70 Challenger RT/SE 440-6pack "shaky SHAKER"

[ScottSmith_Harms]

The factory shaker drain holes were all the same size 70-71, all engines

[RUNCHARGER]

If that's a repro shaker bubble it's a good one. The hood doesn't have wrinkles in the bracing so I think it is a repro. The hood pin cars still had the hood retained with the main and safety catches as well. Hole behind wiper motor probably drilled for nitrous lines or something else I bet. Yes the bracket on the front frame rail is for the clutch pivot ball stud. Overall a pretty exciting car I think. I'd be happy to own it.

[Cuda Cody]

Can't find a photo that shows that hole behind the wiper motor...     Not sure what it's for?

[TobiasM]

Now that I put your expectations high of what that main result of my yesterdays investigations was, I will breed flesh to the bone and say one word: COLOR!

As already mentioned, my Challenger could have been named "Jill" after the red 1972/1973 Challenger starring in the 1974-original of the "Gone in 60seconds"-movie, because my Challenger was once also stolen but luckily recovered. So my car is not one of the babied one-owner-survivor-cars, but one with a shaky history including theft-recovery and dragracing-times...that`s why I dubbed it the "shaky SHAKER"

As you could follow through this thread, I am curious about my cars history and if it proofs its beeing: a factory sublime 440-6, shaker, 4-speed car.

To do so, where did I start yesterday? I tell you: with the paint!

How? I`ll tell you, too!

The aforementioned theft-recovery took place in the State of South Carolina and my Challenger was issued an additional ID-number by the State of South Carolina. That additional ID-number was engraved on a plate pop-riveted to the drivers side door-jamb under the windscreen.

So I looked underneath that plates location and compared the color(s) I found there and in the direct surrounding next to that plate-area.

Results were really interessting! My car is sublime by fendertags and obviously shows this colour today...but in total there were not less than SEVEN colors/layers!!!

To start from the actual color down to the bare metal:

- layer 7: sublime ("good" quality = not so fast to sand down)
- layer 6: lightgrey primer
- layer 5: a metallic colour, which appeared to me like a "dark burnt orange"-ish (F5) or "burgundy"-ish (R8), but not necessarily an original MOPAR-colour
- layer 4: black ( ("light" quality = very easy to sand sand down = definately aftermarket)
- layer 3: bright red ("light" quality = very easy to sand down = definately aftermarket)
- layer 2: sublime ("heavy" quality = harder to sand down, as one would expext from a factory paint)
- layer 1: light grey primer
- layer 0: bare metal

Now the interesting part: because the additional-ID-plate from the State of South Carolina wasn`t removed for the following repaints, I could draw the reverse-conclusion of the colour my Challenger must have had when it was stolen and also what time that was arround.

My previous owner told me that the car was stolen in the 1980`s and I have a photo of a South Carolinan title issued to a gentlemen from Burton, SC in 4-1986 and stating that addidional-ID-# off that mentioned plate, meaning this is a title after the car had been recovered! That title itself has an 8-digit title-# (1730xxxx) also says what what the # of the previous title was. That previous-titles number is also 8-digit and not too far off (1204xxxx)...so I guess the previous title is also from SC. As I don`t now the title-rules in the USA or specifcly in SC at that time, you must help, please:

a) Does a new title-number necessarily mean that a car has changed hands to a different owner?

or

b) Would a different title (meaning a different title-#) been issued to the same owner when some of his personal data updated (e.g. when moving within South Carolina to another town in SC or when a Ms. becomes a Mrs. and so has a new family-name)?

If b) is not the case, but a) is, then I at least know that the gentlemen from Burton, SC who titled the car in 4-1986 was not the first owner after theft-recovery...there must have been minimum one person in the middle.

If b) is the case, it is at least possible, that the gentlemen from Burton, SC who title the car in 4-1986 is the first owner afert theft-recovery.

So what color was the Challenger at what time:

- from the FACTORY:
SUBLIME (praise the Lord!!!) 


- BEFORE being STOLEN:
Maybe BLACK, probably bright RED, unlikely still the factory SUBLIME.

Why in that order of probability? Because the car being approximately 10-15years old when it was finally stolen in the 1980`s and as far as I have learned, repainting a car (color-changing or not) was and is very popular in the US. If I got it right, there were even TV-commercials for repainting a car for only 99$ ("Earl Scheib")?!?

So I guess the Chally already had received the (very thin quality) colorchange from factory sublime to bright red before being stolen.


- in the MOMENT of THEFT:
That`s a fifty:fifty bet between still beeing bright red or already black. Why? Because for the same reasons with the colorchange from sublime to bright red, it might have been very likely that the car had received the 2nd colorchange now from bright red to black when it was still legally owned. Additionally the black paint was of the same thin/poor quality as the bright red paint...so maybe even painted by the same shop or by the same (private) person.

