(first posted 1/26/2015) This simple car is the definition of the Chrysler Corporation in 1980s North America. From 1981 to 1995, this basic architecture was molded, shaped, stretched, shrunken, and face-lifted into everything from sporting car, to minivan, to all guises of sedan. So let’s travel back to the time of big hair and parachute pants to explore all the permutations of the humble Chrysler K-car.
We will start with the beginning of the family; it all spirals outward from there.
K-Body: Dodge Aries / Plymouth Reliant
This was the figurative Adam and Eve of the K-car family. Introduced in 1981, these were solid sedans devoid of any sporting pretensions and advertised as being able to carry six passengers. While these passengers were of indeterminate size, the Reliant and Aries would provide many of these people their first taste of front-wheel drive.
Physical changes during the life of the Aries and Reliant were quite modest. There was an ever-so-mild revision in 1984 that eliminated the hood ornament.
MY 1985 would bring about the only nose-and-tail job these would see; both would remain unchanged until their demise in 1989. Model year 1988 saw the introduction of the “America” series; based upon the success of the Omni / Horizon “America” series, they would have a host of standard features made available at a very attractive price.
Chrysler had high ambitions for the Aries and Reliant, and they mostly panned out. However, several endeavors were less successful, such as the A38 Reliant taxi package…
And the Reliant / Aries police package available from 1982 to 1987. The police package consisted of extra body reinforcing, larger capacity radiator, and an optional 125 mph speedometer. The bulk of those produced were acquired by the United States military. Top speed of a 2.6-liter version? 103 mph.
The standard engine in the beginning was the 2.2-liter four. It would remain through the end. Optional initially was a Mitsubishi 2.6, which was supplanted by a 2.5-liter four of Chrysler manufacture.
A manual transmission would be available, if not overly popular, for the duration of the K-car’s run. A four-speed was available from 1981 to 1985; a five-speed was optional starting in 1982, and was the only available manual beginning in 1986.
Considered a Hail Mary pass by many, Chrysler was able to experience a profound revitalization thanks to the K.
K-body: Dodge 400 / Chrysler LeBaron
Introduced in 1982, these were simply an Aries in a nicer set of clothes.
The 400 was available as both a two-door and four-door. In 1982, it would become the basis for the first Dodge convertible since 1971. The convertible did prove to be relatively popular, outselling both trim levels of the 400 four-door in 1982.
The 400 would last for only two model years. For 1984, the coupe and convertible would be rolled into the Dodge 600 line and the four-door discontinued.
Explanation of the LeBaron gets quite tricky. As will be seen throughout this article, during the 1980s Chrysler was obsessed with the LeBaron name, using it on many different types of cars. This particular iteration of LeBaron was offered in the same bodies as the 400, and also as a wagon.
As with the Dodge 400, a LeBaron convertible was created for 1982. Being the first Chrysler-branded convertible since 1970, it shared the 100.3″ wheelbase of the 400. One could have an early LeBaron with a manual transmission, as an automatic wasn’t standard equipment until 1985.
These cars were available with turbocharging for 1984. Chrysler was focused on having a full financial recovery and brought out the big guns in their commercials.
The LeBaron convertible and coupe were unaffected by the termination of the 400, and would remain through 1986; the sedan and wagon would remain through 1988.
E-Body: Dodge 600 / Plymouth Caravelle / Chrysler E-Class / Chrysler New Yorker
This is where the K-Car family tree starts to get confusing.
For 1984, the 400 nameplate went away in favor of the 600, although the 600 coupe and convertible retained the Aries / Reliant wheelbase. The sedans had a longer wheelbase at 103.3″, officially prompting the E-body designation.
Initially, the 600 and the similar Chrysler E-Class were offered in 1983; the E-Class went away after 1984. Having a frontal and rear appearance similar to the New Yorker, but without the excessive adornment in between, the E-Class was a plainer Chrysler that could be considered the spiritual successor to the Newport.
Upon the termination of the E-Class after 1984, this body shell was rechristened as the Plymouth Caravelle. Both the Caravelle and Dodge 600 would last into the 1988 model year.
The K-body Dodge 600 coupe and convertible, sitting on the 100.3″ wheelbase and originally called Dodge 400, would receive a mild face-lift for 1986, identical to that of the E-bodies, but would be cancelled at the end of the model year. The 600 and Caravelle sedans hung around until mid-1988.
In addition to the overworked LeBaron nameplate, the New Yorker name was one of the few remainders from the Old Chrysler. Using the rear-drive R-body platform in 1981 and the rear-drive M-body in 1982, the New Yorker nameplate landed a longer-term home on the E-body for 1983. For all intents and purposes, the 1983 New Yorker was a gussied up E-Class.
This version would last through 1987 and a very similar New Yorker Turbo would be present for a portion of the 1988 model year, selling only 8,805 units for that abbreviated run.
G-Body: Dodge Daytona / Chrysler Laser
Not all the K-derivatives were mild mannered, milquetoast sedans. Sitting on a 97″ wheelbase, the Chrysler Laser and Dodge Daytona were introduced for 1984. Their physical similarity to a Porsche was hard to overlook.
A few years later, Daytona advertisements would be poking a bit of fun at Porsche.
The Laser lasted for only three model years; oddly, it outsold the identical Daytona during its first two years on the market. These cars were intended as competitors to the Ford Mustang and Chevrolet Camaro, and with the right power train they were formidable adversaries.
