MPC Super Charger - 1974 Charger rundown

[CapSat 6]

2 hours ago, Mark C. said:

As much as I am a fan of vintage NASCAR models, I have to agree that Salvinos has pretty much cornered the market on 1970s Chargers and Satellites/Road Runners.

If it were my call, I would rather that Round 2 focuses their manpower and budgets on bringing out street versions of the Charger (and by extension, Road Runner). Then there are all those other languishing subjects that haven’t been brought back yet.  I say leave the 1970s NASCAR Mopars to Salvinos (I’ll admit that I say it with trepidation, though, as they have recently priced themselves out of my budget until they bring out a new body, like a Magnum or Superbird, or some other subject that hasn’t been done, like a Montego, etc).

Great thread!

Thank you! I by no means think that NASCAR variants of the Charger or Road Runner should be a priority of Round 2’s- Salvino’s has those covered, but they could be potential variants based on the same body tooling as new street cars down the line. If I had my druthers, I’d rather have better kits of those available. 

The street cars would definitely be the priority here.  

[Carmak]

On 6/16/2025 at 10:25 AM, Carmak said:

Some observations on the MPC 72 and 73 Charger stock car kits.

Some more observations and comparisons of 72-74 annual bodies and interiors plus the 72 NASCAR Baker body and the early 73 NASCAR Petty body and hood.

All bodies look to have the same trunk emblems.

Both 72 bodies have the same C-pilar emblem with no rocker trim, both 73 bodies have the same door emblem with ribbed rocker trim and the 74 door is very slightly changed from 73 but with the same rocker trim.

Both 73 hoods look the same except for the hood pins on the Petty hood.

All interiors look to the same basic upholstery patterns, but the headrest shape are looks to have changed in 74 (and the Super Charger).

The Petty Charger body has the posts blocked off but still has the station wagon cut line that the 73 and 74 annuals have.

[Can-Con]

Don't know what's up with the upholstery patterns on your pic of the '74 annual but it's not like mine.

Note the seam down the center with one button at the top and one in the middle and the head rest area looks more prominent.

This doesn't seem to match any Charger sew patterns I can find, maybe someone with more knowledge about them then I do may have more info.

Looks like that one was modified somehow. Mine is shown in bare plastic with the only paint being the brown on the door panels and console.

Edited Tuesday at 11:52 PM by Can-Con

[niteowl7710]

14 hours ago, CapSat 6 said:

The Salvino’s kits are a factor. I was thinking from the standpoint that another version could be baked in for each…licensing would be an issue, but then again, Round 2 does tons of licensing, and have had vintage NASCAR licensing for their slot cars, diecasts and other products, too. I wouldn’t know if it would be financially logical or not, but for all we know, it might be a matter of negotiating some kind of rider on an existing license that they might already have. 

They could also look at either putting out generic versions of both kits (like the old Model King re-releases from about 15 years ago) or getting licenses for lesser known (and perhaps less costly) drivers from the era. 

Lots of these cars were driven in USAC, for example. 

The one thing about modern licensing is that just because you have one product licensed doesn't mean it applies to anything else. Salvinos is at this point THE officially licensed product of both NASCAR and IndyCar in terms of model kits. Lesser drivers mean lesser sales. There's a reason why so much SJR stuff is Petty and Chase Elliot. They are the two names that move product, intentionally doing something obscure is a non-starter even for them with their 1,500 pc kit runs.

I really hope those who want these early malaise-era Mopars get their wish - presuming there's an actual market for them outside of the 1% that inhabit this forum - but I can't think of any car less inspiring than a smog choked small block '74 Charger.

[CapSat 6]

5 hours ago, niteowl7710 said:

The one thing about modern licensing is that just because you have one product licensed doesn't mean it applies to anything else. Salvinos is at this point THE officially licensed product of both NASCAR and IndyCar in terms of model kits. Lesser drivers mean lesser sales. There's a reason why so much SJR stuff is Petty and Chase Elliot. They are the two names that move product, intentionally doing something obscure is a non-starter even for them with their 1,500 pc kit runs.

I really hope those who want these early malaise-era Mopars get their wish - presuming there's an actual market for them outside of the 1% that inhabit this forum - but I can't think of any car less inspiring than a smog choked small block '74 Charger.

