For Sale Not Mine 1970 Chrysler 300 convertible

[MBar]

1970 Chrysler 300 convertible

Posted 30 minutes ago

print
favorite this post 1970 Chrysler 300 convertible - $19500 (Huntington beach) hide this posting
image 10 of 11

1970 CHRYSLER 300

condition: excellent
cylinders: 8 cylinders
drive: rwd
fuel: gas
size: full-size
title status: clean
transmission: automatic

1970 chrysler 300 conv, 1 of 1077 built in '70, 440 375hp, power brakes,power steering, power top, power windows, power seats. Matching numbers motor, trans, diff, carb, rad.
33k original miles.
New top, original carpet and seats. Everything works, including radio. Drives like new.
New rear shoes and cylinders, master cylinder, rebuilt original Carter carb, new ignition system ( distributor, coil, module), u-joints, new tires with 2k miles on.
I drove it for 3k miles in 1 year, went to palm springs and back at 80mph.

 

[73 T&C]

No A/C no deal!

And for $20k you’d think they could have at least cleaned the interior.

 

[saforwardlook]

Why does it have a 1971 steering wheel? I wonder about the mileage claim. Maybe..........................

 

[1978 NYB]

Does that engine compartment look like 33,000 miles?

 

[330dTA]

”...rebuilt Carter carb...”

I thought all HP engines were equipped with Holleys (???)

 

[ayilar]

Does that engine compartment look like 33,000 miles?

Well my Polara ‘vert of the same year did not look like its engine only had 31k miles, yet there is no doubt about it.

This being said, this 300 looks like it’s exterior has been repainted. Why not do the seats at that time, I dunno.

Is this a HP car? Color seems right but I don’t see the tag or VIN. More photos would help.

 

[azblackhemi]

No A/C no deal!

And for $20k you’d think they could have at least cleaned the interior.

Yeah I agree. Those dingy dirty seats is the first thing I noticed about the car. Not a good first impression.

 

[65sporty]

I question the miles on it also, I better put on my boots because I think the bs is deep.

 

[Davea Lux]

”...rebuilt Carter carb...”

I thought all HP engines were equipped with Holleys (???)

The '70 HP motors still had Carter AVS carbs, appears to also have the HP manifolds, that along with the correct HP engine color suggest that this is the correct TNT engine as this is a 300 series. Dirty engine compartment, interior and repaint suggests that this is probably not an original mileage car. U joints do not fail at 30k

Dave

 

[The Goose]

I like it. If I could swing that deal I’d love to have it in my driveway. It’s really only the price of a nice used truck or Buick out here.

And if it was mine i wouldn’t sell it to any of you guys for only $20k. You’d have to pry the wheel from my cold dead hands LOL !!!!

 

[polara71]

Yeah I agree. Those dingy dirty seats is the first thing I noticed about the car. Not a good first impression.

White doesn't hold up well regardless

 

[The Goose]

White doesn't hold up well regardless

That’s what soap & lemon pledge is for.

 

[saforwardlook]

The '70 HP motors still had Carter AVS carbs, appears to also have the HP manifolds, that along with the correct HP engine color suggest that this is the correct TNT engine as this is a 300 series. Dirty engine compartment, interior and repaint suggests that this is probably not an original mileage car. U joints do not fail at 30k

Dave

Dave is correct about the carburetor being an AVS for the HP in 1970. The standard 440 had the Holley 4160 on it though.

 

[metaldad]

that tool chest in the trunk included?

 

[ImpJay]

No A/C no deal!

And for $20k you’d think they could have at least cleaned the interior.

Just put the top and windows down and lean on the gas pedal!

 

[saforwardlook]

I talked with the seller yesterday. Very straight shooter and disclosed everything he knew about the car to me. Didn't hold back on anything. But the reality is that the paint job isn't that well done but I am convinced it is original low miles. He is a automotive tech himself and has fixed everything it needed mechanically, which wasn't that much. But the car was painted by the previous owner. But neither the body work or paint were that nice, but seemingly has always been free of any significant rust. The car came from Canada. But he is still firm on price since he may well not have much room to get his money out of it given shipping costs from Canada and the work he has put into it. I think he will probably keep the car is he can't at least get $18K out of it. He is a guy that used to formerly live in Italy. He even acknowledged the car could have an odometer that has been around once, he he highly doubted it since it runs like new he said. In looking at the door pull on the passenger side, the typical wear of the driver bucket seat on the side of the lower cushion and the presence still of the an original looking lower seat side shield, I doubt it has been around once. His honesty was refreshing. And he followed up with additional photos of the underside as well shortly after our conversation, like he said he would.

 

[sauterd]

I talked with the seller yesterday. Very straight shooter and disclosed everything he knew about the car to me. Didn't hold back on anything. But the reality is that the paint job isn't that well done but I am convinced it is low original low miles. He is a automotive tech himself and has fixed everything it needed mechanically, which wasn't that much. But the car was painted by the previous owner. But neither the body work or paint were that nice, but seemingly has always been free of any significant rust. The car came from Canada. But he is still firm on price since he may well not have much room to get his money out of it given shipping costs from Canada and the work he has put into it. I think he will probably keep the car is he can't at least get $18K out of it. He is a guy that used to formerly live in Italy. He even acknowledged the car could have an odometer that has been around once, he he highly doubted it since it runs like new he said. In looking at the door pull on the passenger side, the typical wear of the driver bucket seat on the side of the lower cushion and the presence still of the an original looking lower seat side shield, I doubt it has been around once. His honesty was refreshing. And he followed up with additional photos of the underside as well shortly after our conversation, like he said he would.

oh yeah, i figured this was the same car I kept checking on a few years back. talked a little email with him, after he had bought it. pretty close to my "dream" colors, but I still have to go (styling) with the '69 300 over the '70. No offense to the '70, but just my preference.

 

[ImpJay]

I like the back up lights located to the outermost ends of the tail lamp panels on 70-71 300s and Ny`ers.

 

[sauterd]

I like the back up lights located to the outermost ends of the tail lamp panels on 70-71 300s and Ny`ers.

yeah, I do as well. One thing I never liked on ANY Mopar was bumper guards. I know eventually they became mandatory, but I think that was fairly late (mid 70s?)

 

[ImpJay]

yeah, I do as well. One thing I never liked on ANY Mopar was bumper guards. I know eventually they became mandatory, but I think that was fairly late (mid 70s?)

I don´t know about the date/year of mandatory, but onwards from 75 they were standard:
https://www.hamtramck-historical.com/images/dealerships/DealershipDataBook/1975/75_Chrysler_0002.jpg