This car is AWESOME! Greenlight really hit a grand slam with this one. I have literally thousands of 1/64 cars and this is my second favorite casting of all time. THANK YOU GREENLIGHT!!!

yep they did a good job on it

I love this company, and this casting is one of the reasons why! What a great offering of a unique car. BUT I hate the scale! I think GL is starting to roam a bit on a few scale interpretations. It started with the Camaro concept, and now we see it in Challenger Concept and for sure in the 300! It's HUGE!!!!! But still very cool. I already have all 4 colors.

69Stang, your missing one, there are 5 out if you include the conv. pace car

69Stang, your missing one, there are 5 out if you include the conv. pace car

Right you are, but it was closer then the others, so I cut it some slack. I just want them to watch this. If you are starting from scratch, then you can make sure it's done right. No reason to accept something as bad as the Camaro or for sure the 300! ( Referring to the scale)

However I wonder if they purchased someone eles's tooling for the 300. It just does not even share the same underside look at it's cousin's. One of mine also has solid glazed windows! Just snuck through QC.

Still love the selection, but the scale just bugs me that much!

This car is AWESOME! Greenlight really hit a grand slam with this one. I have literally thousands of 1/64 cars and this is my second favorite casting of all time. THANK YOU GREENLIGHT!!!
what is your FAV casting of all time?

what is your FAV casting of all time?

This is going to sound weird, but it's the Buby, from Argentina, casting of the 1963 Ford Falcon. When I was little, there were several Falcons in my family, and it was the first car I can remember really recognizing. Family lore is that when I was about 3 years old, I pointed out a Falcon and shouted "Grandpas Car", and it was the exact year and model.

I looked at and bought some new Greenlights - '64 Fury & '66 Coronet. But I thought the '63 Chrysler was horrible. The plastic roof is very poorly done. The colors of the die cast body and plastic roof (a red) did not match. I understand that the casting serves both convertible and coupe models - fine. But they can (and have done on other cars) a much better job of integrating the two different materials and mating the parts in a more subtle way. The hardtop on the Chrysler looks like an amateur afterthought. Now if I get a chance to buy the casting as a convertible (which I have not yet seen), I will certainly be open to that. But the coupe is very poorly done; it is a great disappointment because a 1963 Chrysler is an unusual die cast subject that I would like to have in my collection.

I think Greenlight did a very sloppy job on a previous hardtop conversion too. It was, as I remember, the '67 Coronet and the top again fit poorly.

And another bit of a whine about Greenlight - why so many Chryslers? Didn't Ford make any interesting cars in this era also? The company seems very Chrysler-centric now. I want to see as many Fords from this same era: '61 Starliner; '62 Galaxie; '64/'65 Falcon Futura; '70/'71 Ranchero; '72 Ranchero; some cool Mercurys too like the '63/'64 Marauders. But Greenlight must do a much better job on the hardtops than the botched Chrysler attempt!

Now if I get a chance to buy the casting as a convertible (which I have not yet seen), I will certainly be open to that. But the coupe is very poorly done; it is a great disappointment because a 1963 Chrysler is an unusual die cast subject that I would like to have in my collection.


It is already out in the pace car series. And it looks so much better without the VERY plastic looking roof. Just look past the facct that it's a scale 37 feet long!

i lke this casting too

I like the 300,but my only gripe is that it doesn't fit in the display case with the rest of my Mopars.

I think the plastic top should have been made to fit much better than it does. The gap across the back under the rear window looks bad.

The designers should be aware that any area that is a transition from metal to plastic has the potential to be a weak point, and they should really concentrate hard on making it look and fit together as perfectly as possible.

The same suggestion applies to the AAR 'cudas that I saw, too. I could not convince myself to buy one.

I like this casting, a neat car that you just never see many of anymore. I do think it looks a tad big but, it WAS a big car in 1:1 form. I do agree the transition from body to roof doesn't look as good as possible. I think this car's design does not lend itself well to being done as both a coupe and convertible from the same casting. If you look at the 65 Coronet and the new 64 Sport Fury, this roof style is much easier to pull off successfully. Maybe they should havedone the 63 only as a convertible, and then another casting as a 64 only as a coupe with metal roof?

I like it but cant find one

Finally!!!

Some of you are seeing that GL is getting too many high marks for good but NOT GREAT castings.

