FINAL FLING
LAST CHARGER
If you wander through the history of Chrysler Charger in Australia, you can’t help but be entertained by how the whole exercise came about. And perhaps a little appalled that the nameplate and project didn’t last longer and go on to much greater things.
As a styling exercise it was remarkable, thanks in part to the drive of then Chrysler Australia Managing Director David Brown and Chief Stylist Brian Smyth. The latter recalled Brown not so much giving a brief as asking a question: what might a short wheelbase coupe based on the VH look like?
Early shapes looked promising and the project, aka the Rebel, quickly hit clay model stage. Head office was informed at this point, but the local team was a long way from having production approval.
Even so, development progressed, with two working prototype utes famously doing track time in the hands of Leo Geoghegan to test and develop the driveline and
underpinnings. Incredibly, both those test mules are around today.
Things were looking promising, but there was one final hurdle to overcome, which was getting the final tick of approval from the mother ship. Gavin Farmer’s excellent local Chrysler histor y,
GreatIdeasinMotion, tells it this way:
“Ian Webber, a former managing director, remembered vividly: ‘I was in David’s office when he rang Chrysler International to let them know we were going with the Charger program. Unusually for him, he was as nervous as a cat on a hot tin roof !
“’What they did not know, and David didn’t tell them, was that the Charger was well into the tooling development stage. It was damn near ready to go down the production line. David really put everything – his reputation and career – on the line for that car.’”
Of course it was a big success for the company, working as an image leader for the entire Chrysler Valiant range and getting people talking about the brand.
We saw four generations of the design, in line with the mainstream sedan/wagon/ute series: VH 1971-73; VJ 1973-75; VK 1975-76 and CL 1976-78. Sadly, it didn’t survive to accompany the final CM generation of the family car range.
Over the years, collectors in particular have tended to focus on the early cars, particularly the homologation specials such as E37, E38 and E49 R/Ts. They’re often described as the best cars
"THE APPEARANCE SUBTLY SHIFTED TOWARDS GRAND TOURER"
never to have won Bathurst, a back-handed compliment but a compliment nevertheless.
Chrysler meanwhile was seen as having lost its way over the life of the Charger – in part perhaps through lack of investment at a time when both the Australian and US companies were struggling financially. There’s truth to that view, but that doesn’t mean the late product necessarily suffered.
In fact, you could put up a strong argument that the later Chargers were better equipped than ever and a more integrated package.
By far the easiest way to pick a CL is the front. Its quad headlight snout was said to have been designed for an earlier generation and delayed. In any case, it added a sense of luxury to the appearance, subtly shifting the coupe more towards the grand tourer market.
The powerplants by now were reduced to three: the 245 (4.0lt) and 265 (4.3lt) straight Hemi sixes, plus the venerable 318 (5.2lt) Fireball V8. All were designated as the upmarket 770, with exception to a Drifter version, sharing some of the graphics of the short-lived vans and utes of the same name.
Tied to those was a choice of three or four-speed manuals, or a Borg-Warner auto in the sixes. The V8 was generally offered with a Torquef lite auto, though the Drifter V8s scored a four-speed manual.
By now new emission rules had been introduced, which saw some pretty ordinary short-term power-robbing responses from Ford and GMH. Chrysler was generally a little ahead of its competition, with electronic ignition in place and its computer-controlled ‘Electronic
Lean Burn’ system rolling out into the surviving mainstream range from 1978.
When you look at the specs for the CL series and its predecessor, you could be forgiven for thinking the opposite was true. For example, the 265 in the Charger (arguably the pick of the powerplants) claimed 151kW (203bhp) in the VK but a mere 110kW in the CL.
This was an own-goal in some respects, as the firm (in line with other car makers) had changed from gross to net SAE measurement, which severely hobbled the figures. There is no ready conversion between the two. However it’s fair to say the real performance losses between the two generations were much less than the numbers suggest.
As a handling package, it was a pretty good thing. Torsion bars were still part of the front end package, with a live axle and leaf springs on the rear. However it was a well-sorted chassis from day one, helped by having power-assisted discs on the front end as standard.
The final example rolled off the Tonsley Park (South Australia) production line in October 1978.
Values for the CL series have been climbing slowly but steadily in recent years. At the moment, you’ll still get a very good example for somewhere in the forties to early sixties, depending on condition and spec. That means they still represent exceptional value – particularly at a time where six-figure prices are common for Aussie metal. On that basis, Charger’s final f ling may well turn out to be the best.
"THEY STILL REPRESENT EXCEPTIONAL VALUE "