Mod Squad Challenger on Ebay
Posted: 28 Dec 2007 20:50Item number - 260195874471
or found here http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Dodge-Ch ... dZViewItem
or found here http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Dodge-Ch ... dZViewItem
Page 1 of 1
Posted: 28 Dec 2007 20:50Posted: 28 Dec 2007 20:52Too cool!
Re: Mod Squad Challenger on Ebay
Posted: 29 Dec 2007 16:27fal308 wrote:so they had a 1971 convertible converted to look like a 1972 model.
It feels like a very unusual conversion to me. Usually it use to be the other way around. One of one car? Thanks for posting.
Re: Mod Squad Challenger on Ebay
Posted: 29 Dec 2007 19:08christer wrote:fal308 wrote:so they had a 1971 convertible converted to look like a 1972 model.
It feels like a very unusual conversion to me. Usually it use to be the other way around. One of one car? Thanks for posting.
It was for a 1972 TV show. Chrysler insisted they use their 1972 model for the show but the script called for a convertible. Of course there were no convertible versions in 72 so they converted a 71.
Posted: 29 Dec 2007 20:27So does Dave or anyone else for that matter know, is this an 'officially' built factory car? If so, stupid question but this would technically be a 1 of 1 built car?
Posted: 29 Dec 2007 21:25Offhand I would call this a factory conversion if not a factory car. According to the listing, Chrysler (re)built the car themselves so a case could be made for either status.
Posted: 29 Dec 2007 22:12Interesting Barc, so this would classify it as a 'concept' car much like the Steven Juliano cars? If so, it can only increase in value you would think.
Posted: 29 Dec 2007 22:19I think one could make an argument either way though I would be more comfortable calling it a factory conversion myself as it wasn't really designed to showcase anything. It was built to show off more than anything. Same principle as the factory Hemi a-bodies. Both were designed with a specific goal in mind and that goal was not to increase showroom traffic.
Now if it was at Barrett-Jackson it would most likely be classified as a one-off factory prototype or some such nonsence. That way they could double the price to the investors...sorry, the "collectors"..gif)
Now if it was at Barrett-Jackson it would most likely be classified as a one-off factory prototype or some such nonsence. That way they could double the price to the investors...sorry, the "collectors".
Posted: 29 Dec 2007 23:33Interesting, the sister car #150400 is for sale at the same time at a $40K discount. Maybe cause of the non correct VIN tag rosettes.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/RARE-CEL ... dZViewItem
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/RARE-CEL ... dZViewItem
Posted: 30 Dec 2007 2:38So there were 2 produced!?
Posted: 30 Dec 2007 3:38At least two. I was checking these out myself on ebay. The last number's on the VIN are 399 and 400. Pretty cool! I like the black interior better than the gold one. Nicer car and cheaper price. It would be nice to own both car's though, especially with matching VIN's like they have. I never have seen the new Mod Squad movie. But, I sure liked the old T.V. series.
Posted: 30 Dec 2007 8:34472 R/T SE wrote:Maybe cause of the non correct VIN tag rosettes.
Yeah, most likely!
More seriously:
The more expensive car has a fresch rim-blow steering wheel, a fresch original radio and a stock seat upholstery. The lower priced car has a worn tuff steering wheel, an aftermarket radio and a non-original (?, I am not 100% sure) seat upholstery. These differences are not worth 40K though.....
patrick wrote:It would be nice to own both car's though, especially with matching VIN's like they have.
I guess most of us just can´t stop thinking of buying/owning Challengers, can we?
Posted: 30 Dec 2007 11:40It would have been unusual to have just one car unless they never had any in-car shots. I had been wondering about that.
Most TV shows and films have at least three cars depending on if stunts are involved. One is always a camera car rigged up with camera mounts. One other is always for the "pulling up to the kerb" and close-up shots. This is always the best one.
Sometimes a third or fourth car is used for chases etc. In particular if any off-road driving or stunts are involved. One may be also set up with camera mounts. This is so that if any damage is done they at least have the main camera and close-up cars available for the non-stunt shots.
These extra cars are not susually finished to any great standard. In fact they are usually very rough and only look good from 20 feet away at least.
Most TV shows and films have at least three cars depending on if stunts are involved. One is always a camera car rigged up with camera mounts. One other is always for the "pulling up to the kerb" and close-up shots. This is always the best one.
Sometimes a third or fourth car is used for chases etc. In particular if any off-road driving or stunts are involved. One may be also set up with camera mounts. This is so that if any damage is done they at least have the main camera and close-up cars available for the non-stunt shots.
These extra cars are not susually finished to any great standard. In fact they are usually very rough and only look good from 20 feet away at least.
Posted: 31 Dec 2007 9:39472 R/T SE wrote:Interesting, the sister car #150400 is for sale at the same time at a $40K discount. Maybe cause of the non correct VIN tag rosettes.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/RARE-CEL ... dZViewItem
I thought it would be a good idea to copy the pic´s for future needs.
Posted: 31 Dec 2007 10:53christer wrote:I thought it would be a good idea to copy the pic´s for future needs.
Posted: 31 Dec 2007 11:50jr wrote:christer wrote:I thought it would be a good idea to copy the pic´s for future needs.
Thanks! I tried to do the same with those pic´s but I did not manage to do it.
An easy thing for you to do, right? Posted: 31 Dec 2007 15:22christer wrote:Thanks! I tried to do the same with those pic´s but I did not manage to do it.
Either disable javascript or use firefox.
Posted: 31 Dec 2007 15:27An interesting note is that they both do have the same interior code on the build sheets, H6Y3. Which translates to gold.
bob
bob
Posted: 02 Jan 2008 18:19jr wrote:christer wrote:Thanks! I tried to do the same with those pic´s but I did not manage to do it.
Either disable javascript or use firefox.
Thanks! Useful information!
Posted: 02 Jan 2008 18:22jh27n0b wrote:Which translates to gold.
bob
And? Nothing odd with that, eh? Aren´t all e-bodies worth its weight in gold nowadays?
