70-76 Demon,Dart sport,Duster Pictorial History

-
super70bird said:
Great info here! Couple of things:


The lightweight (Feather, Lite) cars could be had with 318s and automatics - not all were slant 6 w/ overdrive.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree with that. 318's were not a Feather Duster or Dart Lite option. But the package with special 6 cyl. could be ordered with an automatic or a 4-speed O.D. "Regular" 6 cyl. were used in the "regular cars". The only related statements in print that I can find at the moment are at the bottom of this article where the author states: "Along with the usual slant six engine".

http://www.valiant.org/duster.html


... this about 1/2 way down the page: "The 1976 Feather Duster was an engineering (if not marketing) success, featuring many lightweight parts including some aluminum body panels. It had a slant-six with gas-miser tuning and a special exhaust that could achieve over 30mpg."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plymouth_Duster


.... and this near the bottom in the "1976" section: "Another interesting new package was the "Feather Duster", which was available only as a Slant Six"

http://wikicars.org/es/Plymouth_Duster


.....and one more, just past 1/2 way down the page: "A Feather Duster was introduced which replaced many of the body components with aluminum, resulting in nearly 200 pound weight loss for the vehicle. It was outfitted with the six-cylinder engine, special exhaust system, and promoted as a light-weight, fuel efficient vehicle."

http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z10449/Plymouth_Valiant%20Duster/default.aspx
 
Locomotion said:
I have to disagree with that. 318's were not a Feather Duster or Dart Lite option. But the package with special 6 cyl. could be ordered with an automatic or a 4-speed O.D. "Regular" 6 cyl. were used in the "regular cars". The only related statements in print that I can find at the moment are at the bottom of this article where the author states: "Along with the usual slant six engine".

http://www.valiant.org/duster.html


... this about 1/2 way down the page: "The 1976 Feather Duster was an engineering (if not marketing) success, featuring many lightweight parts including some aluminum body panels. It had a slant-six with gas-miser tuning and a special exhaust that could achieve over 30mpg."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plymouth_Duster


.... and this near the bottom in the "1976" section: "Another interesting new package was the "Feather Duster", which was available only as a Slant Six"

http://wikicars.org/es/Plymouth_Duster


.....and one more, just past 1/2 way down the page: "A Feather Duster was introduced which replaced many of the body components with aluminum, resulting in nearly 200 pound weight loss for the vehicle. It was outfitted with the six-cylinder engine, special exhaust system, and promoted as a light-weight, fuel efficient vehicle."

http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z10449/Plymouth_Valiant Duster/default.aspx
Click to expand...

agreeded....here is an official press release from chrysler upon introducing the dart lite for 76.....

DETROIT -- Dodge is introducing a liteweight contender for the compact car economy crown.
Called the Dart Lite, the 1976 Dart Sport with the fuel economy package weighs in more than 150 pounds lighter than the conventional version of the popular compact.

Dart is available for 1976 in low line versions of the coupe, two-door hardtop and four-door sedan, and a high-line version of the two-door hardtop. A series of merchandising packages are available so that the motorist can tailor his Dart to meet his motoring needs.

"The Dart is one of the most successful compact cars ever introduced in the American automobile marketplace," according to R. D. McLaughlin, vice president of Chrysler's Automotive Sales Division. "It enjoys a strong owner loyalty and is a car that has established a reputation for reliability and value.

"In a price-conscious market, Dart will have an advantage. The car has more than a decade of building a strong reputation for extra value as a new car purchase and good value at resale. These are the reasons why we will continue to market the Dart while introducing the new compact Aspen," he added.

Weight saving in the Dart Lite economy package is accomplished by use of aluminum components. The 225 six cylinder engine, the only powerplant available with the package, is equipped with an aluminum intake manifold.

Bumper reinforcements are aluminum instead of steel and the hood and trunk lid inner panels also are fabricated from aluminum instead of steel.

In addition to the lightweight manifold, the engine block has been modified to lessen the weight. A dual biscuit catalyst is utilized and a new, larger exhaust system is a part of the Lite package.

