1972 Dodge Charger vs Chevrolet Malibu Dealer Promo Film
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 06. 2018
- 1972 Dodge Charger vs Chevrolet Malibu Dealer Promo Film
Mopar is a registered trademark of Chrysler Group LLC. Master Tech series training materials are the property of Chrysler Group LLC and are used with permission.
MyMopar.com - Auta a dopravní prostředky
I miss the mid 60's thru the early 70's. The big three produced so many nice looking cars. I would take either one of these but prefer the Malibu. The '72 Ford Torino was a good looking car also.
For me my favorite has to go to the 70 Chevelle SS 454.
Cool video, thanks for posting it. I actually owed both of these cars in the early 80's. I had the 72 Charger SE, with power steering , and 400 2 bbr. My Malibu convertible had the 350. The Charger was a blast to drive and I could park it on a dime. The Malibu was nice but the frame rotted out. I miss the Charger more!
Martin Walling I had a 1971 . It had a 440 - 4 barrel. I bought the car in 1978 for $1250. It was a family car and it had 59,000 miles on it. I want a lot of races with that car.
0:46 Look at the charger now..... Just a family 4 door sedan
Now there's a cool flashback
I worked as a mechanic at a Ford dealer from 1983 through 2006. I can remember sitting through Ford's model training videos every year with the sales department. The videos were similar to these in comparing their vehicles to their competitors. Quite frankly, I found them boring and misleading in a lot of ways, but I can see where its useful to the sales staff that didnt have to repair them.
Something I always found interesting, a salesman can easily compare their model against the competitor, until they get the competitor's car in on trade then have to resale it on the used car lot; they are quick to point out what a great car it is to a prospective buyer.
by 1970s chrysler was ahead of the market in engineering / style / luxury / and power. a base model in any chrysler line looked nicer than most upscale models from the general or FoMoCo . unibody with bolt on subframe is considered standard today. but chrysler had been building them from the late 40s. they do have their own drawbacks. #1 being rust. and chrysler of the 70s had other qc issues. from electeral to fit and finish. i have always liked the charger and would love to own one. and even though the 72 malibu this charger was compared with was the last year for that body style ( body change for 73 ) i would have to give the edge to the general for overall quality for the price. i think time has proven that the gm model was better built. given the two choices i personally would rather have the charger. just my 2 cents. love seeing the old videos. keep up the good work.
Just wanted to correct you on one thing - Chrysler didn't start going unibody until the late '50s. It was actually Nash/AMC that Pioneered unibody as far back as 1949. But you're spot on in regards to everything else. Chrysler used to be known as "the engineers company". First with power steering, first with electronic ignition, the best automatic transmission in the world, unibody, torsion bars....
The only thing that crippled them was their quality in the mid 70's. But in all fairness, quality was generally poor among the big three during that time. It says a lot when AMC used to have the BEST quality. One of their old advertisements even boasted the fact that: "The best car to come out of Detroit this year will come from Kenosha."
I had this year Charger SE 400 big block red white leather black vinyl roof flip lights full console slap stick i miss her!
Mopar was king from 1967-1974.
Man Chrysler jumped everybody's gun, just by out engineering everyone, they're technicians designers and engineers, were fricking geniuses in those days.way ahead of everybody else, ahead of there own time.
Name one thing.
Googles your friend.
Look it up.
Im sure no one has time to comment a BOOK
1971-72 Charger is nothing more than a 1969 Grand Prix rip off with the long hood short deck theme and interior.
True, the alternator was a Chrysler innovation (previously cars had a generator and were plagued with electrical problems), the Dodge Power Wagon was one of the first successful four-wheel drive vehicles (predating the jeep by years), the slant six was a great design, all of the accessories were mounted on one side of the engine for easy access, plus the power per cubic inch was very high for that engine - and it was so well engineered that it was used in Mopar cars and Dodge trucks for 30+ years with minimal changes. Just a few of the innovations.
The distributor was not so easy! Not as bad as some though. Spot on with the alternator, I'll give Mopar credit where it's due. Still, I'd take the Malibu.
they could use this today!
