Was there ever a better ALL AROUND car
 

Like the title says, WAS THERE A BETTER ALL AROUND CAR then

the 68/69 MOPAR B bodys?

You look at a GTX and they have TONS of room, ride was good, handling was on par for the day and ran very strong with either the 440 or the Hemi?

Now yes I'm a bit biased as my first car was a 68 GTX convertible clone, 440 4sp 4.10 Dana. But been looking around at nice older cars for a family DRIVER. Just can't seem to see anything that would fit quite like a GTX??? 66/67 Chevelle is a bit smaller, just not as nice inside of have the "attitude" of the GTX. Impala/Biscayne same thing. Plus "most" performance GM engines won't run on todays pumpgas as well as the 440.

Guess maybe the Buick GS 455 would be good too, just never really like the looks of them as they don't stand out going down the road unless it's a GSX.

Be well, stay safe.

John

https://i.postimg.cc/nz1Cy9b2/autowp...-gtx-440-2.jpg

https://i.postimg.cc/zvXV8Dqr/1969-plymouth-gtx.jpg

Not sure if it's the best all around car, but I'm a big fan of the 68-70 GTX's and Chargers. One with a 440 and a 4 speed would be my preference. I think a bronze '68 GTX (not necessarily a fan of the lower black paint on the '69) and a B5 blue '69 Charger (NO General Lee paint jobs, ugh) are my favorites of the B bodies.

----I'm almost there with you but prefer the 66 versions. Same size, but I love the look of both of the 66 B-bodies...….Bill S

I am partial to the 1969 model. I like the changes made from the 68 to 69. The front and rear now have definition with a more three dimensional look. I never cared for the lower body stripes on the 68. As Larry Shinoda once said . . . sometimes less is more. I also like the Air Grabber which first appeared on the 69. Probably not very functional but when you raised the hood it definitely made a statement.

The GTX was an expensive muscle car: MSRP was $3416 for the hardtop. But you did get the standard HD torqueflite auto trans along with bucket seats and F70x14 redlines. And most important the standard HD drum brakes which were 11" x 3" in the front and 11" x 2.5" in the rear. This was a sore point (IMO) on 1968 and prior GM muscle cars which used 9.5" x 2.5" on the front and 9.5" x 2" on the rear.

Add a radio, power steering and power brakes and maybe the road wheels and you are up to $4000. Total GTX production for 1969 was 14,902 a drop from 68's 17,914.

How about GM A bodies from about 68 through 1972. :dunno:

Don't forget the 1970 B Body which was, in my opinion, the best of the 1968-1970 B Bodies. Here is my 1970 Charger R/T 440 4 speed.

My father needed to buy a car with a large V8 to be able to tow his boat trailer but didn't want to have to pay for a full size car with all the fancy stuff to get the engine and stiff suspension. I explained the features of a '69 Road Runner. It fit the bill to a "T" with the standard 383 and a Torque-flite and 3.55s. That's what he bought off the lot. Although it wasn't quite the bargain he had in mind with P/S, P/B, A/C, vinyl roof, road wheels, light package, deluxe interior and posi!


I also used it to flat tow my '62 to the drags.


It WAS the best all around car my family ever owned!


Verne

Best all around? That’ll always be debatable but I for one enjoy the b-body mopar.

My parents had a 68 Coronet 500 and 63 Impala SS when I was growing up in the 80s. I would have to say I didnt notice much difference in the back seat or the trunk size other than the Impala trunk was deeper. Every time I went with mom to get groceries a cart boy would ask to buy the Coronet. BTW we pulled our boat to the lake with it for a few years.

Make my B body a 1970 Charger R/T SE 440/6 4 speed in orange or red.

Little smaller. Nothing wrong with them. I think the GTX's with the wood-grain interior touches were just a bit nicer finished off. And that is only my thoughts. Just like in today's cars, some higher end cars offer the wood-grain interior packages.

I've had all of the above, and the best daily driver was a '68 Barracuda formula S w/ 340 a/c, disc. Everything always worked.
Handled well, stopped well, easy to park compared to the above cars, and never had to put 10 cents in repairs.