I’m not going to pretend to know for certain how the licensing agreements really work. We would have to ask an insider to know for certain, and even then, we probably would not get 100% of the answer, as it might be somewhat confidential. Much has been made of licensing costs and complexities. That’s why ultimately, I would leave it to the experts to decide. I’m just having fun here. 

I do know that things in business often change quickly. I’m not knocking Salvino’s, but for all we know, while they are “the” player in NASCAR kits now, that might change down the road, so IF a new kit were developed, then IT MIGHT be worth Round 2’s time to do the design for a NASCAR variant if it permits some additional benefit to doing the design in the first place. 

I’m not suggesting that the NASCAR variant should be Round 2’s next project by any means. It just might sweeten the pot a little bit. 

I’m not even suggesting that the ‘74 Charger overall should be their next project. I’m just suggesting that it might be worthwhile to run some plastic through the molds if they have them, sketch up some nice new decals and box art, and the thought is that they would probably have something that would provide a little variety.

If they are ever looking at doing a new tool ‘71-‘74 Mopar B Body, then an enhanced ‘74 Rallye and/or SE with Super Charger Energy might be variants to consider, that they could do for relatively little investment, and that could sell reasonably well. 

Personally, I could think of plenty of cars that are less inspiring than smog choked 318 ‘74 Chargers (to be perfectly fair- the ask is for a smog choked 440 Charger  ) that we already have kits of, and plenty of cars that are more inspiring that we will never get. It’s all relative - a matter of taste. 

If the only ice cream we could get was strawberry, then I would never eat ice cream. If the world was full of people like my daughter, then pizza would not be a thing (and people like me would be very sad, if we knew what we were missing). That’s why smart manufacturers offer variety and occasionally take calculated risks. Frankly, 4 or 5 separate renditions of the same inspiring subject bores me a little. 

[1972coronet]

5 hours ago, niteowl7710 said:

but I can't think of any car less inspiring than a smog choked small block '74 Charger.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ! I can think of a few , but they're not being brought up for reissue or new issue.

BTW, a 360-powered 1974 Charger is better, IMO, than a choked-out 400 big block - all being equal.

[Ragtop Man]

On 6/11/2025 at 3:12 PM, tim boyd said:

OK if you guys really want to get in the weeds on this....

1) The MPC '72 Charger Promo included a sheet with decals for both the Charger and Challenger Promos.  And what did the decals show?  How about 1972 "R/T" decals, not the actual "Rallye" graphics that came out on the real car.  Thus presumably proving my long-held belief that the change from R/T to generic ho-hum "Rallye" series nomenclature for '72 was not only misguided (my view since the day they came out) but also a very last minute one.  

2) The original 1/1 scale plan for the '71 Charger included several additional side graphics treatments that never made final production.  These were shown in several of the car magazines in their "intro" articles for the 1971 automotive model year.  One of those options also included a never-released stand-alone rear spoiler that was very reminiscent of the GTO Judge approach for 1969.  Guess what, guys.....find an original, unmolested 1971 Charger annual kit and you will find that exact spoiler in the kit parts! 

(I did an article on "might have been muscle cars" showing model kits that featured last minute cancellations of 1/1 scale muscle cars, including both of the above IIRC, and others such as the never-released Boss 429s in the 1970 AMT Torino and MPC Cyclone kits, the cancelled 1975 GTO in the MPC 1975 Ventura kit, and several others.  I wrote it for Hemmings Muscle Machines but they showed no interest, so it finally appeared (in slightly revised form) in an issue of Scale Auto back in the day.)

Makes me want to revisit a kitbashing idea i've had for many years...a 1/25th scale 1972 Charger using the original 1972 "R/T" promo decals and a recreation of the planned but never released semi-hemi 400/440 engine block/heads program that was planned to replace both the B/RB and Hemi engines and was thought to be on track for the 1972 model year.  What a cool model that would be????

TB

Tim: Do it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[CapSat 6]

52 minutes ago, 1972coronet said:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ! I can think of a few , but they're not being brought up for reissue or new issue.