For the 1986 model year, the Daytona would receive the Chrysler-built 2.5 liter engine as standard equipment.
Changes would be slow but steady with the Daytona. The 1987 model year (1991 MY shown) would bring about a revised nose with hidden headlights, and standard four-wheel disc brakes would arrive in 1989.
A driver’s-side airbag would come into play for 1990 as would the option of Mitsubishi’s 3.0 liter V6.
image source: www.turbododge.com
Daytona would receive yet another nose job for 1992. Mid-year also saw the most potent Daytona yet, with the IROC R/T. Powered by a DOHC 2.2-liter engine, it would pump out 224 horsepower. Only about 800 were made. The Daytona was terminated at the end of the 1993 model year.
H-body: Dodge Lancer / Chrysler LeBaron GTS
The mid- to late-1980s would see a proliferation of K-based cars. The 1985 introduction of the Dodge Lancer and Chrysler LeBaron GTS was on the leading edge of this salvo. Chrysler used the LeBaron name once again in hopes to whip up as much market frenzy as possible. In the case of the Chrysler version of this car, the LeBaron name could easily have compromised sales results since it was yet another identically named horse in the Chrysler stable.
Playing to the patriotism of U.S. consumers, the 103.1″ wheelbase Lancer and LeBaron GTS showed themselves to be stouter than the competing European sedans frequently being sought by young, affluent baby-boomers. Arguably, the Lancer and GTS were the most attractive K-car derivatives yet.
Chrysler emphasized performance in the turbo versions of both the LeBaron GTS and the Lancer, even getting Carroll Shelby involved in 1988. The Dodge Shelby Lancer came equipped with a 174 horsepower 2.2 liter engine dubbed “Turbo II”. This was ultimately a halo car as only 279 Shelby Lancer’s were built for 1988.
Both saw a significant sales drop for 1987 due to the introduction of the Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable. These cars would continue through the end of the 1989 model year.
One notable jockeying of nameplates involved the non-turbo versions of what had been the LeBaron GTS, which were called “LeBaron Sedan” for 1989. The turbo version would maintain the GTS nomenclature for its swan song year.
J-body: Chrysler LeBaron
Upon its introduction in 1987, this version of LeBaron was intended as a replacement of sorts for the Chrysler Laser. The Laser had just bid adieu in an effort to provide Dodge some exclusivity in its sporty car. The J-body was based heavily upon the Laser/Daytona and was the first K-car family member without a twin in another corporate division.
The advertisements for the J-body were quite contemporary for the times. This commercial also demonstrates the progression away from the 1970s influence of its pitchmen while presenting a distinctive voice, much like Chrysler was aiming to do.
The 1987 LeBaron was also available in hardtop form. From the outset, there was quite a sales disparity between the coupe and convertible; in 1992, for instance, the sales ratio between the two was nearly 8:1. Many of the convertibles were dumped into various rental fleets in warm weather areas.
Engine choices initially were the base 2.5 liter with the 2.5 liter Turbo I and 2.2 liter Turbo II both being optional. Production was initially in St. Louis, but moved to Newark, Delaware, for the 1992 model year.
The Mitsubishi 3.0 V6 arrived for 1990 in almost every model. The LeBaron was unusual in that a manual transmission could be mated to the 3.0; finding one is equally unusual.
image source: www.wikipedia.org
The front of the car was updated for 1993, which was also the last year for the much slower selling coupe.
The J-body LeBaron, along with its thoroughly flogged nameplate, was retired after 1995.
P-body: Dodge Shadow / Plymouth Sundance
Introduced for 1987, these were intended as a replacement for the L-body Dodge Omni and Plymouth Horizon that had been around since 1978.
Billed as a junior BMW by some, it was a junior Dodge Lancer in appearance. The initial advertisements for the Shadow were uncharacteristically reminiscent of days gone by, with a strong acknowledgement of the Dart.
As had become typical, the Dodge was aimed more at the performance minded, while the Plymouth targeted the budget minded, a fact that is reflected in the respective commercials for each. Available in both three- and five-door versions, the Shadow and Sundance did strike a chord with buyers.
Initially offered with naturally aspirated 2.2- and 2.5-liter engines and an optional turbocharged 2.2-liter engine, the 3.0 liter Mitsubishi V6 could be found in the engine bay for 1992.
Both received a face-lift for 1989, and an “America” series was introduced for 1991. Unlike the namesake series seen earlier with the Omni/Horizon and Reliant/Aries, this time there was a certain degree of de-contenting taking place; power steering was about the only luxury that came standard.
The Shadow was presented as more of a performance and enthusiast car, and would see several variants never available with the Sundance. The Shadow convertible was offered in 1991 and 1992. Converted by American Sunroof Corporation, there would be 19,000 convertibles built for 1991, but only 3,100 for 1992.
Carroll Shelby’s involvement with Chrysler Corporation during the 1980s would ultimately cover a number of cars, including the Shadow. For 1987, the Shadow CSX was introduced, powered by the 175 horsepower Turbo II, a turbocharged and intercooled 2.2 liter four-cylinder.
