mamilligan
01-18-2005, 12:32 AM
As the owner of several Challengers over the years here is a detailed report on the new Challenger slot bodies.
Overall the body is not a bad representation of the real car. The A/FX chassis is wide and short so most cars end up looking a bit stubby. The early A/FX cars all had a cartoonish way of dealing with this that made them look fun and hid the short wheelbase. The Challenger is in that same spirit. It is made wide in the middle so the doors stand off of the chassis mounts with an obvious taper in the nose and tail. The body does a nice job of carrying the detail of the new die cast with a ¼“ less wheelbase and ¼”more track. The car does sit high and looks like it could use a 1/8” lowering.
The body itself is a trick though heavy piece of plastic. The body is made so that one of three hoods (R/T, shaker, & T/A), one of two spoilers (wing & T/A), and one of two rear taillight/bumper assemblies (’70 & ’71) can be used. The fit and finish of the hoods are not the greatest and consistently is misaligned on hardtops. The wing is heavily reinforced for slot car duty to the point of looking more like a ’69 Trans Am wing than a ’70 Go Wing or a ’71 Gull Wing.
Actually there are two bodies, a ’70 hardtop (don’t say coupe, they were a special package on a hardtop) and a ’71 convertible. This is probably my biggest complaint. The grille on the ’70 and ’71 are done far better that the nicely done ones on the new die casts and includes the same tampo details. The problem is that the grille is molded into the body. That is why the “70 Hemi Challenger Convertible” has a ’71 grille. I don’t know the reason the grille was not part of the front bumper but it would make kit bashing a lot easier. It will take some intimacy with my Dremel to replicate my ’71 hardtop.
The taillight panels on the die casts are also better and simpler done. All ’70 and ’71 Challengers had a gap between the rear fender trim and the taillight panel that is either body color or argent silver on SEs. This is not present on either rear bumper. The ’70 should have a back up light between the taillights with “Dodge” on it. The ’71 should have a dip between the taillights. Additionally, the taillight panel does not seem to sit deep enough into the body. The fact that this was so well done on the latest die casts makes the slots a disappointment.
As for body details, they are mostly tampo paint. Door handles, marker lights, hood pins, and emblems are painted on while window trim and the flip top gas cap are molded in. Let’s hope someone comes up with a decal sheet to replace the details lost during a repaint. One odd thing is the windshield has wipers molded in when a feature of the Challenger was the hidden wipers.
Now for the really picky stuff, here are the details missed in research.
The T/A has the most errors. Most obvious is the hood should be painted flat black. A little easier to forgive is the missing Challenger emblem in the grille. All T/As had side exit exhausts and rear valences with out cutouts so the rear exiting exhaust pipes should not be there. The front spoilers are also missing (these might be optional, I’d have to look this up, but come on why model a T/A without them).
The ’70 R/T is fairly accurate. The shaker bubble should have an engine size call out on it. The T/A style spoiler was not an option but if it were dealer installed it would have covered the trunk emblems and it would have been removed not placed on the front of the spoiler upside down.
The ’70 Hemi convertible has a ’71 grille as has already been mentioned and it should have an engine call out. The convertible top has the dorky look that some of the bowtie cars have but not quite as bad. The back window is the same size as the hardtop but it should be smaller, about the size of an SE. Also, the real cars don’t have chrome trim around the back glass. The quarter panel kicks up too much putting the Dutchman panel at too steep an angle. I hate the wing (on real cars and on these) but it is a nice touch having the “Challenger R/T” tampo painted on the deck lid.
The ’71 convertible has one big problem. All together now so all those idiots cloning these cars can hear, “There are no ’71 Challenger R/T convertibles.” That’s right. The R/T was a hardtop only deal for ’71. If the model were a hardtop, the stripes would be accurate, as would the black grille while this car should have argent silver paint. Also, the R/T hood would only have come with a 4 barrel engine (340 or 383) so the duals are probably correct. Impress you friends with useless trivia, there were no ’71 440 4 barrel Challengers or ‘Cudas making the ’70 only 440-4 e bodies rarer than the 2 year 440-6 ones.
