Mechanically they are all pretty much the same, but body and interior wise, they are totally different animals! I've owned both 66 and 67 Coronet's and the 70 Charger R/T, so I've "been there, done that"!
Thanks for the links, the one thing that is frustrating me is in 68 they used vacuum hide-a-ways, and those lights are lazy opening up!
the other thing that has me baffled are the running lights and turn signals are not working I think its either in the wiring or one of the sockets in the parking lamps (maybe not sure)
01-07-13, 01:07 PM (This post was last modified: 01-07-13, 01:17 PM by thebankerstoy.)
Piper Wrote:Thanks for the links, the one thing that is frustrating me is in 68 they used vacuum hide-a-ways, and those lights are lazy opening up!
the other thing that has me baffled are the running lights and turn signals are not working I think its either in the wiring or one of the sockets in the parking lamps (maybe not sure)
Probably to early to say at this point, because you haven't determined what is causing your "lazy" headlight issues yet, but I do know that the headlight vacuum activators are always a possible issue on the 68 models. My 70 Charger R/T had the electric motor to run the hide-away headlights and it wasn't much better. As seen in the link below, it looks like some are converting their 68-70 Chargers to later model systems to fix the reliability issues with the early vacuum and electric systems.
Go around all the mechanism and listen for a vacuum leak, a length of heater hose up to your ear works in a pinch. The vacuum storage can is common to be rotted through. And disconnect the vacuum motors from doors and make sure linkage isnt just stiff like my knees in the morning.
Piper Wrote:Thanks for the links, the one thing that is frustrating me is in 68 they used vacuum hide-a-ways, and those lights are lazy opening up!
the other thing that has me baffled are the running lights and turn signals are not working I think its either in the wiring or one of the sockets in the parking lamps (maybe not sure)
Kevin, take your pick, vacuum leaks or wiring fires, your choice. My brother has a 67 with motor problems after numerous burned wires and dead batteries I finally got him to put them in the open position permamently. That car is nicknames the "discharger"
Here is the motor I am piecing together with parts I have on the shelf to replace the tired 318
its starting to look like something
I was going to ditch the cam for a hydraulic but I am thinking with Mopar's loose lash it should be pretty much close to one of their hydraulics
'72 440
915 heads
.528/284 MP cam
PJ Gear Drive
Hooker Super Comps (remember all stuff that is sitting on the shelf)
10" Fairbanks
3.91's (maybe 3.55s If I can make a swap with someone)
Torker 440 (I hear this is a neat manifold, never ran one before)
Mopar Muscle did a shoot out on a bunch of manifolds, this is what they said about the torker
[COLOR="#0000CD"]6. Edelbrock Torker (original)
Another popular intake was the old Edelbrock Torker single-plane. The Torker features relatively straight, comparatively small cross-section runners. Although out of production for many years, this intake was sold in such numbers they're still plentiful. Frankly, I'd never been a fan of these intakes, even though I'd run a number of them in various 440-equipped Mopars. For me, the Torker results were a shocker, and something of an enigma. The Torker ripped an unreal 608.4 lb-ft, the highest peak torque of the test. The high torque was startling. Peak horsepower came in at 605, but the manifold peaked this .670-inch lift, roller-cammed, 2.25-inch-valved, max-ported 440 at an unbelievably low 5,500 rpm. I guess that's why they called it the Torker.
The Intake: Edelbrock #3015
Type: Aluminum Single-Plane Four-Barrel
Rated rpm Range: 2,500-6,000
Max hp: 605.8@5,500 rpm
Max Torque: 608.4@4,700 rpm
Avg. hp 4,000-6,600 rpm: : 0564.6 hp
Avg. Tq 4,000-6,600 rpm: 565.5 lb-ft
[/COLOR]
My 70 Charger R/T had the electric motor to run the hide-away headlights and it wasn't much better. As seen in the link below, it looks like some are converting their 68-70 Chargers to later model systems to fix the reliability issues with the early vacuum and electric systems. 