The following year would see a replay of events from Shelby’s time with Ford, as a Shadow CSX-T was created strictly for the Thrifty rental car fleet. Only 1001 of these machines were produced.
image source: www.bangshift.com
For 1992, Plymouth would latch onto a piece of its past with the Sundance Duster. While this version did not see a Space, Gold, or Feather version, the Sundance Duster would have cast aluminum wheels, a revised suspension and the seemingly ubiquitous Mitsubishi 3.0 V6. While better than the base four-cylinder, the 3.0 didn’t make the Duster as bubbly as one might expect.
At the end of 1994, the Shadow and Sundance were laid to rest to make way for the Dodge and Plymouth Neon.
AA-body: Dodge Spirit / Plymouth Acclaim / Chrysler LeBaron
Nothing lasts forever, and by 1989 the K-car twins of Reliant and Aries had lived a full and productive life. While Chrysler could have called their replacements by the same names, Spirit and Acclaim were chosen instead. For the 1989 model year, these were on the sales lot alongside the outgoing Reliant and Aries, just as the Volare and Aspen had been sold alongside the Valiant and Dart in 1976.
Powered by a 2.5-liter four-cylinder that could be either naturally aspirated or turbocharged, along with the 3.0 liter Mitsubishi V6, the overall shape of the Spirit / Acclaim was clearly influenced by the outgoing K-cars.
Despite Chrysler again trotting out Tina Turner for ads, the vast majority of Acclaim sales were of the base model.
The Spirit and Acclaim would receive a driver’s-side airbag in 1990, when it was joined by yet another version of the Chrysler LeBaron. The LeBaron would come standard with the 3.0-liter V6 seen elsewhere in the AA-body.
For the most part, these sedans were as stimulating as a dose of Demerol. However, the AA-body wasn’t always a textbook study of humdrum.
Dodge would release the Spirit R/T for 1991. Powered by a 16-valve, 2.2-liter engine pumping out 224 horsepower, this engine was identical to the one later found in the Daytona R/T. Powered by an engine dubbed “Turbo III”, the Spirit R/T would cover the quarter-mile in 14.5 seconds, with a trap speed of 97 miles per hour; top speed was 141 miles per hour.
With cylinder heads developed in cooperation with Lotus, the Spirit R/T was faster than the six-cylinder Ford Taurus SHO and the R/T was billed as being the fastest sedan sold in America.
The Spirit R/T would last for only two years, selling about 1,800 units in all; the Spirit, Acclaim, and LeBaron would remain through 1995.
C-body: Dodge Dynasty / Chrysler New Yorker Salon / Chrysler New Yorker
The spiritual successors to the M-body Diplomat and Fifth Avenue, the Dynasty and New Yorker appeared for 1988. Exterior styling was supposedly dictated by Lee Iacocca.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9gHEqN2cJc
Billed as a “contemporary family sedan” the Dynasty quickly became the most popular passenger car within Chrysler Corporation. Initially a 2.5 liter four-cylinder was the standard engine with Mitsubishi’s 3.0 V6 available optionally. The much remembered Ultradrive transmission came on board in 1989, along with a standard driver’s-side airbag.
image source: www.copcar.com
With the termination of the rear-drive M-body in 1989, Dodge explored the idea of a police package Dynasty. It was a logical move as the Dynasty was pretty close to the outgoing Diplomat / Gran Fury twins in most interior dimensions. To further study its feasibility, Dodge produced three prototypes.
All were 1991 models powered by the 3.8 liter V6 found in the Imperial (see below) and tuned to have a 160 horsepower output. Suspensions were strengthened, the Ultradrive transmission was beefed up, oil coolers and pursuit tires were added, and each had anti-lock brakes. Of the three, one saw service in Stevens Point, Wisconsin, with a second serving in Washtenaw County, Michigan, where Chrysler president Bob Lutz lived at the time. Dodge kept the third; given the planned termination of the Dynasty in 1993, Chrysler opted to not enter this market.
The New Yorker had only the 3.0 V6 under the hood upon its debut. This was the first Chrysler to offer four-wheel disc brakes with an anti-lock option.
Later on, a Chrysler-built 3.3-liter V6 was standard equipment on the Chrysler and optional on the Dodge.
The New Yorker Salon of 1990 was a grille-and-badge-engineering attempt to fill a perceived gap between the Dynasty and New Yorker. It was not overly successful in initial guise.
Muddy and murky waters prevailed in 1991. The New Yorker Salon remained, taking the place of the New Yorker after the introduction of the New Yorker Fifth Avenue on the 109.3″ wheelbase of the Y-body. Confusing? It pretty much boiled down to the car formerly known as New Yorker now having the name “Salon” tacked onto it.
If you see a New Yorker Landau, this was not yet another variation; the Landau was simply a trim level of the New Yorker and New Yorker Salon.
The Chrysler New Yorker Salon would receive a more rounded frontal appearance for 1992; the Dynasty would never realize any exterior changes during its lifespan. This C-body lasted through the end of 1993.
Y-body: Chrysler Imperial / Chrysler New Yorker Fifth Avenue
In 1990, Chrysler donned their best poker face yet while introducing the Imperial. Sitting on a wheelbase of 109.3″, it was simply a stretched and tarted-up Dodge Dynasty with a base price of $27,000 (roughly $48,000 today).
Advertisements of the time unabashedly made comparisons to various European makes. While perhaps the points were valid, the basic execution and adornment of the Imperial differed vastly from that of the stated competitors.