BTW, a 360-powered 1974 Charger is better, IMO, than a choked-out 400 big block - all being equal.

I can think of a few that ARE being brought up for reissue and new issue. That’s just my opinion though, and it’s only worth what I’m paid for it!  

I agree that the 360 was a super-underrated engine. 

Mopar 400’s for the most part were super-choked in stock form, but they do have LOTS of potential, when stroked and poked. 

Edited yesterday at 01:55 PM by CapSat 6

[Carmak]

14 hours ago, Can-Con said:

Don't know what's up with the upholstery patterns on your pic of the '74 annual but it's not like mine.

Note the seam down the center with one button at the top and one in the middle and the head rest area looks more prominent.

This doesn't seem to match any Charger sew patterns I can find, maybe someone with more knowledge about them then I do may have more info.

Looks like that one was modified somehow. Mine is shown in bare plastic with the only paint being the brown on the door panels and console.

This is really interesting Steve. What jumps out to me about your buckets is the center button with center pleat. 

This COULD explain the softer headrest detail - maybe???

I just looked up the upholstery pattern in 1:1 Dodge Chargers in 74 and there is no center button/pleat (it is unchanged from 73). It is possible that Dodge had INTENDED to change the pattern in 74 but the change did not make it to production. MPC may have run some promos and kits with the proposed pattern and then corrected it to remove the center button/pleat.

The only 74 promo I could find a pic of that clearly shows the seats (see pic) does not have the center button/pleat.

[CapSat 6]

I have an interior with those odd-seam seats. Notice that the rear seat still is the ‘72-‘73 style, while the front seats have that oddball pattern (front and rears don’t match). I think mine did come with a built ‘74 annual. The pics I have above are of a ‘73 annual. 

I think the interior was more or less the same in the ‘72, ‘73 annuals and the Super Charger reissue, at least the same patterns on the seats. I never gave the headrests a close look. Not sure why the ‘74/ oddball seats didn’t carry over to the Super Charger. 

[tim boyd]

5 hours ago, 1972coronet said:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ! I can think of a few , but they're not being brought up for reissue or new issue.

BTW, a 360-powered 1974 Charger is better, IMO, than a choked-out 400 big block - all being equal.

John is spot-on here.  The E58 '74 360 was by far the best engine choice for any '74 Mopar, and easily among the best choices for any car that year (the Pontiac SD-455 and hi-po Camaro Z-28/Corvette 350 being the others).  Mother Mopar did a great job bringing this performance-oriented engine to market for 1974 in spite of government and insurance industry plots (err...let's make that "actions" instead) to undermine any performance-oriented auto offerings those years. 

What Chrysler - and most of the enthusiast rags - horribly failed at was getting the message out to performance car buyers on this engine.  At the time most media scoffed and called it nothing more than the C-body 360 wagon motor with a four barrel carb added, listing net hp ratings of somewhere between 180 and 200 hp, and thoroughly dissiing the effort.  This was happening even as recently as 20 years ago in some very respected publications. 

I've got a whole file on this subject (and had written a detailed sidebar on it for my "Collecting Muscle Car Model Kits" book a few years ago which I had to drop because I was way over the contractual word count for the mag).  Short story is the E58 was rated at 245 net hp (equivalent to 305-315hp under the 1971 and prior gross hp rating system), had nearly all the 340 gubbins inside except the cylinder head and forged crank (some sources even state it had the same cam and specs as the original 1968 340 automatic), and possessed low-mid-range torque a 340 could only dream about.  (The NHRA soon refactored the recognized HP for racing classes at 270-280net hp). After I took delivery of my '74 E58 road runner, the son of the local Shell Station owner ordered his like mine, except he wanted to "upgrade" to the 400 4-barrel.  I gave him all the reasons not to do so but he did so anyway.  Big disappointment. 

All of the above applies only to the 1/1 engine discussion.  As much as I'd love to see newly tooled '71-'74 B Body model kits, my business side suggests there are considerably more promising venues for Round 2's limited kit design budget at this point in time, even though I wish that wasn't the case. 

Best...TB    

Edited 23 hours ago by tim boyd

[Mark C.]