Gosh golly!! I wonder which of these 2 fine cars will be head and shoulders above the other?? I mean, the suspense is killing me!! I might just fast forward to the end for the answer.
I really really enjoy these thank you 🙂❤️👍🏻👌🏻
As far as looks go, the Charger is the hands-down winner. It even manages to look relatively modern compared to the Chevy.
Wow an early production SE with a Sunroof in Y4 Gold and body color mirrors.
Sooooo....vinyl is more desirable than cloth? We used to call them vinyl bum-burners during the summer.
But it looks like Corinthian leather!
lol I totally understand that nickname XD But I've found that Vinyl is easier to clean than cloth while also doesn't stain like cloth either.
Yeah, weird thinking. In my country cloth was more desirable by far
This was very interesting (ding)
It’s interesting seeing these dealer promos (ding)
I wasn’t old enough to buy cars other than Hot Wheels at this time (ding) 😊
GM had intended for the Colonnade A-bodies to be on the market in 1972 but for various reasons that didn't happen and the new in 1968 generation continued for one more year. It's clear on this video that the Charger is a full generation more modern than the Malibu (even if it's just as clear that means the Charger is saddled with more inefficient dead weight - those overhangs! - of the sort that immediately dated it after the gas crunch).
Still using Powerglide in 1972 was a stunning bit of cheapness on GM's part. OTOH I like the purposeful look the Heavy Chevy's trim-ring-free Rally wheels and blackwalls give it. Chevy should've used that combo with the black grille more widely, it really updates the car's look almost to a late-70s/early '80s style.
GM experienced a strike which set them back a year. The foot bumpers were very unattractive in 1973.
the black grille wa n the ss also. Plus the dash in an ss was way better lookin
Would have been interesting seeing them compare the Charger to a Laguna. IMHO, the collonades made everything else in that size class look old.
@@JWROWE3 The only '73-77 A body I thought was appealing was the Grand Prix. The rest, especially the four door versions, were just plain fucking ugly. I didn't care much for Charger but thought Coronet/Satelite sedans weren't bad and only the Torino Sportroof was appealing to me. Mid '70s intermediates were just bad IMO. But opinions are like assholes, everyone has one.
Chrysler engineering was so advanced compared to Chev and Ford.
Advanced? With cart (leaf) springs at the rear? Nope.
You must be a Chrysler man
@@harrisionstan3773 Yes. Ford and Chevy's rear suspension trailing arms yawed (wallowed) around corners/turns and wheel hopped under hard acceleration. Chrysler's asymmetrically mounted differentials on leaf springs did not and actually help to load the differential ("hook up") under hard acceleration. The torsion bar front suspension's on unit body chassis was stiffer, stronger and provided for a superior handling/controlled automobile. Don't believe me? Notice the great number of chase scenes/movies from the 60's, 70's and 80's where unit body Chryslers were used in high speed, high stress (jump) applications. Due to their superior chassis strength (and drive trains), they required much less modification for high abuse applications (as compared to the Ford and GM counterparts). A testament to this fact is that Chrysler products (Dodge's and Plymouth's) were the preferred car of police departments during this period.
Maybe, but those MOPARS were rustier than the RMS Titanic! 🛳🛳🛳
@@jjojo2004 I said engineering, not metallurgy. 😉
I think The charger and Chevelle were great cars.
They sure we're brother
You had me at "hello"
I had a used 72 Charger for my first car. Sure wish I kept it and stored it. Traded it in on a new 78 Honda Civic. $400.00 LoL.
I would like to see a comparison of the '73-'74 Chargers against the new GM mid-sizers. All they would have to do is show pictures. Man, those GM cars got ugly. Unfortunately, so did Mopars after '74, because Mopar always followed GM's styling lead. (Compare the Charger's loop bumper and quad headlights to the '68-69 Pontiacs, for example-nearly identical).
The 68-70 Chargers generally had similar styling wise to the 66-67 GM A-bodies with its coke bottle styling.
I was thinking that the Charger competes more with the Monte Carlo
Strongly agree
But that was the whole idea of making the Charger the basic intermediate two door instead of Coronet: There were models from stripper $3000 to Grand Prix type personal luxury at $6000+
The Monte didn't go oil pan first into a pot hole cuz' a torsion bar broke on impact.