The Imperial was not overly successful. The age of wire-wheel covers and vinyl roofs was pretty much over when these appeared.
Conversely, the very related New Yorker Fifth Avenue sold roughly four to five times as well as the Imperial. The 3.3 liter V6 was standard; the 3.8 liter V6 found in the Imperial was optional on the New Yorker Fifth Avenue beginning in 1991.
Both cars went to the retirement home at the end of the 1993 model year.
S-body and AS-body: Plymouth (Grand) Voyager / Dodge (Grand) Caravan / Chrysler Town & Country
Once upon a time, the first generation Voyager and Caravan seemed to be as common as sand on a beach.
Little more than an Aries with a wheelbase of 112″, the Voyager and Caravan twins, introduced in 1984, succeeded in bridging a gap between passenger car and full-size van. Its inherent utility combined with an attractive price turned into a goldmine for Chrysler, as the Caravan alone was soon selling over 200,000 units per year. Until 1988 the sole power train was a Chrysler or Mitsubishi four-cylinder engine with either an automatic or manual transmission.
The Grand twins of Voyager and Caravan appeared for 1988. Using a wheelbase of an additional 7″, the vehicle was longer overall by 14″ and was powered by the Mitsubishi 3.0 liter V6. The following year would bring the availability of a turbocharged 2.5 liter engine on standard wheelbase Caravans and Voyagers; the next year would see the 3.3 liter V6.
Not wanting to miss the gravy train, Chrysler introduced a minivan based Town & Country for 1990. It, too, was successful albeit following Chrysler’s then business practice of dressing up a Plymouth and selling it as a Chrysler. All were based upon the extended chassis.
The minivans continued on a K-car based platform through 1995. These were certainly one of Chrysler Corporations biggest successes ever.
Q-body: Chrysler’s TC by Maserati
The TC made its not-so-triumphant debut in 1988 as a 1989 model. Originally powered by a turbocharged 2.2 liter engine, 1990 would see the incorporation of Mitsubishi’s 3.0 liter V6.
When these appeared, they were all built fully laden with equipment with the only buyer choice being color. Their profound physical similarity to the much less expensive J-body LeBaron severely limited the appeal of these cars; even the aluminum wheels could be found on Dynasty’s and minivans. Automotive News magazine proclaimed the TC by Maserati as being “Flop of the Year” for 1988.
K-body: Chrysler Executive and Limousine
Any history of the K-car family would be incomplete without discussion of the Executive and Limousine. Based upon the two-door K-bodied LeBaron, these two cars are some of the lowest production K-cars ever made.
The Executive was available in 1983 and 1984. The prospective buyer had a choice of the 124″ wheelbase of the standard five-passenger Executive or the 131″ wheelbase seven-passenger limousine – not to be confused with the later Limousine. Standard motivational power was the 2.6 liter Mitsubishi four-cylinder.
The Limousine was available in 1985 and 1986 but only with a 131.3″ wheelbase. The 2.6 liter remained standard for 1985 but the turbocharged 2.2 liter engine was finally made standard equipment for 1986.
Production was also scant, never approaching 1,000 units in any given year for either model. 1986 saw the lowest production at a mere 138 units. The intent of these was to rekindle the spirit of the extended wheelbase Mopars of the 1940s and 1950s. This idea never ignited in the marketplace.
The conversion of the two-door LeBaron into the Executive or Limousine was performed by American Sunroof Corporation near St. Louis, Missouri.
Notable International K-Car Derivatives
The virtues of the K-car family were expanded to areas all over the globe. While the cars may have been tailored for their intended homes, they were still members of the family and deserve recognition. So in no particular order, let’s shed some light on some of these overlooked cars.
image source: www.wikipedia.org
Based upon the AA-body Dodge Spirit, the Chrysler Saratoga was exported to Europe from 1989 to 1995. Power trains were similar to those available in the United States, but engine programming was reflective of European regulations.
All Saratoga models were equipped with bucket seats. Leather would become available in 1993, something that was never available on the AA-body in the United States. The AA-body LeBaron was also available in Mexico as the New Yorker when equipped with a vinyl roof and as a LeBaron when not equipped with a vinyl roof.
image source: www.zcoches.com
Also under the Chrysler nameplate was another Mexico market AA-body, also called Spirit. This Spirit was introduced in 1990 with a carbureted 2.5 liter engine that used leaded gasoline. Mexican regulations changed considerably for 1991 when fuel injection was added to deliver unleaded gasoline.
image source: www.fotolog.com
These were also quite popular with the police, as seen here with this example from Argentina.
Based upon the J-body LeBaron coupe, the Chrysler Phantom was available in Mexico from 1987 to 1994. Apart from the name, these were identical to what was offered to American customers.
One unique variation was the Phantom R/T which used the 224 horsepower Turbo III found in both the Acclaim R/T and Daytona IROC R/T. That engine was not available on J-bodies in the United States.
The H-body LeBaron GTS was exported to Europe as simply the Chrysler GTS. For all intents and purposes it was simply a rebadged Dodge Lancer.
The permutations for international markets were quite numerous and cannot all be captured here. For instance, the Dynasty and Daytona were both sold in Canada with a Chrysler nameplate.
Even Chinese Hong Qui sought to build a variation of the Dodge 600 / Plymouth Caravelle.