20 hours ago, CapSat 6 said:

Thank you! I by no means think that NASCAR variants of the Charger or Road Runner should be a priority of Round 2’s- Salvino’s has those covered, but they could be potential variants based on the same body tooling as new street cars down the line. If I had my druthers, I’d rather have better kits of those available. 

The street cars would definitely be the priority here.  

Yeah, I totally get where you’re coming from here. I was just tossing my 2 cents worth in, which isn’t worth a whole lot nowadays!

[Mark C.]

10 hours ago, niteowl7710 said:

I really hope those who want these early malaise-era Mopars get their wish - presuming there's an actual market for them outside of the 1% that inhabit this forum - but I can't think of any car less inspiring than a smog choked small block '74 Charger.

Don’t take this the wrong way, but IMHO that’s kind of a silly comment.  It’s a model car, so the factory specs on its 440 (kit) engine are kind of non-important.  Firstly, people tend to buy model kits of cars that they like the looks of.  To my eye, the ‘73/‘74 Charger styling is very nice - it looks like it’s going fast just sitting on the shelf.

However, if performance is important in this case, maybe it has an earlier 440 in it with all the good stuff applied.  You could always add a six pack or a Hemi.  Lots of options if you want it to be fast.

But seriously, there are lots of 1970s and 1980s era models being reissued that would be just as anaemic as the Charger in question.  Lots of heavy and slow Camaros, G-bodies, etc.  But people are obviously buying them.  

TBH, I think it’s just best to say that you don’t like these cars and wouldn’t be interested in buying a kit of one than to attempt to create some sort of objective reason that Round 2 should not venture to bring this one back.  Besides, in the end Round 2 will do what is best for their situation.  In the meantime we can still have fun talking about it.  

[CapSat 6]

44 minutes ago, tim boyd said:

John is spot-on here.  The E58 '74 360 was by far the best engine choice for any '74 Mopar, and easily among the best choices for any car that year (the Pontiac SuperDuty and hi-po Camaro Z-28/Corvette engine being the others).  Mother Mopar did a great job bringing this performance-oriented engine to market for 1974 in spite of government and insurance industry plots (err...let's make that "actions" instead) to undermine any performance-oriented auto offerings those years. 

What Chrysler - and most of the enthusiast rags - horribly failed at was getting the message out to performance car buyers on this engine.  At the time most media scoffed and called it nothing more than the C-body 360 wagon motor with a four barrel carb added, listing net hp ratings of somewhere between 180 and 200 hp, and thoroughly dissiing the effort.  This was happening even as recently as 20 years ago in some very respected publications. 

I've got a whole file on this subject (and had written a detailed sidebar on it for my "Collecting Muscle Car Model Kits" book a few years ago which I had to drop because I was way over the contractual word count for the mag).  Short story is the E58 was rated at 245 net hp (equivalent to 305-315hp under the 1971 and prior gross hp rating system), had nearly all the 340 gubbins inside except the cylinder head and forged crank (some sources even state it had the same cam and specs as the original 1968 340 automatic), and low-mid-range torque a 340 could only dream about.  After I took delivery of my '74 E58 road runner, the son of the local Shell Station owner ordered his like mine, except he wanted to "upgrade" to the 400 4-barrel.  I gave him all the reasons not to do so but he did so anyway.  Big disappointment. 

All of the above applies only to the 1/1 engine discussion.  As much as I'd love to see newly tooled '71-'74 B Body model kits, my business side suggests there are considerably more promising venues for Round 2's limited kit design budget at this point in time, even though I wish that wasn't the case. 

Best...TB    

I can testify…I owned a ‘74 360 Barracuda…with basic, poorly thought out mods…that car was an absolute beast! 

Ideally, Round 2 would eventually revisit their ‘74 Cuda kit…that one has been floated as being “on their list”…although the tooling has its issues. It would be nice to see a corrected body, better chassis, and a stock 360 with design based on their 340 from the AMT ‘71 Duster. 

The ‘74 Charger kit would probably be better off with a big block…for no other reason other than that many modelers seem to prefer the “biggest” option. Even I wouldn’t market this kit as a 318, bench seat, tan-on-the-box-build Charger.  