The Lite is equipped with a 2.94:1 rear axle when the car is ordered with a three or four-speed manual transmission. A three-speed column shift is standard and three-on-the-floor and Overdrive-4 manual transmissions are optional. A 2.76:1 rear axle is standard on Lites ordered with automatic transmissions.

Dodge's Overdrive-4 manual transmission has a 0.73:1 final drive ratio which allows cruising at highway speeds with minimum engine revolutions. When the Overdrive-4 transmission is ordered with the Lite package, the transmission case is made of aluminum.

In addition to the 225 six, the Dart line includes the 318 cubic-inch V-8 and 360 cubic-inch four barrel V-8. The 360 is available only in the performance oriented version of the Dart Sport.

The various merchandising packages available for the four 1976 Dart models allow the buyer to outfit his car in trim levels ranging from the high line Custom package to the premium line Special Edition trim.

Rear axle ratios, vital to economical fuel usage or performance -- whichever is preferred -- are available in a wide selection. A 2.45:1 rear axle is mated with the Federal 318 V-8, while the six has a 2.76 standard rear axle. The standard ratio for the 360 four barrel V-8 is a 2.94:1 rear gear. Also available is a 3.21 rear axle option.
 
Guys,

Sorry to rain on your parade, but there is no evidence the 72 Demons and 73 Dart Sports ever came from the factory with the hood scoop holes in place. The snorkel scoop was cosmetic only. The rain grommets were only used on the 71 model, and they were not hooked up to a fresh air package.
 
There's not enough evidence that says holes did not come with the scoop option either! You were open to someone getting more info on the '72's and '73's from Galen Govier in a previous scoop thread. So in all fairness, I think we should agree that it's still up in the air, including the possibility that they may have come with and without the holes!

The burden of documented proof is on the "with holes" crowd because it's not common to find documentation that says what a car "didn't" have. However 7demon2 did post a parts page that listed the under-scoop grommets in '72 and '73 parts books. His quote was: "baffle a/scoop water (sports hood). part#2998881. it lists 2 being 1 for each hole. the third column is dart/demon. if you look down further in the same column near the bottom you can see the stripes listed and the scoop and scoop nuts to secure it on. the book is dated november 1972 in the right corner. now if the holes weren't being put in then why would they list the water baffels for it in the parts book for 72 demon and 73 dartsport? i still haven't been able to locate the article for this but i am still looking.....hope this helps shed some light.

While that is not "undeniable proof", because there probably have been parts listed that didn't actually make it into production models, it's a good start.
(The '71 Challenger T/A ad comes to mind but I don't know if that included actual parts.) There may have also been parts on production vehicles that weren't in the catalog. (i.e.: '71 spec 340's and/or parts in early '72 production models.)

I've been checking out later A-bodies for a long time and there would seem to be a lot of restored '72 Demons and '73 Dart Sports that would be "incorrect".

I also purchased a light blue hood with scoop, stripes, holes and grommets from an apparently unmolested 318 Dart Sport, which I still have.

So I'm not saying that a factory installed scoop could not have come without the holes. But everything I've seen, heard and learned makes for a comfortable umbrella over my "with holes" parade, even if the holes weren't in all of the scooped hoods ;) I'd put money on it. If we can only compile more info.
 
I'm not ruling out the possibility of this option, but no one has come forward with any proven documentation that the scoop and holes option were offered TOGETHER on the vehicles in question. Could you get the scoop, yes. Could you buy the hole grommets and install them yourself, yes. Were both of these parts in the catalog for 72 and 73, yes. But I have almost every A-body reference guide that's ever been published, and there is absolutely no mention of this package ever being offered FROM THE FACTORY. Sure, you see a lot of cars around with the scoop and holes, but that really doesn't prove anything.

I'd really like to think that this option came with my car, but as someone who appreciates the history of these cars, I'm not willing to accept theories. Let's see some factory documentation.
 
I have a friend who ordered a new '72 340 Demon and still has the car, which is a low mileage NHRA SS car. (Only unaltered OEM hoods and scoops are allowed.) I requested his personal input as well as any other info he might have on a racers forum. I'll attach a link when he replies.