Production Volumes
An often used phrase for popular items goes along the lines of “gee, they built a million of them”. In the case of the K-car family, it would be more appropriate to say “golly, they built 12.8 million of them!” Yes, it’s true. This spreadsheet shows production by year and model for all K-car relatives, cousins, and offspring.
K Car and Derivative Production
The humble K-car showed itself to be quite a malleable platform, transforming and adjusting itself over fourteen years of production. Hopefully, this article helps to de-mystify the product content of Chrysler Corporation during those crucial years of the 1980s.
These cars reminded me of Muzak, hardly noticeable- but everywhere and about as bland. Though I really wanted a Daytona once.
I still want a Daytona or Laser. An ’86 Shelby Z with T tops, manual trans and black leather interior. ’86 was the last year for the ‘4 eyed’ look with a real actual grille, and got the 5 bolt hubs, equal length half shafts and upgraded transmission. Those turbo II’s are pretty quick stock but they can be massaged into real monsters.
+1, love those cars
The first new car I ever bought was a 1984 Chrysler Laser Turbo. It was a base model with a turbo engine–I wanted the turbo, but not the buggy electronic instruments and higher price of the XT trim.
It was a fast, good-looking, comfortable car that was a blast to drive–until pieces started to drop off. I was stranded in the street one day when the clutch cable snapped in two. I had it in to the dealer multiple times because the cruise control drained the battery dead when it sat overnight. They never entirely fixed it. The rear spoiler’s paint began to flake off and it had to be re-sprayed. I could go on …
I learned never to buy a US make’s first model year production. Let the early-adopters work out the kinks. But I loved that garnet red sports coupe, at least when it was working. That experience helped me when I eventually acquired a 1972 Triumph TR6, which was a great car … when it was running.
Oh boy – that was a fantastic and comprehensive article on these cars. Great work, Jason.
I remember the 1987 LeBaron Convertible being especially popular in white paint back / white vinly roof back then. I think some of them even had white interiors. True 80s tacky-ness.
Fully loaded they were a comparatively “cheap” alternative to BMW´s E30 convertible.
Here in rust-free Northern California, there are still THREE LeBaron convertibles in my neighborhood. They all appear to run (one is under a tarp for the winter, but it was driven there)! How many BMW E30 convertibles still do?
They looked good, as did the Dodge Lancer/Chrysler Lebaron GTS/Sedan. I thought the original Aries/Reliant looked too boxy when it first came out. I was
pleased at some of the K-Car restylings, but thought others (such as the E-bodies with their low-budget rear door-C pillar design) looked a bit awkward.
I was surprised at how the Dodge Dynasty kept selling. While it was less car, than the Ford Taurus, it probably looked like more, to some…dignified, in keeping with the name, and maybe that same market segment that Lee Iacocca always seemed to have in mind, is what kept them selling.
The real winner among the derivatives was, of course, the minivan. While it could be argued that it wasn’t the first, it certainly Kreated a new market Kategory. Wasn’t it the last K-Derivative still in production in the USA?
In Germany the E30 convertibles have all pretty much disappeared. They are usually only being taken out for a ride during summer.
I used to own a 1990 325i and the ragtop with just one layer was its weak point.
It was extremely noisy on the autobahn and not very water proof either. After a couple of years the fabric would wear out and then it was a real pain in the neck when used as a daily driver.
Hardtops were extremely expensive and a replacement ragtop would be something around 1.500 DM back then.
Technically, they were extremely robust. Engines and rust protection were extremely durable.
Still, in the 80s they sold like hot cakes as at 40.000 DM they were the only available 4 seater convertible with 6 cylinders.
Last summer there was a 1986 Caravelle for sale in Alameda. White on red with the droopy headliner and 68,000 miles. I looked at it and I drove it. Thought it wasn’t such a bad car and when was the last one I ever saw. It may be the only one I ever saw. I was considering buying it more as a novelty rather than as a must have.
The owner wanted $1500 for a car stored outside in only clean condition. That is about $300-400 too high and it was not passing smog. I offered $1000 with me handling smog but he wanted his $1500. The car failed three more smog checks before it finally passed and who knows what that cost him. I knew what the issue was but c’est la vie.
Great article. I really enjoyed reading all that. 🙂
Well, compared to GM’s X cars, the K’s didn’t have as many problems, recalls, or detractors. Boring is better, sometimes.
My head hurts.
You, too.
For the love of K! What didn’t they make?
I could have sworn that the Scamp/Rampage was based on these, but then again, I always thought that every Chrysler product was K-based!
Apparently, I was pretty close! 😉
They were based on the Horizon and Omni (L-car, IIRC). But then the K-car was pretty heavily based on the Omni/Horizon, so they are related.
Weird to think the New Yorkers and Grand Voyagers all have the Simca 1100 as their ancestor.
Funny Paul, because Burton Bouwkamp (head of Chrysler Body Engineering don’tcha know!) stated that the K-cars were a CLEAN SHEET DESIGN with a *powertrain* that was common with the L-body. I always questioned your take on this, and rightly so it seems.
Contrary to your oft-repeated claim, the K-cars are NOT heavily based on the L-bodies. At all.
https://www.allpar.com/threads/1981-plymouth-reliant-and-dodge-aries-the-first-year-of-the-iconic-cars.229753/
Where did I say they were “heavily based” on the L cars? There’s a number of different ways to define what “based” means. My point was that Chrysler undoubtedly learned much from the L cars and utilized their experience with it (as well as certain elements) to create the K car. It’s not like they took an amnesia-inducing drug before they started developing it.