I definitely agree, the Charger consisted of the 2 door coupe only. Similar to the Monte Carlo having a 2 door coupe model only. That's why I agree that the Charger competes more with the Monte Carlo too.
Or with the oldsmobile Cutlass these are a better comparison
My first car was the hard top red with black vinal top and a 318.
The bodies on these Dodges were notorious for rusting out and there were so many rattling body panels and interior squeaks and rattles. They weren't very good cars Navi then. I had a 73 Laguna and my brother-in-law had a 73 Charger. His Charger literally had fenders flapping in 3 years.
Charger looked like the better choice
I assume the Chevrolet had more HP, because the narrator went on and on about cubic inches and did not mention actual performance figures. I think that Dodge was more concerned with comfort and ride at that time. I bet those Charger doors were a pain in parking spaces. We used to call them "battleship doors", because of the size.
The 6s and bottom V8 on either side were an even match.....the moment you went larger than the small 8, the Charger was already into the big blocks.
Power numbers weren't great for any of this class. Compression had been squeezed. They were probably embarrassed at the drop in performance, so no use pointing it out to customers.
318 had more horsepower than 307.
I wonder why they didn't bring in the malibu SS
Richard golden dewitt Probably saving the best for last.
Chevelle
These are always fun to watch. The 68/69 Malibus were sportier but these Chargers were just too big. Had a '69 383 Magnum and also a '70 307. Guess which i wish i still had ;)
Which?
@@chief1972 thanx for the reply. The '69 Charger (you knew that already). I put a set of headers and turbo mufflers i bought used for $50 in the '70. Were for a '67 Chevelle but dropped right in since the frame rails were the same. Also 'blacked out' the grill like an SS. At least it looked and sounded good. still a grocery getter.
The 68-70 chargers were way better looking.than a 68-69 chevelle
Im a mopar person and I've been watching maybe 15 of these mopar vs whoever videos and in everyone contradicts what was said previously or in the future. One time complained only 2 Seats in back can't sit in middle while praising the 2 seats in 66 charger. Another one it's good that our is bigger and heavier gives car more weight to plant when cornering at higher speeds. The competitor charges 12 bucks for that option, but is standard equipment at no cost when you payout for the hemi model. It goes on and on and i get it, but for the 72 charger and 72 malibu I was guessing what could be said in chargers favor and with the build up that buyers want performance gives dodge the win for least output per cubic inch. Probably never did another one of these comparisons knowing how far out there thats needed to go and even elementary kids aren't buy it. Desperate man trying to save his job.
Man do I also miss the cars of the 60's and early 70's before pollution control gutted the performance of muscle cars. Even the 72 Charger was a joke compared to its predecessors. Bring back vinyl tops!!! Pure luxury,, :)
In 1972 the Barracuda was their best looking car.
I walk to the Nearest Ford dealer and buy a new 72 Gran Torino the best looking intermediate for 72
I'm sold
Got to go with the charger.
Spacious!! try to go in the back seat.
Me gustan los dos carros
Less than $100 difference between 6 & 8 cylinders, WOW! The difference now between a SXT and RT is at least $5000. I know that includes different suspension components too, but seriously what is the difference in the manufacturing cost?
They had the concept of the "base V8" then.
You got to keep in mind charger did not come in a station wagon or four-door or convertible
I really enjoy these Mopar / competitor videos, but they missed the target this time. Dodge is definitely above the Chevy level - closer to Pontiac and Oldsmobile and those 2 brands would have been a much more fair comparison. Here the Charger is clearly the winner (I'd take one over the Malibu without hesitation) but the outcome would be closer against the Grand Prix or Cutlass line. If anything the Charger could have been "comparable" at a lower cost.
But that was the whole idea of this generation - that it competed with literally everything from a base Chevelle through the Pontiac Grand Prix SJ. It was the 'everything car' with fixed back window, rubber floor coupe up through the hidden headlights and canopy vinyl roof SE, so the top model could price out at double the base car.
The Charger has wraparound bumpers, GM was out of that by 72.