You also have to consider that the grommet part number in the '72 and '73 books were in production/replacement parts books, not aftermarket or performance books! They list parts on production vehicles for the respective years. It wouldn't appear to be a misprint because it carried over through '72 and '73.

What kind of documentation is there for the '71 twin scoops indicating that they came with fresh air holes and grommets?

I'll continue to post tidbits as I find them.
 
Here's what I find curious: 7Demon2 has pointed out (and I believe he is correct) that the holes were originally planned for some kind of fresh air package that never made it to production for the 71 model. I can see where the factory might have left the holes in 71 if it were too late, or too expense, to eliminate them for the 71 production run. But it makes no sense to also include the holes in 72 and 73 when there was plenty of time to get rid of them. I just can't see the factory purposely installing holes in the hood if there were no plans to hook them up and make them functional. The holes have virtually no performance benefit with the enclosed 72 and 73 air cleaner. So, I find it hard to believe that Chrysler would have continued to offer an aborted, half-completed fresh air package for two additional years...especially when they would have had to move the holes from the 71 location to the 72 location to accommodate the new snorkel hood.
 
I believe the seperate twin scoops and holes began on 1970 Dart Swingers and then continued through 1971 on Demons, which used the same hood.
I also recall hearing about Chrysler considering a sealed ram-air option with these holes. They did have 2 years to do it. If it was considered for '72 and '73, it was probably economics and emissions that kept it out of production. And, as I saw somewhere, Chrysler stopped putting so much empasis on performance because of gas prices and emissions.

NOW......hopefully someone has access to part numbers to verify something. I did PM 7demon2 asking if he could access the parts books again to see if there were 2 different hoods in 1972 and 1973. Since then, I found this link and am wondering if these are actually part numbers for 2 different hoods in 1973! With scoop - 3684286, and without - 3684266

Interchange numbers 54 and 55 in the upper right-hand corner:

http://books.google.com/books?id=er...ts=PaBHnX6I86&sig=kogwzt81PhxCsbNjP4KHBL3iDAk

Would the only difference be the holes for the studs, or did it also include the 4" holes for fresh air, which do have the grommets listed in the parts books as production/replacement parts for the years in question?

I also remember seeing some "crash" books, or body parts replacement books with soft covers that had illustrations for the parts listed. One of those may have illustrations of the different hoods or may mention the differences if those are the part numbers.
 
I own a 72 Demon 340. It came fully dressed, and the holes/hooscoop were factory. I have posted a pic of the underside for measurement purposes previously. It is the original hood, and the holes (after I removed the dried grommets) were too perfect to be cut after the fact. The holes are the same size as my 70 Swinger, which is 4-1/8" I believe.

Grant
 
7demon2 said:
very nice car! i do like this stripe as it is seldom seen. do you have any rear shots? it is too bad no one is reproducing these today. at least that i have seen anyway......do you remember if this was possibly a canadian car or not? just wondering as they seem to get special items not always available in the states.....
Click to expand...

Not Canadian - it was an Alabama car originally.
 
I guess it's possible there might have been two hood part numbers: one for the hood with the scoop installed, and one for the hood without the scoop. But the holes on the underside of the hood for the stud mounting nuts are there either way.

I'm not sure the fact that the holes are cut perfectly on some hoods is strong evidence of factory installation. It's possible to make a very clean cut with the right tool and technique.

One note about the parts interchangeability book referenced here. Check out the descriptions of the hood packages for the other (non-A-body) vehicles. They all specifically reference "fresh air package." The description of the Dart Sport hood only says "with scoop." There's no reference to fresh air.
 
Locomotion said:
I have to disagree with that. 318's were not a Feather Duster or Dart Lite option. But the package with special 6 cyl. could be ordered with an automatic or a 4-speed O.D. "Regular" 6 cyl. were used in the "regular cars". The only related statements in print that I can find at the moment are at the bottom of this article where the author states: "Along with the usual slant six engine".



The reason I stated this is that MCG had a Feather Duster featured in the mid 90's which was a 318 car. Could have been an engine swap, but I don't remember that in the article. I have all my magazines so if I'm bored someday I could look thru and find that issue.