If undue praise is showered over their decent but *NOT great* products, they will NOT improve. The detail of their castings needs a little bit of work, while the wheels are STILL *enormously* out of proportion and need serious rework... after all, if they are doing castings of real cars, why make the wheels look so horribly out of proportion in the 'cartoon' style of the original Muscle Machines (but the cartoonishness of the MMs was intentional).

Just compare the GL green 71 Charger against those by HW 100%/Showcase line (purple 71 Charger), as well as that by Ertl American Muscle (the green/black 71 Charger) series... and GL, though decent, still is NOT up to par.

My thought on the 300 J - Didn't it have a square steering wheel?

Mike

The front end of the 300 should be slanted forward more than it is on the GL 1/64 version. The 1/1 is more agressive looking up front. Didn't anyone look at a photo? It's sort of the most important part of the design, i.e., the car's "face".

http://www.chrysler300clubinc.com/1963300j.htm

My thought on the 300 J - Didn't it have a square steering wheel?

Mike

I think that the squared-off steering wheel may have been an option on those cars. It would be cool to have it on the 1/64 version.

The steering wheel on the on the blue 300 (custom) in MCG4B is indeed square.
I only have this one.

That is great attention to detail. Regarding the scale, I always thought that GL cars were a bit larger and couldnt exhibit the first few cars with other diecast, but now i have enough of GLs that they can go together as a bunch.

hmmm interesting this site claims there were no 300J convertibles
so GL the 300 convertiable in the pace car is not a letter series, but a 300 sport
it doesn't say J on the package, and there web site says sport, so they got it right.
if you look at the package they changed with a sticker, what was underneath?

the steering wheels on all my 300 are squarish, I have one of each (all 5)

also I am not sure if all 300J's had the cross ram 413, some may have not, as what this website kinda says

http://www.chrysler300site.com/cgibin/history.cgi?1963

http://www.chrysler300site.com/

or is it a pace setter:

http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.com/owensm63.html

http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.com/owensm63p2.html

http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.com/luedtke63.html

You guys are gonne think I'm nuts, but I think the 300 is too small!!!

Hear me out, folks. The C body Chry. in 1/1 is WIDER than it's smaller brothers ~
B-body Coronets and the like.
Ok now take your GL 300 and compare the width to a smaller GL MoPar.
Done? It's the SAME width, right? right.
Therefore, if the PROPORTIONS of the 300 are correct...,then the SCALE is OFF in context to other GL cars.
This car should be wider and LONGER than it is!!!

BTW, I'm content with this casting, it's not THAT bad. At least they had the stones to make the thing in the first place.
It's far from perfect, but perfect from afar!

And also, it DOES have the correct shape steering wheel IMO. I used to own a '63 Chry. wagon.

The GL 300J is 3 13/32" length and the real car is 215.3." This would make a 1:63.21 scale.

http://www.chrysler300clubinc.com/1963300j.htm

1:63.21 scale.

Not even 1:64?! OH THE HUMANITY.

:p

With my measurement, you also have to take into account paint thinkness, and my old eyeballs!!

I measured 5 or 6 different Greenlights the other day and they were all very close if not right on 1:64. Katie speaks the truth!!

The GL 300J is 3 13/32" length and the real car is 215.3." This would make a 1:63.21 scale.

http://www.chrysler300clubinc.com/1963300j.htm

Told ya - ha - ha! :jest: :rolleyes:

Guess I need to eyeball my c & b-bodys I got lying around Lummoxborg one more time! :freak:

Well, the numbers don't lie. So I have been proved wrong...again! Not anything new, and I am getting more used to it!

I still don't like the "look" of it, but hats off to GL for working scale. Maybe, I just like the old 3" style of diecast and not so much the 1:64 scale!

But thank you for the time to measure the piece. I will shut up now!

well I don't know about width but lenght wise it looks about right compared to the 64 Plymouth and AAR cuda
it's hard to compare width unless there loose

http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.com/mmo1000.html

looking at the pics in the site above of the indy pace car I think GL did a good job on this odd machine

they even seem to have the floor shift console, with no shifter

No shifter 'cause ~

Trash-on-the-dash
Juke-box-drive
Blender-drive
Blender-buttons
Don't-mistake-reverse-for-"Defrost"-cause-it's-got-push-button-"convenience".

All MoPar> automatics from '56-'64 had this feature.