The 400 engine was a slug in stock form, and the extra weight didn’t help, when compared to the 360. I did know a guy who had two cars: a ‘64 Sport Fury and a ‘62 Dart. He built the Fury first, with a nasty 440. He followed up with a stroker 452”, based on a 400 for the Dart. He insisted that the 400/452 would run all over the 440, no question. 

In scale, the 400 and the 440 look virtually identical. 

When I get it running again (the engine is out), I’ll take anybody in my ‘70 528 Hemi Super Bee, lol.   

[Ron Hamilton]

On 6/11/2025 at 8:06 AM, CapSat 6 said:

Custom parts from the ‘73 and ‘74 annuals. Most of these (tow hitch, station wagon pieces) did not come with the Super Charger, but it would be great if these were ever found / unblocked for a future release. 

The stock bumpers are shown. The front bumper is the same as what comes in the Super Charger. The rear bumper in the Super Charger does not have bumper guards like the annual ‘73 and ‘74 rear bumper does. 

I have an unbuilt 73 Charger in the collection.  I never opened the bag thevparts are in. 

[Motor City]

There would be much more sales potential with a 1970 GTX or Road Runner kit using Round2's 1969 GTX kit for the powertrain, chassis, glass and interior tub.  Newly tooled door panels, dashboard, seats, body, ram air hood, grille, bumpers, and a few other parts would need to be fabricated.  You would have a somewhat modern tool that would please most modelers.  Having both a GTX and Road Runner would lead to more kit sales.  

[Carmak]

I looked into the original 1974 Dodge Charger Color and Trim Book pages to see if either of the upholstery designs used in 74 were correct.

I discovered this funky cloth insert was available in 74 on the buckets. This is definitely going to find its way into a build!

[Andria H]

Can't wait to see this back (hopefully) Hope they do a Force 440 Monaco/Coronet coupe body or even a new tool Magnum body and interior for the Dukes/Goon Car/CHP Monaco sedan.

Edited 20 hours ago by Andria H

[CapSat 6]

2 hours ago, Motor City said:

There would be much more sales potential with a 1970 GTX or Road Runner kit using Round2's 1969 GTX kit for the powertrain, chassis, glass and interior tub.  Newly tooled door panels, dashboard, seats, body, ram air hood, grille, bumpers, and a few other parts would need to be fabricated.  You would have a somewhat modern tool that would please most modelers.  Having both a GTX and Road Runner would lead to more kit sales.  

It sounds like Round 2 might be more likely to be able to spin these off from their new ‘68 Coronet tool. The word is that the ‘90’s era tools are difficult to modify, otherwise, we might have seen the ‘68 Coronet done on the bones of the ‘68 RR/ ‘69 GTX. 

A ‘68 GTX would also be a good option- as that one has never been done ever. Perhaps they could do a ‘68 GTX, ‘69 Road Runner, and ‘70 GTX / RR for the Coronet bones? 

That would not be ideal, but probably more within the realm of possibility. 

[Can-Con]

2 hours ago, CapSat 6 said:

It sounds like Round 2 might be more likely to be able to spin these off from their new ‘68 Coronet tool. The word is that the ‘90’s era tools are difficult to modify, otherwise, we might have seen the ‘68 Coronet done on the bones of the ‘68 RR/ ‘69 GTX. 

A ‘68 GTX would also be a good option- as that one has never been done ever. Perhaps they could do a ‘68 GTX, ‘69 Road Runner, and ‘70 GTX / RR for the Coronet bones? 

That would not be ideal, but probably more within the realm of possibility. 

That '68 RR was first released sometime in '89. It's not one of that generation of '90s kits. 

I kinda suspect it ,along with the '69 Olds 442, were the last kits developed by MPC before the Ertl buyout.

[1972coronet]

7 hours ago, tim boyd said:

The E58 '74 360 was by far the best engine choice for any '74 Mopar, and easily among the best choices for any car that year (the Pontiac SD-455 and hi-po Camaro Z-28/Corvette 350 being the others).  Mother Mopar did a great job bringing this performance-oriented engine to market for 1974 in spite of government and insurance industry plots (err...let's make that "actions" instead) to undermine any performance-oriented auto offerings those years. 