By the way that article you linked me to has a major mistake right near the top. It says:
For the first time in decades, a domestically-engineered car from Chrysler Corporation did not use torsion bars; the front suspension had more in common with imports and Chrysler Europe cars, using the now-de-rigeur MacPherson struts along with rack and pinion steering.
The L cars were engineered simultaneously on both sides of the Atlantic, and the American version has a number of very significant differences, most of all its strut/coil front suspension that was engineered fully domestically (at Chrysler USA). The European Simca Horizon used a totally different type of torsion bar design.
And that strut front suspension Chrysler USA engineered for the Horizon/Omni is of course very similar in design to the one used on the K cars.
I never implied that the K Car was just a “stretched” L car or such. I said that Chrysler took advantage of many aspects/elements of what had been developed for the L cars and used them directly (like the transaxle) or in principle, like the front suspension.
Endemic to that site; there was never much of any fact-checking there.
Mine still does. This was an article to put together one section at a time, with lots of space between each LeBaron.
You were quite the genealogist, Jason. Your exhaustive, comprehensive, and well-researched and written chronicle of the K is a great piece.
It looks like you told over the Dodge charger and Plymouth Turismo, the latter of which I had. It seems that only real difference between the two was the nameplate. I had the 2.2 package, which had beefed up suspension, a fake air scoop, and lower profile tires, in 83.
Those were L-bodies as Paul mentions above (and Guardstang notes below.) My first car was an ’84 Turismo 2.2.
The Charger/Turismo cars were L bodies–2 door versions of the Omnirisen cars. I really miss cars like the original K’s–simple honest cars even available as a 2 door.
Nice history. I can imagine that the LeBaron nameplate might be a favorite of Lee Iaccoca. He loved foreign sounding words with unspecified cachet.
If the LeBaron GTS had flush windows, it would have been right up to date. Audi changed the game with those on the second gen 5000, and Taurus/Sable made them popular.
Lido was playing in the sandbox when LeBaron started building custom bodies for Chrysler….
http://www.coachbuilt.com/bui/l/lebaron/lebaron.htm
Our bought-new 1981 Reliant ($5,880 MSRP) was a stripper model, but boy, was it a blast to drive! Kept it for 7 years.
Our 1984 E-Class – you have my photo of it above, we bought it used and drove it for 8 years. A very classy car and we loved it. It, along with our Acclaim brought us to Ohio in 1992.
Our 1990 Acclaim, bought new, served us famously for 10½ years.
Our 1993 Spirit, bought used, was a lemon.
Our 1992 LeBaron convertible bought used w/101K was a fun car, kept it for almost 8½ years until the engine blew up – we knew it had issues, but it was just a fun car.
Now I’m done. They were except for the 1993 Spirit, all good cars.
Well, I never would have even considered buying one these K variants but then I’m a car guy. However, Chrysler sold three of these to my Grandmother in the last 20 years of her life, starting with an 1982 Dodge 400, which was traded for an ’87 Chrysler LeBaron GTS (I could never figure out how the salesman talked her into that one) which she finally swapped for a ’93 Chrysler New Yorker Salon. That one had the 3.8 Mitsubishi V6, and probably too much power for its soft suspension, all season whitewalls and the driving skills of someone in their 80s.
I drove all these cars, and I could feel every kompromised K-Kar bone in their bodies. But that didn’t matter to my Grandmother. I doubt she really even knew that they were front wheel drive. She drove MOPAR products all throughout the 70s, a couple Darts, an Aspen, and my favorite, a ’74 Charger with a 440. I think it was easier to keep lifelong customers back then. Amazing that she had an Aspen, and actually bought another Dodge to replace it.
It’s rather healthy to own an aspen because people tend to be more optimistic after owning one.
As I recall, hers wasn’t as bad as other horror stories I’ve heard. But then again, she traded in her cars every 3-4 years with under 50K on the odometer. I imagine even an Aspen could have made it that long without rusting out or breaking down. I’ll never forget the sound of that Hyde Park Hummingbird starter motor. Brings back fond, nostalgic memories of my Grandparents and their cars.
50k. That’s just barely less mileage than mine. I have a ’78 Volare with factory undercoating at 59k, and probably four years in Michigan winter from the previous owner is enough for the quarter, wheel well and even edge of mirror to rust, also lower part of the doors. And the previous owner changed the alternator and power steering pump, I got the blower switch changed too ( Which they used cheap black plastic parts with thin metal on F-Body, they used much better materials on other models sharing the same part ) But the interior looks pretty luxurious, on the other hand. Especially the AM only radio full of silver chrome paint. ( But I am looking for an AM-FM recently )
On the mention of Highland Park, it’s such a dreadful place right now. I drive on Woodward Avenue on a regular basis ( rather than sticking on I-75, reason 1, my winter LeSabre handles too sloppy at modern speed, 2 summer Lincoln Mark VIII cruising at 95 is too challenging in such a crowd, 3 Volare is a merely moving roadblock! ) usually Roadmaster with bullet holes has some presence around that area, or humble police drives carefully not to offend anyone on the way to a murder scene, and one time I spotted a people trying to ram down another guy on the sidewalk!
