Next Hot Mopar Collectible?

YY1 · May 7, 2025

You mean "the man who saved Chrysler"?

Speaking of Mopar big blocks....

There's been basically nothing since that company bought the tooling back in the late 70's/early 80's, which was fairly well publicized at the time.

You would think that if you paid what I can only guess is a fair amount for said tooling, that you might actually do something with it.

Cranky · May 7, 2025

Coelacanth said:
I really liked the body styling of the 1997 - 2004 Dakotas best of all the Dakotas. The slight changes in body lines in 2005 wasn't an improvement, IMO. 1997 was a bold styling year for the Dakota, borrowing the "big rig" front grille styling of the Ram to a smaller truck. I special-ordered a '98 Dakota with the 5.2L and RWD (because all the 5.2's on the dealer lots were 4WD) and that thing had some snort and embarrassed a lot of ricers from a stoplight.

I also think the Magnum wagons could become collectible. It's unfortunate they didn't continue the line, and it hasn't been revived, so the wagons outfitted with the Hemis could become desireable someday. I might have to keep my '05 Magnum R/T AWD, I love it.

I like the styling of the 97-04 Dakotas too but man, they also got fat! The R/T gained 600 lbs over my 92 V8 truck and both had similar options....but yeah, the R/T had some weight in the bigger wheels, suspension etc.

YY1 · May 7, 2025

My '00 ext cab weighs 4200.

Moves pretty good for 245 HP.

The main thing I miss about the 91-96 body is all the room in the front of the cab.

Those are WAY more comfortable.

toolmanmike · May 7, 2025

Cranky said:
I like the styling of the 97-04 Dakotas too but man, they also got fat! The R/T gained 600 lbs over my 92 V8 truck and both had similar options....but yeah, the R/T had some weight in the bigger wheels, suspension etc.

I had a 2000 and 2 96's. All were 3.9 V6's. I really like the square body trucks better but mainly because of the interior especially the seats.

Tony Tee · May 7, 2025

I think anything with a big block last year 1978?
Magnums cordobas trucks and vans. Will be in demand.

Cranky · May 7, 2025

YY1 said:
My '00 ext cab weighs 4200.

Moves pretty good for 245 HP.

The main thing I miss about the 91-96 body is all the room in the front of the cab.

Those are WAY more comfortable.

I was pretty comfortable in our 2000 Durango....only thing it didn't have were heated seats and mirrors. Didn't think having the seats heated was a good idea for leather. It too ran decently with the 5.2 and 3.90 gears. IIRC, it was 4600

YY1 · May 7, 2025

I remember about the 91-96 cab-

More foot room
More leg room
More hip room
More forward/side/temple area head room
More general head room at the roof

Whew.

That truck truly felt "mid sized", where as the 97-04 feels like a larger compact although it's the same floorboards at least from the seat area back.

Cranky · May 7, 2025

YY1 said:
I remember about the 91-96 cab-

More foot room
More leg room
More hip room
More forward/side/temple area head room
More general head room at the roof

Whew.

That truck truly felt "mid sized", where as the 97-04 feels like a larger compact although it's the same floorboards at least from the seat area back.

What about the 90 and older trucks? Don't think any changes were made to the cab. I was just as comfortable in my 87 as I am in the 95. Tilt wheel sure helped with that lol

YY1 · May 7, 2025

Pre-1991 the engine compartment/core support was different.
Only really designed to fit a V6.
The Shelby trucks had an external, electric fan.

I think the floor pan was still the same.

Cranky · May 7, 2025

YY1 said:
Pre-1991 the engine compartment/core support was different.
Only really designed to fit a V6.
The Shelby trucks had an external, electric fan.

I think the floor pan was still the same.

From what I've read and from the ones I worked on (parted one out some years back), everything on the body is the same except for the core support, bumper and hood. Even the front fenders are the same from 87 until 96.

YY1 · May 7, 2025

IDK about the fenders.

I think they start to have a basically diagonal (seen from above) shape as the grille "pushes out".

If that makes sense.

Gen I was basically a right angle.

I could be wrong though, I've never owned a gen I.

YY1 · May 7, 2025

All those subtle changes makes calling them Gen I Gen II, etc seem kinda odd.

Cranky · May 7, 2025

GM introduced the S10 in the early 80's I guess? I remember the refinery bought several of them because they would fit on the docks better than the full size trucks. Some had the 4.3 (later 80's) and those things ran pretty good. Seem like GM came out with a hotrod version too. Smaller truck overall and same thing with the Fords. I rode in a small Ford Bronco I guess it was and didn't like riding in it on the highway. A bit too tall and narrow for my liking.