What Chrysler - and most of the enthusiast rags - horribly failed at was getting the message out to performance car buyers on this engine.  At the time most media scoffed and called it nothing more than the C-body 360 wagon motor with a four barrel carb added, listing net hp ratings of somewhere between 180 and 200 hp, and thoroughly dissiing the effort.  This was happening even as recently as 20 years ago in some very respected publications. 

  Short story is the E58 was rated at 245 net hp (equivalent to 305-315hp under the 1971 and prior gross hp rating system), had nearly all the 340 gubbins inside except the cylinder head and forged crank (some sources even state it had the same cam and specs as the original 1968 340 automatic), and possessed low-mid-range torque a 340 could only dream about.  (The NHRA soon refactored the recognized HP for racing classes at 270-280net hp). After I took delivery of my '74 E58 road runner, the son of the local Shell Station owner ordered his like mine, except he wanted to "upgrade" to the 400 4-barrel.  I gave him all the reasons not to do so but he did so anyway.  Big disappointment. 

The '72 400 was decent - it was hamstrung by the following year. However, the B-Engine (mainly the 383 and 400) is a great foundation for the 450" + cube stroker engines.
The bigger-than-the-440 bore + a lower block skirt make for a better basis.

The 1974 360 (first year for the aforementioned high-perf version) was truly a sleeper. Longer stroke than the 400 (the B-engines, all the same) made for a torque monster. The addition of , in essence, the 340's top end (cam , four barrel, exhaust manifolds) would make it sing. 

Timing was "poor" for the intro of the 245hp (net) 360. The first gas crisis fell upon the consumer only a couple of months into the model year (21-10-1973) and lasted until March 1974. 
However, the 4-speed was optional for '74 only (in spite of rumours to the contrary) , making that a one-year-only setup.

The 360 lived on through the Malaise Era in the A-bodies and B-bodies ; the former having the option to delete the catalytic converters ( not in California, of course ), then abandoned them entirely for the '76 model year ( a '76 Dart Sport 360 - now 220hp - was top contender in a Car & Driver test / shootout ).

[Dave Darby]

2 hours ago, Can-Con said:

That '68 RR was first released sometime in '89. It's not one of that generation of '90s kits. 

I kinda suspect it ,along with the '69 Olds 442, were the last kits developed by MPC before the Ertl buyout.

Ertl bought MPC in 1986, before either of those kits were tooled. The Olds was the last new tool sold under the MPC/Ertl label,  which was discontinued in 1989. The engineering looks very similar to the 66 Nova, and other Ertl kits from around that era. I'm pretty sure both kit tool designs originated in Dyersville. 

[tim boyd]

6 hours ago, Dave Darby said:

Ertl bought MPC in 1986, before either of those kits were tooled. The Olds was the last new tool sold under the MPC/Ertl label,  which was discontinued in 1989. The engineering looks very similar to the 66 Nova, and other Ertl kits from around that era. I'm pretty sure both kit tool designs originated in Dyersville. 

FWIW, I agree with Dave on this subject...TB

[Stef]

9 hours ago, Dave Darby said:

Ertl bought MPC in 1986, before either of those kits were tooled. The Olds was the last new tool sold under the MPC/Ertl label,  which was discontinued in 1989. The engineering looks very similar to the 66 Nova, and other Ertl kits from around that era. I'm pretty sure both kit tool designs originated in Dyersville. 

Since this was brought up, I've often wondered about MPC's sudden and drastic improvement in overall quality and engineering of the late 70s/early 80s, long before ERTL took over.

For example, MPC's 79 Mustang and 82 EXP kits had separate door/engine bay panels, their Omni 024/Shelby Charger/Daytona featured highly complex engines and front drivelines, their Fiero had insane detail throughout, their F-body Firebird and Camaro kits were far ahead of their time, the 80 Bronco was far more sophisticated than what Revell or Monogram had put out, and their C4 was top-notch for the day.

Just curious if anyone has any insight as to how MPC got really good in the 80s!

[stavanzer]

O.T. just a little bit.

The Energetic Replies to this thread, and it's rapid growth, all show that there is a whole bunch on interest in this kit.

Not sure that Energy will move the ball, but I am sure Round2 has seen the response and filed it away for the future.