It’s better to stay in smaller towns in Michigan, and there are plenty of older cars to have the ’90s feelings, plus few Fairmont, few early ’80s Malibu and few Citation, and many Valiant, Dart and my Volare to imagine being in the early ’80s ( but not many AM stations anymore )
I miss the original K-cars and their immediate derivatives, the LeBaron sedan and wagon. Simple, clean styling with minimal fuss. The Lebarons added a touch of class to the basic platform and were a nice step up in terms of ride comfort and interior design with great front seats. There were numerous K-cars in my family in the 90s, the nicest one was Dad’s Lebaron woody wagon with the talking dash!
Some of the other K-spinoffs were questionable at best. A K-derived Imperial? No!
There’s a Chrysler Saratoga at a dealership here in Dresden that I keep meaning to go and check out.
And, good write up. I didn’t find these cars very exciting when I was younger, but now they appear to my nostalgia for all things 80s.
I helped a friend change the brake pads and rotors on his Dodge Spirit FFV this weekend. It’s a second car meant to free his first from home improvement chores and he also had aspirations of using it to keep miles off his primary in a job that involved racking up 20K miles a year on his personal car. Unfortunately, the Dodge sat out the two years he had the job, as the engine lasted less than 80K miles and the replacement engine wouldn’t pass smog so it hasn’t been registered. Like many Chrysler products, the Spirit combines good, utilitarian design with fart-in-the-wind mechanicals. For a car with so few miles, very little of it has held up, and that is having spent most of its time in La Jolla, which has less demanding weather than an east coast living room.
CJ,
When I was in college I once drove a friend’s 1993 Imperial to run an errand. The whole time I felt as if I was driving a glorified K-Car – I didn’t enjoy the mushy handling and sloppy steering. And the whole car felt as if it would fall apart at any minute.
At that time I had a Volvo 850 GLT that was the same year (’93) as the Imperial. The Volvo was so much-better built, rode better, and was basically 50 times the car that the Chrysler was.
The Imperial cost $5K more than a base 850 GLT in 1993. It was the equivalent of over $48K today. I’m sure there were big rebates, but not big enough. I’m a fan of the Imperials of the ’30s, 50s, ’60s and ’70s, but the later ones stretched pedestrian platforms too far. Also, I haven’t had much luck with Mopars built after the ’60s. The latest was my company’s Magnum R/T. It didn’t hold up well at all, although the ‘Hemi’ didn’t cause most of its problems.
’93 New Yorker Fifth Avenue handles in an extreme strange way. It understeers all the time, I think it should be a result of extending a small car way too far.
I owned a 85 LeBaron convertible for a short time. Bought it brand new and it was awful. Spent six months at the dealership before the drivers window fell down during a storm while I was driving. Never been around a K that could be trusted.
Well done.
And thank you for avoiding calling this the Kurbside Klassic Komprehensive Khronology etc.
+1
Thank you.
The phoenetics are there and I thought that was plenty!
Had I done this subject, the temptation would have been impossible to resist. 🙂
Was it available with a Kühnle, Kopp & Kausch turbo charger ?
No, but some considered it for the basis of another specialty model to be designed in Germany but manufactured in South Korea. It was to be sold as the Karmann-Kia.
Groan. Yet, I laughed!
Somewhere, the ghost of Buddy Rich has taken time out from chewing out his band to do a rimshot for that one!
In general I like these even if they aren’t really my style. I like that they retained elements of the classic American car (bench seat, column shifter) while adopting FWD and compact dimensions, yet without clinging (for the most part) to vinyl tops, etc. that didn’t look right on smaller cars (talking to you, FWD GM C Bodies).
If I had to pick one to drive, I think it’d be the 400-600 convertible, which’d look really sharp in the right colors. Or a little baby blue Reliant as a winter beater.
Thank you for the interesting, picture-filled, and comprehensive history of a huge part of the automotive landscape of my childhood (though we didn’t have a single K-car in my extended family, they were literally everywhere around us).
Great write-up Jason. It will be helpful for many to have all of these models in one place.
For whatever reasons, I will always have a deep interest in the K-cars. There’s just something about them I find more amusing than similar era GM and Ford cars. I won’t even name my favorites, because I have so many. I also have amassed quite a large collection of brochures of these cars.
The Shadow convertible isn’t a car I think of often. I actually knew someone who owned one – a girl in my grade I knew from elementary school through high school’s parents owned a teal colored Shadow convertible as an extra car. They still had it as of a few years ago.
I dated a girl who had one of these with the 3.0 automatic, and I dated another girl whose sister had a Turbo 5-speed (both convertibles). I actually drove the Turbo, and it wasn’t that bad a car. It was pretty fun actually.
I rented a Thrifty CSX-T at DFW a couple of times. Fun, but the torque steer would about tear the wheel out of your hands. It was kind of eye opening for me, as the only FWD cars I had driven up to then were econoboxes, like my wife’s ’84 Sentra.
It also seemed like Chrysler & Shelby didn’t upgrade the A/C compressor to deal with the higher output. It (or the AC clutch) seized on me during a fairly spirited drive; when I got to the job site there was smoke coming from under the hood. The serpentine belt was actually bubbling. I rented another one a few weeks later, and on that one the AC just didn’t work at all, so with it being August in Texas, I reluctantly turned it in for a more plebeian rental.