*I'm sold! I can't wait to order my new 1972 Malibu!*
Unbelievable for the advertising to show and explain the vehicle... today's advertising is all about profiling people, class, race, gender... generally promoting the division of our society.
I always wondered: what is the difference between a coupe and a hardtop? Is it the presence of a B pillar? i mean,a sedan could be a hardtop,softtop or convertible right? Is it just the type of roof?
mcrozoo a hardtop is like a convertible with no B pillar. In fact, they put vinyl tops on them to mimic the look of a convertible.
The rear windows were fixed on the cheap coupe model and rolled down on the hardtop
Malibu is a great looking car--had it been the size of a Camaro or Mustang, they would have sold 10 times as many
Chevelle more of a muscle car and more reliable see way more on road now 2019 .chargers was more of a beast in68 and 69.
I'll Take 1 of Each Please
This was the year that horsepower ratings switched from gross to net. But we all know what the truth is!!
They're so salty at Ford and Chevrolet at that time now they're considered as boats that can't corner lol
John Vlad except not? Like have you ever drove a 60s Charger?
@@Shade_tree_garage01. Today everything needs to be rebuilt. And who rebuilds everything dead stock? Are you going to put 8:1 pistons in a 350 or 383? Or the old camshaft? Everything is upgraded. My Charger is a corner killer. I built it to do everything that the old muscle cars couldn't. Mission accomplished
and even today,
Turned into the Chrysler Cordoba with Corinthian leather in 1975.
Ding
Change the slide
Ding
Change the slide
Ding
Change the slide
Ding
Change the slide
Ding
Change the slide
*DING*
What was that I missed it
One and a half feet is a big package
Towards the end they showed the charger with cargar ss wherls 😂 they didn't come with these wheels out of the factory!
Boy Dodge was really reaching in this video. Chevy has the spare on the right but WE have it on the left! Lol. What a bunch of crap. But they’re both amazing cars.
compare it to the KIA FORTE
Always kinda conflicted when it comes to these early 70s cars. On one end anything from 70-71 was king in terms of performance due to the horsepower war being at an all time high and the new decade brought great body styles, on the other end anything built in 72' and later like these two slabs of steel were detuned to high hell and were made incredibly slow due to epa regulations and gas shortages caused by the 73' oil embargo and fuel shortages. Personally I wouldn't dare touch these model years because they dropped a lot of the options from the previous years and they got slower and then eventually got uglier such as with the 73 chevelle and the 75 charger cordoba shitbox. Great advertisement tho, wish we had stuff like this today instead of just showing the car driving up and down a mountain-side highway
Lost the beauty of the 68-69 Charger, and the Chevrolet had a real frame.
Chevy had nothing real and the what happened to the 70 charger?
I mean if you mention 68 and 69, 70 has to be put in there.
Appearance.wise you would put the 71, 72, 73. And 74 together.
Power wise??
68-70 again put together.
The 71-74 not so much.
No HEMI IN 72, POWER.SHRINKS IN THE 72 AND 73 AND 74 SHRINKS MORE
How many frames do you see in a modern car? The reason why the unibody chassis is superior has everything to do with three dimensional torsional rigidity. The old pickup truck ladder frames are not suitable for a performance vehicle. I remember the Porsche 928 had about 5 times the torsional stiffness of the Corvette. No prizes given out to determine which car handled better
Which was weaker (frame construction), less stable and yawed (wallowed) around corners. The Charger's unit body was superior in every way, so much so that ALL American car manufactures adopted unit body construction in the majority of their product offerings there after (Chrysler first introduced this type of construction in 1934 with its Airflow models).
The Charger is just better looking.
In my opinion after 1969, GM was waaaaay ahead in exterior design and appeal in every class of car and stayed there for decades.
THREE different vinyl roofs. Jesus christ.
Sorry the 72 Malibu is far better then a 72 Charger, by 72 they got too big & a little ugly . A 68 -70 Charger's better then all Malibu's tho
'71 is when the Charger design became blah
The General Lee,in factory default color scheme.