440 PHIXX · May 7, 2025

YY1 said:
You mean "the man who saved Chrysler"?

Speaking of Mopar big blocks....

There's been basically nothing since that company bought the tooling back in the late 70's/early 80's, which was fairly well publicized at the time.

You would think that if you paid what I can only guess is a fair amount for said tooling, that you might actually do something with it.

Saved? Like the authorization of crushing all the B and E body quarter panels and fenders that were in the Delaware parts depot? The only thing Lee kept was the FMJ, pickups… with no big block V8… hence no HD trucks throughout most of the 80’s, and the vans.

YY1 · May 7, 2025

S-10 with a 4.3 is a pretty good truck.

I drove one for work for years.

However, s-10 is more of a fail at a domestic compact truck than it is a win at a mid size.

The s-10 did get bulkier and heavier, and then the colorado replacement got even bigger.
Current colorado is larger than the last Dakota or at least the same size.

Funny, I can fit comfortable in some s-10s and not in others.
First thing that's an issue is headroom. bench or buckets doesn't seem to matter.

The ranger is similar, although they actually got smaller from gen I to gen II.
Current ranger is again, as big or larger than the last Dakota.

Sad that Chrysler basically gave up the market it created with the Dakota while the competition, including toyota now offers vehicles in the same size after abandoning their compact offerings.

The toyota "tundra" stared out as the t-100 and was almost exactly the same size as a Dakota.
(there is one stored on my shop property)
They slowly increased it's size to be that of a "full size" American truck.
Their tacoma, although somewhat larger, is still slightly smaller than a Dakota.

Dodge tried to feign a size increase of the Dakota with gen IV by raising the ride height considerably.
Interestingly they also severely reduced the headroom.
I had one of those for work, too and had to remove the headliner in order to fit without slouching.

YY1 · May 7, 2025

440 PHIXX said:
Saved? Like the authorization of crushing all the B and E body quarter panels and fenders that were in the Delaware parts depot? The only thing Lee kept was the FMJ, pickups… with no big block V8… hence no HD trucks throughout most of the 80’s, and the vans.

Either that or bankruptcy?

Cranky · May 7, 2025

YY1 said:
All those subtle changes makes calling them Gen I Gen II, etc seem kinda odd.

That debate is still on going lol. To me a Gen 1 stopped at 96....having a curved front end just isn't that big of a change. Anyways, a buddy that has had several Dakotas told me that the 'gen 1' fenders will accept the rounded grill and parts. The early trucks had a one piece side marker the the newer 2 piece side marker and turn signal lens fits the opening.

YY1 · May 7, 2025

Not to derail the thread but....

Since we have some toyota fans on here (cringe).

I wonder what the motivation is for not fully entering the heavy truck market here.

The do offer heavy (or at least heavy-medium) trucks but they are branded an "hino".

That name has nowhere near the brand recognition as "toyota".

I bet a simple rebranding would increase their sales by a HUGE amount.

440 PHIXX · May 7, 2025

YY1 said:
Either that or bankruptcy?

Killing the big block was a serious blunder. I worked body shops and hit the junkyards throughout the 80’s. I never saw a Dodge rollback. And when I went to the track, guys would trailer their Mopars with Chevy and Ford dualies. With 454 and 460 power.

YY1 · May 7, 2025

The way I heard it, not being able to pass emissions killed the B/RB.
...and the V10 was the replacement.

I agree, Dodge commercial trucks have been criminally underrepresented for a long, long time.

However, they were serious trucks if you saw or used them prior to the late 70's.

That changed (wait for it, it's kinda sad) with the Sterling thing.
I started seeing all sorts of heavier Dodge and Sterling trucks.
Tow trucks, roll-backs, ambulances, etc.

Then the Sterling blunder that also killed the successful ex-ford, Louisville line.

However, I still see a fair share of 3500 and larger Dodge work cabs on the road.
MUCH more than before the Sterling debacle.

Next Hot Mopar Collectible?

Well-Known Member

Banned Henchman #27

Well-Known Member

Henchman #2

Well-Known Member

Banned Henchman #27

Well-Known Member

Banned Henchman #27

Well-Known Member

Banned Henchman #27

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Banned Henchman #27

The Island of Misfit Mopars

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Banned Henchman #27

Well-Known Member

The Island of Misfit Mopars

Well-Known Member

Similar threads