Call me crazy?

[Tnfastbk]

I struggle to understand the love affair with the 60's and 70's Mopars. They did have some sexy designs but their build quality was HORRIBLE, probably the worst of any manufacturer of the era. Yeah yeah HEMI can you say overrated. Nuff said.

So how do you really feel

 

[Don65Stang]

I struggle to understand the love affair with the 60's and 70's Mopars. They did have some sexy designs but their build quality was HORRIBLE, probably the worst of any manufacturer of the era. Yeah yeah HEMI can you say overrated. Nuff said.

LOL, Jeff there's a lot of truth to that statement. And nobody every mentions the fact that the Boss 429 was a hemi-head design as well.

The '71 351c M-code engines with their closed chamber heads were also a hemispherical design.

 

[sm3570]

Wow, I didn't know that. "That thing got a Hemi in it?!?"

 

[droptop73]

I struggle to understand the love affair with the 60's and 70's Mopars. They did have some sexy designs but their build quality was HORRIBLE, probably the worst of any manufacturer of the era. Yeah yeah HEMI can you say overrated. Nuff said.

So how do you really feel

Sorry Roy... I struggle to express my opinion clearly sometimes

 

[Don65Stang]

Wow, I didn't know that. "That thing got a Hemi in it?!?"

Yup. But it's technically more like a semi-hemi. Dang, that could have been my WFQ question.

 

[sm3570]

It doesn't quite roll off the tongue as nice: "That thing got a semi-hemi in it?!?"

 

[Don65Stang]

Ok, I have to confess. I read that on the Internet from a somewhat reputable source but cannot find that source in my searching tonight. So don't take that as fact until I find a good source. One of the problemsis that the word "hem" is reportably a registered trade mark to the Mopar folks.

One of the 429 heads were also known as semi-hemi also. I'm finding more info on those.

 

[luxstang]

I struggle to understand the love affair with the 60's and 70's Mopars. They did have some sexy designs but their build quality was HORRIBLE, probably the worst of any manufacturer of the era.

Yeah, I know about the quality issues especially the issues with rust but I really like the design of those cars. IMHO opinion they have the best design for the late 60ies era.

 

[hyena429]

Ya...mopars sure built cheap.....They still kinda like that..Cheap bodies..Decent runing gear...my freind has a 1970 road runner 440 with a 800cfm holley pushin about 430ish on dyno to the rear tires....He had to put frame rails and supports all over in it...Motor was trashing the car...lol.....Car is a monster and light for its size{dodge cheap bodies is why} But while riding around in my car we agreed the unibody in my mach 1 was much stronger and better designed than his car...No popping or anything...even just hitting things simple as a parking lot dip..You could hear that dodge body walking around a bit...My mach 1..solid as a stone..lol

 

[Widowmaker00]

I would never trade my 72, especially for an earlier mustang. They are not that much different or heavier. They look every bit as good or better in my opinion. I love cars in general, but trade my car is something I could not do. The regular average person doesn't know the difference anyway. I cant tell you how many people have asked me at gas stations if my car was a 69. I have never gotten a bad comment from anyone about my car, and its not even that nice looking. Hemi Mopar? Awesome cars sure, but so is my Mustang. Forget about the potential "worth" of the car, that's not what these cars are about to me.

It really irks me when I hear people talk about how "big" these cars are. They aren't any heavier than most of the muscle cars of the era, chevelle, charger, etc. The Boss 351 was the fastest production mustang ever built for a long time.

 

[Mister 4x4]

No shame in that! 71-73 are my favorite also! Second favorite is 69-70. After that, 74 and up...the haters can keep the earlies as far as I'm concerned! LOL

My sentiments exactly!

I do have a fondness for other muscle cars though, with the '70-75 Challengers being my favorite. Sorry - if it weren't for the inception of the modern Challenger driving up the classic model prices, I probably would've gone that direction. I'm also partial to the '67-69 Camaros and Firebirds - but I just don't fit in those cars comfortably... not to mention, EVERYBODY has those.

But hands down, I'm much happier with my '71 Mach 1 knowing that I'll have the exclusiveness without having to pay 3x more for my 'dream' Challenger.

 

[Obsidian11]

Forget about the potential "worth" of the car, that's not what these cars are about to me.

It really irks me when I hear people talk about how "big" these cars are.

100% agreed! It shouldn't matter what the car is worth if you're going to keep it anyway. And dimentionally '71-'73's aren't a hell of a lot bigger. If you check the chassis specs it's only a few inches longer and pretty much the same width as '67-'70's. The body panels are just wider which let's us use bigger tires without major mods

 

[mach71351c]

For any one that has driven early Mustangs ( Falcons). The 71-73 hands down are nicer driving/handling cars. As for the size guys fix up Chevrolet With full frames talk about heavy poor handling sleds.