Mike Gallant that’s a 1968-1969 Dodge Charger R/T 383-440 with a 4 speed manual, or if you’re show smart, 3 speed auto.
I would have taken the Malibu any day before that charger model. It was too big and heavy, and here they compare base model malibu with se model charger.
1971-1968 charger however is way better.
Let's compare the Malibu convertible to the Charger convertible....oh, that's right, no Charger convertible. :)
Chevrolet malibu😍😍😍
Chevelle more reliable.
But more open to engine tampering as no inside hood release, I remember as a kid cars like this had missing batteries some mornings!! (Seriously).
Of course, they show an ugly version of the Malibu for comparison. If I was considering the Charger, I would compare to the Monte Carlo, Grand Prix, or Cutlass.
1968 and '69 Chargers are one of the best long cars ever but the 1971-74 chargers are plain ole ugly.
Chevelle looks so much better.
Dodge the Charger always came in 2 doors so where is a 2019 2 door charger?
In the same place as the Monte Carlo, Gran Torino, Thunderbird, Cougar, and Cordoba. The past. When people stopped buying intermediate coupes, companies stopped building them.
Chevelle.
I had one with a 318. Biggest piece of shit I ever owned.
Was that car really that bad? I've seen a few comments like this for that body style of charger.
I think Chrysler had more Polish people working for them,very mathematical... Chevy had more Italians.. went by looks mostly..
Such a Drastic Body style change from the 2nd gen car and keeping the name was even more drastic, move on to the current 4 door sedan and that is completely strange the best one is still the 68 through 70 and that's a sad thing the crazy TV show which I don't need to mention purposely wreck hundreds of them for the crazy rat race society and Mostly fake stunt's as well. This one done up in Super B or road runner + track packs with the 426ci is thee car but still can't hold a candle to the one it replaced ,If dodge would bring back the 68 car today there would be a stupid long waiting list & l don't understand why they haven't yet the 300c 4 door sedan based Challenger is way long in the tooth and rated last of the three so-called pony car's because it fat & heavy & not it's own chassis. Crazy how car manufacturers miss out on what the people really want.
The Carge rft cgv
had trouble with my computer.
This is not even a good comparison. The Charger would be my choice but it’s not even close to a Malibu. In all fairness the Chevy is much smaller.
i like the chevelle but charger is better by far
72 Monty Carlo is better than both
American cars were never better-looking than the late 60’s-early 70’s. Says this old fart.
Chevrolet rules the charger
Tell that to Richard Petty.
Chevy is the best
With lightcovers they looked ok...but plain chargers were not attractive
OMG, I had a 1972 Dodge Charger Rallye with the hidden headlights, a V-8, that bulbous hood, et alia. I truly hated that car with a passion. I mean like it was the absolute worst car I ever owned. I had it for one year and traded it for a Gremlin-that's how much I hated it.
WOW! A Gremlin? You must've really been disgusted by that Charger.
@@PhaQ2 Yes, I really was. The Gremlin was by far the better car.
@@kofender Why? What was wrong with the Charger?
Totally no comparison in looks. That Malibu by "Generic Motors" is just a stodgy, cheap looking POS compared to the Charger. Look at the horrible simpleness and lack of design styling in the front grille treatment, lights, indicators and bumper and then look at the Charger. Chalk and cheese!
I like the overall look of the Malibu much more.
The Charger looks rather ugly. Like a tank without the turret.
being a ford guy non of this applies to me..but if i had to choose..it would be the chevy ,,,cuzz that charger is f-ing ugly.....yuk
If you truly believed that you.would pick chevy because it was as friggin ugly as the fords
There was a styling drop-off from the iconic ‘68, ‘69, and ‘70 design.
The Dodge charger is far better.
Timothy Evans the Charger died after 71.
@@Shade_tree_garage01 Actually the Charger did just fine till the redesign in '75
Every advantage the announcer says the Charger has over the Malibu just makes me like the Chevy even more. 72 Charger’s were super ugly, but the Malibu/Chevelle from 69-72 were beautiful cars.
Both gawd awful cars; the beginning of the end...
Wndr why there is no mention of the chevelle Super Sport. ?? 🤔 way better than those ugly ass chargers