Also, at the 1995 Mopar Nats I saw a Dart Lite (only 1 I've ever seen in person) and it was a 318/auto. Could also have been an engine swap but the owner said it was all original and it sure looked it.


Mine is the 225 w/ overdrive and no options:

fd1.jpg
Click to expand...
 
ok, i have come across what i hope ends the speculation on the hood scoop hole or lack there of proof. what i had forgotten is i have a chrysler parts interchange manual. it lists most common parts with their respective part numbers and their interchanges if any....this book is hard to scan but i gave it my best shot. it clearly lists 2 different hoods with different part numbers for both. if there had been no holes then there would have been only 1 hood and 1 part number not 2. i think this along with the scan from the part book from the dealer showing the rain gaskets for the holes on both the 72 book and 73 book proves there was holes as there were gaskets for it as well. hope this helps to answers some questions....

cover.jpg


page1.jpg


page2.jpg


scan.jpg
 
DartSportDude said:
I guess it's possible there might have been two hood part numbers: one for the hood with the scoop installed, and one for the hood without the scoop. But the holes on the underside of the hood for the stud mounting nuts are there either way.

I'm not sure the fact that the holes are cut perfectly on some hoods is strong evidence of factory installation. It's possible to make a very clean cut with the right tool and technique.

One note about the parts interchangeability book referenced here. Check out the descriptions of the hood packages for the other (non-A-body) vehicles. They all specifically reference "fresh air package." The description of the Dart Sport hood only says "with scoop." There's no reference to fresh air.
Click to expand...

the fresh air reference you speak of on the non a-bodie cars is easy. look at number 44 right above the section for a's. it is refering to a 71 charger r/t and superbee w/ fresh air package. those cars had actual popup scoops as i recall. this made them truely fresh air capable, like 70 roadrunners. why would the dartsport or the demon have fresh air in their description if it never actually hooked to the aircleaner in any way to deliver the fresh air the way the chargers or roadrunners did? wouldn't make sence to call it that....
 
I have only one question: how do we know the two different part numbers don't just reference two different available hood configurations: 1) hood with scoop, and 2) hood without scoop. Again, where is the verification that the "hood with scoop" included the fresh air holes at all? Other vehicles mentioned in this guide that did, indeed, have functional fresh air packages mention "fresh air" specifically. There is no such mention in the section about Demon/Dart hoods.
 
"why would the dartsport or the demon have fresh air in their description if it never actually hooked to the aircleaner in any way to deliver the fresh air the way the chargers or roadrunners did? wouldn't make sence to call it that...."

Good point. But then again, isn't it safe to assume the description of the hood would say SOMETHING about holes being present?? That's kind of an important feature not be mentioned ANYWHERE in these reference guides. It just defies logic to believe that NONE of the reference guides would list holes if they were in fact included with the hood -- with or without some kind of functional fresh air hook up. I'd like to see just ONE credible document describing fresh air holes as a bonafide factory option with the hood.

There simply aren't any.
 
well no matter what i say you will never be convinced but i will say this. what sense does it make to have 2 part numbers for the same hood? do you actually believe the fiberglass scoops were installed on these hoods and were stacked up untill they had a scoop car come down the line to put it on? it makes no sense....the only justifaction for 2 part numbers is for 2 different parts. hence the 2 different hoods. the scoops were bolted on the holes hoods and no scoops on the non holed hoods. to further prove this i will look on my hood and find the part number if i can. i will take a picture of it and post it. if it matches the scooped hood then you look at your hood and see if your hood matches the scooped number. if mine does and yours dosent then we have the truth about your hood or mine.........."fresh air" i already explained before.
 
I'm sorry that you're taking my inquiries personally. I certainly don't mean to question your intentions, and I hope you won't question mine. As a serious muscle car and Mopar enthusiast, my only interest is getting this matter right!

I agree that it makes no sense to have two separate part numbers for two different hoods -- one with the scoop installed, and one without. Then again, it makes no sense to believe Chrysler would offer a hood with useless, non-functional holes for a three-year period...without ever fully describing the hole option as part of the official factory documentation. Maybe the holes weren't part of some kind of official fresh air package, but cmon, don't you think the factory manuals would have explained the purpose of the holes at SOME POINT? I own A-body reference guides that go into every tiny detail of these cars, but for '72 and '73, the holes are NEVER mentioned. And I'm supposed to believe this is just some kind of oversight or coincidence?

