54 (or N96) neither. Mine have also same SPD with exactly same thing and no J54 even the sheet. Some late Hemicudas looks to have both J54 and N96 on their tags 1970PlymouthCuda383 1970AMCHornet2D232 2003TruckmastersOkenosDurangoSlt+ 2008DodgeChallengerSRT8

Re: Early build E-body-differences [Re: Lawn Monkey] #649700 03/28/10 11:31 AM 03/28/10 11:31 AM
Joined: Feb 2010 Posts: 79 Finland CarelianCuda member
CarelianCuda member Joined: Feb 2010 Posts: 79 Finland	Quote: What is the earliest build date? 801 = August 1. 1969 1970PlymouthCuda383 1970AMCHornet2D232 2003TruckmastersOkenosDurangoSlt+ 2008DodgeChallengerSRT8

Re: Early build E-body-differences [Re: CarelianCuda] #649701 03/28/10 11:42 AM 03/28/10 11:42 AM
Joined: Jan 2003 Posts: 29,679 Hamtramck, PA A Alaskan_TA Fluffy Balladeer
Alaskan_TA Fluffy Balladeer A Joined: Jan 2003 Posts: 29,679 Hamtramck, PA	The earliest SPDs I have on file for 1970 E-bodies so far are; Hamtramck - 801 LA - 818 For any 1970 car though, there is NO way to know the actual build day. Edited to fix typo. Last edited by Alaskan_TA; 03/28/10 12:22 PM.

Re: Early build E-body-differences [Re: Alaskan_TA] #649702 03/28/10 12:05 PM 03/28/10 12:05 PM
Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 714 USA L Lawn Monkey super stock
Lawn Monkey super stock L Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 714 USA	Quote: The earliest SPDs I have on file for 1970 E-bodies so far are; Hamtramck - 802 LA - 818 For any 1970 car though, there is NO way to know the actual build day. Scratching my head,,,, does 802 = August 2nd 1969 and 818 = August 18 1969 Are build dates in 69 considered early ?

Re: Early build E-body-differences [Re: Lawn Monkey] #649703 03/28/10 12:14 PM 03/28/10 12:14 PM
Joined: Jan 2003 Posts: 29,679 Hamtramck, PA A Alaskan_TA Fluffy Balladeer
Alaskan_TA Fluffy Balladeer A Joined: Jan 2003 Posts: 29,679 Hamtramck, PA	Yes, '69. The 1970 model year ran from August 1, 1969 to July 31, 1970. Personally, I consider the cars scheduled in the first month at each plant "early".

Re: Early build E-body-differences [Re: Alaskan_TA] #649704 03/28/10 12:18 PM 03/28/10 12:18 PM
Joined: Feb 2010 Posts: 79 Finland CarelianCuda member
CarelianCuda member Joined: Feb 2010 Posts: 79 Finland	Quote: The earliest SPDs I have on file for 1970 E-bodies so far are; Hamtramck - 802 On another board i said 802 and then you said at Diamante had 801 (but later invoice). So that is basics of my reply 1970PlymouthCuda383 1970AMCHornet2D232 2003TruckmastersOkenosDurangoSlt+ 2008DodgeChallengerSRT8

Re: Early build E-body-differences [Re: CarelianCuda] #649705 03/28/10 12:21 PM 03/28/10 12:21 PM
Joined: Jan 2003 Posts: 29,679 Hamtramck, PA A Alaskan_TA Fluffy Balladeer
Alaskan_TA Fluffy Balladeer A Joined: Jan 2003 Posts: 29,679 Hamtramck, PA	I hit the wrong button, I know of a few with 801. Thanks for the catch, I'll fix it to avoid any cofusion.

Re: Early build E-body-differences [Re: Alaskan_TA] #649706 03/28/10 12:28 PM 03/28/10 12:28 PM
Joined: Nov 2007 Posts: 21,928 Kirkland, Washington Pacnorthcuda Too Many Posts
Pacnorthcuda Too Many Posts Joined: Nov 2007 Posts: 21,928 Kirkland, Washington	I had an August 69 70 Barracuda (sequence number 100327) that I swear did not have beams in the doors--I wish I had pics to prove, but I don't. I rememeber removing the driver's door and thinking how light it was. After removing the inner panel I saw no beams. Years later I removed the doors from another early build 'Cuda (sequence 108632) and it had the beams.

Re: Early build E-body-differences [Re: Pacnorthcuda] #649707 03/28/10 02:26 PM 03/28/10 02:26 PM
Joined: Feb 2009 Posts: 3,837 New State kidmopar master
kidmopar master Joined: Feb 2009 Posts: 3,837 New State	I LOVE this stuff! Keep it going!

Post deleted by moparts [Re: Alaskan_TA] #649708 03/28/10 11:16 PM 03/28/10 11:16 PM
A Anonymous Unregistered
Anonymous Unregistered A

Re: Early build E-body-differences #649709 03/28/10 11:21 PM 03/28/10 11:21 PM
Joined: Jan 2003 Posts: 29,679 Hamtramck, PA A Alaskan_TA Fluffy Balladeer
Alaskan_TA Fluffy Balladeer A Joined: Jan 2003 Posts: 29,679 Hamtramck, PA	Any more details? I have heard of a few 1970 LA cars with VERY low VINs but I do not have details on them other than the VIN yet.

Post deleted by moparts [Re: Alaskan_TA] #649710 03/28/10 11:38 PM 03/28/10 11:38 PM
A Anonymous Unregistered
Anonymous Unregistered A

Page 2 of 3

1

2

3

Moderated by Al_Alguire, Hotwheelsjr, moparts, not_a_charger, RangerDan440, tboomer

Hop To

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1