I looked at the pictures
Was it an accident that those cars were so box-car ugly , or did they do it on purpose to trick hobo's into buying 'em ?

Train, Train, take me on out of this town :burnout:
The caboose is coming loose
lol

Nice Blackfoot quote! Great song!!

Hard to pick just one. We still daily drive the classics and ironically the two that my wife and I use I don't consider the best "all around" car but they do what we want well enough. The 69Z is the better car, with a better back seat, a little more trunk, and nimble, fun to drive. The 70 Formula has it's drawbacks. The trunk is too small with an even smaller lid that doesn't allow big things inside, the back seat is horrible, like sitting in a dungeon. My son would much rather ride in the Z where he sits up higher and more visibility, and the doors on the Formula are huge. You really don't even have room to open them in todays parking spots. It does ride a little better than the Z though.

Probably my favorite driver we've had were the 70-72 Novas. Small enough they are nimble and easy to park, back seat area is spacious, the trunk was also spacious with a lid large enough to actually put things in it. They rode nice enough, and my wife enjoyed driving them, not too big, not too small, easy to work on.

I like the A-bodies but I don't think I'd enjoy daily driving the chevelle as much. My wife won't drive it anyway....too big. It is pretty comfy with the family inside though. Of course being the larger car, heavier, and longer wheel base, it has the best ride quality.

l-o-l.....

One of the best driving cars I have had was my 70 Superbird it drove and rode better than my Chevelle. The car even still had bias ply tires and I was surprised it didnt feel like I was driving a big car.

personally. if i was going to claim a b-body as the best all around car..id prob go with a 71 charger..they drive better..considering its a uni body...but i dont think anyone i know would call a b-body the best all around car built..

im going with GM a-body myself

There are probably a good number of Buick and Oldsmobile (and maybe Pontiac) muscle car folks who would disagree with your assessment.....

68 ARE unibodys as well. I think the 66/67 are as well.

I used this for my daily driver for 3 years till end of 2010 in the summers of SW Ontario Canada. Actually at the time, I also had a 1967 Ford F100 shortbox as my winter driver.

I have some pictures of my old '68 GTX clone B body from 2016. BUT will look at the house and see if I can get some older pictures from '83 when I owned it.

You got that right Arrowsmith. Except for the 4 inch wheelbase short-fall for the GM car, the track, overall length and width of Mopar 68-70 B-bodies and say, a 1970 GTO is nearly identical.

I've owned examples of both, including Hemi and Six Pack models, LS6 and Ram Air. For overall driving and comfort and build quality - it isn't even close! The full chassis GM had it all over Mopar in the intermediate class from 1968-1972. I can't even say that is my 2 cents, really - bet a lot of Mopar engineers from back in the day would agree if they were being honest ;)

Where are all the Torino or Rebel/Matador/Ambassador fans?

I was thinking the same thing.

Felt like I was in an alternate universe for a little while there.

K

Me too... :)

I think the original poster said it best when he started this thread " I'm a bit biased as my first car was a 68 GTX convertible clone, 440 4sp 4.10 Dana".


I can't compare because I haven't owned and B body Mopars. The E body Mopars, I can they have wow factor and I liked looking at my AAR, but much prefer driving a Z28. I agree that build quality was lacking on some Mopar products. They had damn great drivetrains!

Yeah, horrible riding, driving , handling cars that had near bulletproof drivetrains - I love 'em!

Strange, I have driven, raced and just drove around in various Chevelle's over the years (Beaumonts too) and they never seemed to ride as nice as the B-bodys?? Chevelle has been known for years with there "taxi-cab" dash/interiors, even though the '69 were not too bad.

Some Buicks we nice (my aunt actually bought a '70 GS 455 Stage 1 on her brothers recommendation. I can still remember being in the back seat when my dad drove our snowmobile off the trailer and into the truck of her can the FIRST winter she had it.) Still these others didn't seem to have the room when comparing the intermediates. Now yes, my uncle 1967 GTO did have the room, but the 400 seemed to not be as much of a runner as the 440's.