That's why I want to see something definitive before accepting this business as fact.
 
It's -30 tonight and the hood is in the unheated shop. It is original. I will report my findings.
 
Here is another eyewitness account:

http://classracer.com/classforum/showthread.php?p=54816&posted=1#post54816

I agree with the opinion that the A-bodies did not indicate "fresh air" because they were not sealed to the carb like the other examples. The Challenger R/T - Rallye hoods had a little plate in their scoops which could be taken out and would allow outside air to get in. But they weren't called "fresh air" or "ram air". Not sure if there are other examples. Is there info on '70 Swingers and '71 Demons that go into detail about the scoops and holes? If not, then the same applies to the '72 and '73's. They had the holes, but didn't go into "detail" because they were not ducted in any way to the carb. Why mention it if it wasn't a performance benefit? But just because it didn't do much doesn't mean it didn't exist alltogether.

If you want something in print, here are pages from the Mopar Performance race manuals outlining OEM scoop configurations. Aside from the probable mistake refering to '74's having a scoop, it does detail the '73's as having the scoop and holes. The drawing, while showing a '72 Demon hood, does refer to '73 Dart Sports also.

You have less info to dispute the holes than we have that they were included from the factory! If I put the effort into it, I can come up with at least a dozen people that back up the holes to every one of yours. Some have already posted their personal experiences with it. Are they lying? I conceded that "some" may have come with no holes because Chrysler was known to mix up some parts. But there are way too many restorations and photos all over the internet, in addition to other things that have been mentioned already, to believe that so many people decided to fabricate their hoods all in the same way. Yes, I'm sure some were fabricated, including the one on my race car. It's much easier and more functional if fabricators opened up a bigger area instead of putting in a pair of 4" holes. Why would anyone bother to do it that way if it wasn't really beneficial---------unless it came that way from the factory or they they were duplicating what came from the factory! But you keep coming up with excuses for every tidbit we come up with. There is a lot of mis-information floating around and I would like to preserve the history and accuracy of information in this hobby. Unless you can come up with more info to counter what we have been finding, please do not say that there is no evidence that '72's and '73's did have holes!

Scoop-ducting info 2.jpg


Scoop-ducting info..jpg
 
Locomotion:

I don't understand some of the things you're saying. I have not called anyone a liar, nor have I questioned their motivations. I'm sure we're all interested in verifying the facts so that we can be sure about history of our cars. But you have to admit, there are some major "holes" (pardon the pun) in this entire story that need to be resolved. You act like I should just take this matter on faith. As I've said before, I have not made my mind up (although I am highly skeptical of the factory holes theory) -- I'm willing to accept definitive proof, whichever way it turns out. On the other hand, you guys seem to have your minds made up -- and you're not willing to consider the possibility that I might be right.

Look, I bought my first Duster in 1974 and have owned three A-bodies over the years. It's not like I'm some johnny come lately to this hobby. You guys clearly know a lot about this brand. I think that's great. It would be nice if you'd afford me the same consideration.

The document you have posted is likely the best evidence presented so far. Thanks for taking the time to locate it. It is troubling that the author didn't even know that the snorkel hood was not offered on the '74 model, but regardless, I'm willing to give this material its due. As far as the possible retrofits by owners, there's really only one logical place to install the fresh air holes, and the rubber grommets that go in the holes have been available commercially for years. So the fact that all the hole installations look the same is a non factor. Plus, I've seen plenty of installations where the holes were a little higher than others, or a little closer together.

I've sent an email to Dave Young, the technical editor at Mopar Muscle magazine, asking his opinion on this matter. At this point, I'm also willing to pay the $75 needed to get Galen Glovier's opinion. I'll let you know what I find out.

I'm starting to think there's a good chance you're right about the hood holes, but without any factory option code clearly describing the hole installation, I'd like to get Galen's opinion.
 