Overall the body is not a bad representation of the real car. The A/FX chassis is wide and short so most cars end up looking a bit stubby. The early A/FX cars all had a cartoonish way of dealing with this that made them look fun and hid the short wheelbase. The Challenger is in that same spirit. It is made wide in the middle so the doors stand off of the chassis mounts with an obvious taper in the nose and tail. The body does a nice job of carrying the detail of the new die cast with a ¼“ less wheelbase and ¼”more track. The car does sit high and looks like it could use a 1/8” lowering.
The body itself is a trick though heavy piece of plastic. The body is made so that one of three hoods (R/T, shaker, & T/A), one of two spoilers (wing & T/A), and one of two rear taillight/bumper assemblies (’70 & ’71) can be used. The fit and finish of the hoods are not the greatest and consistently is misaligned on hardtops. The wing is heavily reinforced for slot car duty to the point of looking more like a ’69 Trans Am wing than a ’70 Go Wing or a ’71 Gull Wing.
Actually there are two bodies, a ’70 hardtop (don’t say coupe, they were a special package on a hardtop) and a ’71 convertible. This is probably my biggest complaint. The grille on the ’70 and ’71 are done far better that the nicely done ones on the new die casts and includes the same tampo details. The problem is that the grille is molded into the body. That is why the “70 Hemi Challenger Convertible” has a ’71 grille. I don’t know the reason the grille was not part of the front bumper but it would make kit bashing a lot easier. It will take some intimacy with my Dremel to replicate my ’71 hardtop.
The taillight panels on the die casts are also better and simpler done. All ’70 and ’71 Challengers had a gap between the rear fender trim and the taillight panel that is either body color or argent silver on SEs. This is not present on either rear bumper. The ’70 should have a back up light between the taillights with “Dodge” on it. The ’71 should have a dip between the taillights. Additionally, the taillight panel does not seem to sit deep enough into the body. The fact that this was so well done on the latest die casts makes the slots a disappointment.
As for body details, they are mostly tampo paint. Door handles, marker lights, hood pins, and emblems are painted on while window trim and the flip top gas cap are molded in. Let’s hope someone comes up with a decal sheet to replace the details lost during a repaint. One odd thing is the windshield has wipers molded in when a feature of the Challenger was the hidden wipers.
Now for the really picky stuff, here are the details missed in research.
The T/A has the most errors. Most obvious is the hood should be painted flat black. A little easier to forgive is the missing Challenger emblem in the grille. All T/As had side exit exhausts and rear valences with out cutouts so the rear exiting exhaust pipes should not be there. The front spoilers are also missing (these might be optional, I’d have to look this up, but come on why model a T/A without them).
The ’70 R/T is fairly accurate. The shaker bubble should have an engine size call out on it. The T/A style spoiler was not an option but if it were dealer installed it would have covered the trunk emblems and it would have been removed not placed on the front of the spoiler upside down.
The ’70 Hemi convertible has a ’71 grille as has already been mentioned and it should have an engine call out. The convertible top has the dorky look that some of the bowtie cars have but not quite as bad. The back window is the same size as the hardtop but it should be smaller, about the size of an SE. Also, the real cars don’t have chrome trim around the back glass. The quarter panel kicks up too much putting the Dutchman panel at too steep an angle. I hate the wing (on real cars and on these) but it is a nice touch having the “Challenger R/T” tampo painted on the deck lid.
The ’71 convertible has one big problem. All together now so all those idiots cloning these cars can hear, “There are no ’71 Challenger R/T convertibles.” That’s right. The R/T was a hardtop only deal for ’71. If the model were a hardtop, the stripes would be accurate, as would the black grille while this car should have argent silver paint. Also, the R/T hood would only have come with a 4 barrel engine (340 or 383) so the duals are probably correct. Impress you friends with useless trivia, there were no ’71 440 4 barrel Challengers or ‘Cudas making the ’70 only 440-4 e bodies rarer than the 2 year 440-6 ones.