The 50% bet for the car still beeing bright red anyway results in that car thieves often apply colorchanges to "camouflage" a car. The makeovers are usually also of a low quality, because everbody is in a hurry and wants to get rid of that "hot" car asap...so it is painted quick and dirty...not forget that good-skilled professional car-painters usually have no reason to colaborate with criminals, as there is enough work (=income) for them as alsways is for quality skilled people.

Resuming all that, I would bet 51% my Challenger was already black in the moment it was stolen over a 49% bet beeing still red (meaning being colorchanged only once in advance).


- when it was recovered:
Unless the police does paint recovered cars prior auctioning them, the color at the time of RECOVERY must have been BLACK!

- after recovery:
Because the layers of paint following the black-paint-layer don`t cover the spot where the South Carolonan ID-tag had been fixated to, it is 99% proven to me that after the recovery my Challenger changed from black to that dark-burnt-organg-ish/burgundy-ish metallic-paint and then finally back to its original sublime colour!

I don`t have any clue at what time the changes to metallic respectively sublime had been made.

Know ownerships:

- from 2016 until today: myself
- from 9/2014 until 2016: Terry Bradley of Terrys Muscle Car Garage in Winder, GA
- from unknown until 9/2014: Timothy of Milton, GA (got full name/adress, license-plate-#)
- from 7/2004 until unknown: namely unkown owner of Limerick, ME (got date of birth, license-plate-# and registration-#)
- from 1986 until unknown: Roy from Burton, SC (got full name/adress)
- theft-recovery until 1986: maybe more, but probably only 1 namely unknown owner, probably of South Carolina
- from factory-dealership until theft-recovery: unkown.

Summary is:
My Challenger proofed once more that he is what he claims to be, in this case SUBLIME from factory!!!


Please contact me if anybody got knowledge or even photos of a Challenger R/T SE that could match mine:

- pre 1986: first sublime, then red, then black and finally stolen
- post 1986: luckily recovered in South Carolina, probably still beeing black then, but stripped off from sixpack-engine, trans and maybe interiour, registered 1986 in South Carolina, then 2004 in Maine and until 2016 in Georgia

THANKS!


P.S.:I felt a little like a crime scene investigator or somebody restoring artwork-paintings

[Cuda Cody]

Nice job! 

"a) Does a new title-number necessarily mean that a car has changed hands to a different owner?"  = In WA state there is a new title number issues when a car changes ownership or you get a new title.  You might need a new title to change addresses or something.  But the title number is only for the state to track and it should list the VIN.  The VIN is the important part.

Does your car have front and rear torque boxes like a 6 pack should?

[6bblgt]

do the body numbers match the VIN & fender tag numbers?

the Z-bar anchor on the frame rail has additional non-factory welding, was it added or reinforced? is that the correct E-body piece, looks a little "off" in the picture? here's an installed '72 b-body pics & Brewer's reproduction bracket

the passenger side inner fender is a 'mid-'71 model year piece - has it been replaced?

are the tags: VIN & pics you have of original fender tags originals or reproductions?  I don't think South Carolina would've issued a state VIN ID number if the original was still in place on the dash.  Can you post pics, even partially obscured?

while the SHAKER hood bottom reinforcement panel does have drainage holes  - they appear to be incorrectly located.

if you sand the paint on the inside of the SHAKER bubble - does it have that same "bone white" color of @71vert340 's posted pics?

[TobiasM]

The factory shaker drain holes were all the same size 70-71, all engines

Thanks, Scott, for sharing knowledge!

And again all my thumbs up  for Washington-State: was in Spokane and (though already ID) neighbour-city Post Falls...liked it very much there...nearly bought a 66 Caddy back then in Spokane to start the road-trip with my father to NYC.

[TobiasM]

If that's a repro shaker bubble it's a good one. The hood doesn't have wrinkles in the bracing so I think it is a repro. The hood pin cars still had the hood retained with the main and safety catches as well. Hole behind wiper motor probably drilled for nitrous lines or something else I bet. Yes the bracket on the front frame rail is for the clutch pivot ball stud. Overall a pretty exciting car I think. I'd be happy to own it.

Thanks, Sheldon, for input especially on the hood and on that 4speed-frame-rail-bracket...a second confirmation is always welcomed!

@small hole: no, not for NOS...NOS-pipes/accessoires use a different routing.

[TobiasM]

Nice job! 

"a) Does a new title-number necessarily mean that a car has changed hands to a different owner?"  = In WA state there is a new title number issues when a car changes ownership or you get a new title.  You might need a new title to change addresses or something.  But the title number is only for the state to track and it should list the VIN.  The VIN is the important part.

Does your car have front and rear torque boxes like a 6 pack should?

Thanks, for complimenting my job done, and given information on title-rules, Cody!