I have the information that should resolve the 2 different part numbers for the hoods. I have an original 1973 parts manual and it lists two hoods for the L (dart/dart sport) carline: Part number 3684266 is listed as "Hood Panel Std." and Part number 3684286 is listed as "Hood Panel w/Holes for Scoop".
There is also listed for the L (dart) line is "Scoop, Hood orn. (double)" with part number 3672605 and "Water Baffle, A/scoop (sports Hood) (Rubber)" with 2 required and part number 299881.

This should settle the hood argument for the darts.

Now I found some interesting things for a V (valiant/duster) Hood ornaments. In the parts book there is a picture of a VS Duster 340 with twin scoops on it! The scoops are the 69 barracuda type. There is only one hood part number listed which is 3684274. There is also listed for the V (valiant Duster) carline is what must be the twin scoops. It is listed as "Ornament Assy.(Sports Hood)" and has part numbers 2949336-7. Note that the 6-7 at the end of the part numbers is for and left and right so it is really part numbers2949336 & 2949337. And there is no water baffle listed for the V (valiant/duster) carline. So from the parts book it would seem that the 73 duster had the twin scoop option only on the 340 cars and has no water baffle.

I also checked my 1970 parts manual and it lists only I hood for the duster and two different hoods for the dart. The dart had a different hood if it was a 340 car. And to the best of my knowledge every 1970 340 dart had a set of scoops on it.


Thank you 7demon2 for your informative posting and don't be discouraged by others comments.
 
"Part number 3684286 is listed as "Hood Panel w/Holes for Scoop"

Uh, sorry to be a naysayer, but it sounds to me like this part is the standard hood with the holes drilled for mounting the scoop. That's how "Holes FOR Scoop" sounds to me. Since it's a bit tricky positioning the scoop when mounting it on the hood, it would make sense that the factory would offer a hood with pre-drilled mounting holes for those models that had the sport hood package.

As far as the part numbers being listed for the water baffles in the '73 parts book, I think we agreed that the parts manual would probably list all parts that FIT the '73 model, and not necessarily just the parts that were installed on various '73 models.

I have one question: why is it that part numbers for these water baffles in the major aftermarket supplier catalogs are usually described as "hood to scoop seals, 70-71 Dart and Demon?" Could it be because that's how they were described in the original Chrysler parts books? And why is "72-73 Demon and Dart" not mentioned?

I'm still waiting for a reply from Galen Govier. I suspect he can solve this mystery once and for all.
 
DartSportDude said:
As far as the part numbers being listed for the water baffles in the '73 parts book, I think we agreed that the parts manual would probably list all parts that FIT the '73 model, and not necessarily just the parts that were installed on various '73 models.
Click to expand...

The water baffle part number for 1973 is specific for the L carline only which is the dart/dart sport. That is as far as it breaks it down.

Sometimes the parts manual breaks it down further for certain items. Like it could break it down to a VS29 which which would mean it is specific parts for a 340 duster only. (the v is valiant carline, s is special meaning 340 duster, and the 29 is for the fastback model). But in this case it only breaks it down to the carline L (Dart/Dart Sport)
 
DartSportDude said:
"Part number 3684286 is listed as "Hood Panel w/Holes for Scoop"


As far as the part numbers being listed for the water baffles in the '73 parts book, I think we agreed that the parts manual would probably list all parts that FIT the '73 model, and not necessarily just the parts that were installed on various '73 models.
Click to expand...

WRONG! If it is listed in a factory parts manual, it means that they are factory parts that were installed in certain models from that year. It's not a performance catalog, it's not an aftermarket catalog, it's not a parts list of stuff they have from previous years that might be used in current year.... it's a current (for '73) OEM replacement parts catalog!

And anyway, going by your above comment, they wouldn't "FIT the '73 model" if they weren't made for the application because you are saying that the hoods didn't have holes for the grommets to fit into in the first place! Why would there be a part listed in an OEM parts replacement manual when it would require cutting AFTER production to install it?

In one post you say that it might be possible that the holes existed, then when someone posts a little info to support it, you come back with "hate to rain on your parade", "sorry to be a naysayer", etc. Give people the courtesy of posting their findings/documentation in peace so others can make their own mind up instead of discrediting it with your opinions/interpretation. We already know what your opinion is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top