Don't get me wrong, there were a lot of nice and roomy cars back then. Just looking now for a nice reliable driver that has room, creature comforts and good performance, the 440 powered B-body just seem the have the most all around combined. They were BIG, trunk was BIG, had the 440's and just had some nice finishes. Others may agree or disagree, that's fine by me. BUT you must admit, there wasn't an easier car to turn the steering wheel then the power mopar of the '68's??? Probably TOO EASY.

Hey! I have a Great Idea! Why don’t you sell those crappy Chevys in your signature and buy a GTX? Then you could live happily ever after.....

Don't need to sell. Just starting to look for one already. Prefer convertible.

There were 4 versions of the 400cid in 67 GTO's
Your uncle may have had the economy 2bbl version with an automatic ?

An HO or RamAir engine in a 67 would have turned you into a GTO owner.
The base 335hp version was okay for basic transportation.

My uncles '67 GTO was a auto with dualgate. He was sorta into cars but not up on all the particulars. He told me when he bought it that it was a RAM AIR car and DID seal to the hood. Needed premium gas to run at all (around here that is 93 octane pump). With the auto, it wasn't a fast as his friends 1963 409 4bbl Impala. Being hyd lifter and heads on the Impala, the GTO just couldn't run with my uncles GTO.

Before I bought my car, when I was 15 a friend in town had a really nice '66 GTO with the Tri-power. That to didn't really impress me as much as my brothers 1975 Trans Am with a 1974 455 in it.

I do NOT have much experiences with Pontiacs myself. A few guys have them around me. I figured FOR SURE the best run back in the day for my 440 Mopar was a local 1971 T-37 (GT-37) factory 455HO 4sp car with cam, headers, carb and 4.10 gear. Been on this site a few times about that car. And it's still around local to me to this day. I know about that car then the current owner did. Anyway back in the mid '80's that T37 sounded KILLER. Had pretty much the same setup as my GTX clone. He would race everyone else BUT ME. Just kept saying he had no chance. My car had headers, CH4B intake, Holley 780 vac carb and a weird came. Stock lift but about 6 degrees more duration. Sorta pissed me off as it didn't rumble like the others around town.

I recently got ride of a FAST 1961 Pontiac Bubbletop. Car had a 409/425 motor that was worked, 4sp and 3.36 gear. That car certainly would have outran 99% of the cars around, and room and actually not badly finished off inside. Problem was that you just can't find parts for them. And the tipical X frame twist when running hard.

I'm not knocking ANY CARS. They all fit a bill. I like some of the Pontiac stuff and actually went looking for a 1971 T37 455HO car. Couldn't find one, and still need to check the boxes when one does show up. And a L78 Chevelle would run hard, have some good room, just needs more attention and possible fuel issues as I have found out with my '67 Nova with the 427.

I'm just shopping right now as with the lockdown, you can't really go look at anything or even get over to the USA to get it. I'm hoping to have SOMETHING buy fall of 2021!!!!

I DO really appreciate everyone's input. At this time, I just DO NOT have the funds to go, visit my buddy, and buy his Hemi Challenger Convertible clone. Doubt he would sell anyway. That is the car that really gets me thinking. EFI 426 Hemi, gear-vendors overdrive car that looks and sounds stock, runs 10.70's and can still in Toronto heat and traffic for hours.

Steve,
I didn't notice any build quality problems with the '69 Road Runner I had for a long time. My only complaints were the starter that sounded like a hyena laughing and a lack of road feel in the steering.


Verne

All the 67 RamAir cars came with 4.33 gears standard.
No way that thing wouldn't have tore your head off.

RamAir pans were also available over-the-counter items.
67 H/O cars are fast runners, i have one.

But, some peoples cars just won't do the boogy when its time to dance.

Boy I don't think I've heard a statement more true. More often than not, they look better than they run. A lot of people talk, but they never show up at the track.

I like my stuff to run as good or better than they look.

So very true.

Ya NO WAY uncles car had 4.33. He said it was a factory 360Hp car but the gears were changed to 3.55 years ago for driveability. Wasn't a bad car by any means. Purple-ish with black roof and interior. I have always liked the '65 GTO's. Thought of one of them with a 455HO would be nice too.