@torque-boxes: yes, present at all 4 "corners"

[TobiasM]

do the body numbers match the VIN & fender tag numbers?

the Z-bar anchor on the frame rail has additional non-factory welding, was it added or reinforced? is that the correct E-body piece, looks a little "off" in the picture? here's an installed '72 b-body pics & Brewer's reproduction bracket

the passenger side inner fender is a 'mid-'71 model year piece - has it been replaced?

are the tags: VIN & pics you have of original fender tags originals or reproductions?  I don't think South Carolina would've issued a state VIN ID number if the original was still in place on the dash.  Can you post pics, even partially obscured?

while the SHAKER hood bottom reinforcement panel does have drainage holes  - they appear to be incorrectly located.

if you sand the paint on the inside of the SHAKER bubble - does it have that same "bone white" color of @71vert340 's posted pics?

@body numbers: no body numbers.

@z-bar-frame-bracket: => Z-bar-bracket looks to me exactly the same as yours on the red car = correct original. But the brewers-part looks different, not pointing downwards where the slot is as the original and not curved-shaped on the side pointing towards the firewall. Sorry, don`t have a closeup of my bracket, will take one occasionally.

@right inner fender "mid 71 upwards": =>A good hind. Don`t know...maybe an installed due to damage or maybe the car had a fiberglas-front-clip during its hard dragracing-timeline.

@shaker-bubble: will try to sand it a bit down an let you know.

@vin-tag: pic attached.

@fendertags: I would judge them as originals...will forward in a separate post what I answered Cody via pm.

[Cuda Cody]

Any chance the body numbers are covered in paint? 

http://www.e-bodies.org/buying-your-first-e-body/vin-numbers/

[TobiasM]

As announced, here is what I pm`ed Cody regarding my fendertags:


"Thanks for asking, Cody.

I assume they are real for several reasons:

1. because of marks of "wear" on the 2nd fendertag (I guess repros woul be really "slick")

2. because of the misprint "P37" (=power convertible-roof) instead of the proper code for power-windows. (guess repros wouldn`t show any misprints)

3. because SPD April 15th matches to the information given on this board regarding "shaker-hood-shortages" resulting in mid-April SPD`s. Though it is stated in that thread an "April 10th"-SPD-code would have been used for cars already ordered with shaker-hood-option but put on "hold" due to shaker-hood-shortage, my April 15th could would then at least fit into the "shaker-hoods are available again" timeline. Additionally I think it is not logical, that when the estimate for shaker-hoods beeing available for production again was "mid April" the company would NOT use the "exactly-in-the middle-code" in April (415) but an odd "somewhere in the middle code" (410). Btw: my SPD April 15th 1970 was a Wednesday (EDIT on 2017-06-18: technically correct is "FRIDAY", but doesn't have any influence on my drawn conclusion!) ...so ordinary production day...one more good fit.

4. my SPD April 15th and my sequence-# 308xxx perfectly allign. Did some research on the www and found at least 1 or 2 Challengers with broadcast-sheet documentation and also with 415 SPD, showing also a 308xxx sequence-number. For me this is the ultimate proof, that my car`s fendertags are legit, because I don`t think someone who creates a "freestyle-fendertag" matches all these points...especially not SPD in combination with sequence-number..."

[TobiasM]

Any chance the body numbers are covered in paint? 

http://www.e-bodies.org/buying-your-first-e-body/vin-numbers/

Ehm...no. :-(((

[TobiasM]

the Z-bar anchor on the frame rail has additional non-factory welding, was it added or reinforced? is that the correct E-body piece, looks a little "off" in the picture? here's an installed '72 b-body pics & Brewer's reproduction bracket


if you sand the paint on the inside of the SHAKER bubble - does it have that same "bone white" color of @71vert340 's posted pics?

As promised in my reply #39, I am getting back with more infos/pics to your input regarding a) clutch-z-bar-anchor/bracket and b) my shaker bubble:

to a) I attached a new detailed photo of the clutch-z-bar-anchor/bracket. As already mentioned, mine looks exaktly like yours on the red e-body meaning perfectly stock. The stock e-body-bracket differs from that aftermarket-bracket you showed in an additional pic, that the original brackets upper flange is pointing downwards while the reproduction-part stays horizintal all the way.

Also the factory clutch-rod-hole is in the firewall, plus 4-speed tunnel-hump and pedal box are still in place on my car. By this all it is also prooven to me that my car is a factory 4-speed car.

to b) yes, under that sturctural metallic-silver-paint my shaker-bubble is bone white. Could also clarify the partnumber and have to corrrect it to "3418657". Below is a second number reading "85148". The partsnumber is definately the factory# for the shaker bubble and the second number matches up to beeing the vendor number of the proper vendor. Reference is a thread over at moparts.org, which I attached via screenshot to you.

More updates to follow in a few minutes...

[Cuda Cody]

Not sure why that last photo is not showing up.  I'll look in to it....