As the proud owner of two K car variants, an 85 Daytona Turbo Z (loaded with every option and I paid $14,000 for it) and a 91 Spirit ES (loaded with every option, paid about $12,000 for it), I could say that I honestly liked both these cars.
The Daytona looked great, the turbo had a bit of power, and was problem free for 5 1/2 years.The only annoying part of the car was the talking dashboard. Every time I started the car, I heard, “Please fasten your seatbelts”, followed by, “Your engine oil pressure is low”, followed by, “Your fuel is low”. Brought the car back to the dealer several times, and they could never get it fixed. I did, though, appreciate the time it told me, “Your electrical systems are malfunctioning”, right before the car stalled as I was pulling away from a red light. That was the end of my relationship with the Daytona Turbo Z, as it was going to cost over $1500 to repair the electrical system. So that day I walked out of the dealership with a brand new 1991 Sprit ES.
I actually liked the Spirit ES better. It was really sharp looking for a box. I opted for the black exterior with the nifty grey, red, and black striped velour seats. I tinted the windows a bit, which made it look kind of sinister. The 3.1 V6 had a lot of power to move the beautiful snowflake style wheels. This engine was superior, IMHO, to the turbo 4 in the Daytona. I drove the Spirit for 10 years, without a hitch. Never had 1 problem with the car. I decided to give the car to my twin nieces to share when they got their licenses. They enjoyed the car for another 3 years. When the car was finally turned in for a new Honda Accord, it had 185,000 miles on it. The only things that was ever done to the car was regular maintenance. It was a very good car !!
I owned a 1984 Dodge Daytona Turbo, all black…a very nice looking car. It was fully loaded with every option to make a twenty something blinded by the fact that it was a piece of junk. I must have bought a lemon. Thirty years later, my Dad still brings it up…”remember that car that used to talk”…..then he laughs….
Comprehensive, indeed! I will have to come back to this to pore over when I have the luxury of some more time. Suffice to say that I lived and breathed the birth and introduction of (almost) every one of these. As a young guy in a complete Mopar swoon at the time, I gobbled up every touch of info I could get on these. Sadly, as much as I tried to get excited about them, I just never really could.
However, they were certainly competent, mainstream cars when they came out, but like the final Studebakers, sort of wound up a size or so too small as the competition began growing again in the wake of low fuel prices.
I never knew there were so many K cars being built, I always thought the only K cars that existed were the Dodge Aries/Plymouth Reliant, I prefer the original style of the Aries/Reliant vehicles, I hardly see any of the Shadow/Sundance’s, Lancer’s/LeBaron’s, Laser/Daytona’s, and the Caraville/600’s around anymore yet still see a good number of the Aries/Reliant’s, Spirit/Acclaim/LeBaron’s and the K car New Yorker’s around, I hardly see the original versions of the minivan’s anymore.
When I look at those K-Cars the thought that strikes me first is: Gosh – those rear view mirrors are T-I-N-Y !
Great post! Chrysler de Mexico was quite creative with the K cars and derivatives. They also offered a convertible Aries/Reliant K (named Dart/Valiant or Volare K overthere) in the mid 80s and there was a police package version too with the 2.2 liter engine.
A great, comprehensive article…Well done!
I’ve never seen a K-car with a manual trans and a bench seat!! Wow, it must be the last (maybe the only) one around. I worked at Chrysler and I never knew these exsisted.
The interior shot of the manual transmission in the Reliant is the same Reliant two-door seen at the very beginning and end of the article. It was great to stumble upon a two-door and seeing it was a stick only sweetened the discovery.
My head is spinning just trying to keep up with all the LeBaron variations. Egads.
The very first comment at the top sums up the feelings I’ve always had about every single one of these cars…automotive Muzak.
BUT I have to admire what Chryco accomplished and as noted elsewhere, they weren’t the self-destructive disasters the GM X-cars turned out to be.
I don’t remember ever seeing one with a stick…maybe I just forgot.
Anyway I join the chorus of kudos for a well-written and fascinating article. The cars may be boring but the backstories are enjoyable.
Our 1981 Reliant was a 4-on-the-floor. That car ran rings around all other domestics at that time, especially in snow. Like driving an MG compared to other cars and much more reliable!
Chrysler bailed out of the market down here by 1980 selling out to Mitsubishi so no K cars here however Mitsu stomped out a near clone in the Magna in Aussie very closely related by powertrain if not actual models.
The Magna has zero relation to the K-cars, aside from the 2.6l Mitsubishi engine that was optional in some K’s during their early years. The vast majority of the cars seen here had Chrysler’s 2.2/2.5 SOHC engine.
Wow, there’s a lot of info there.I just hope you’re not expectimg us to answer questions later…..
…..one question I have is about the width of all these cars – you note the change sin wheelbase (from 100 to 117″ I think, plus 131″ for the hideous limo, but did the width vary much? Visually, some look long and narrow, to say the least.
Also, am I correct t recall that Roy Axe of Rootes fame styed the first versions?
No questions….for now!
Looking on automobile-catalog.com, I found the following regarding track widths:
1981 Aries:
front track = 57.6″ / 1,463 mm
rear track = 57″ / 1,448 mm
1988 Dynasty
front track = rear track = 57.6″ / 1,463 mm
So, yes, the width was pretty constant from the original to the (arguably) largest example in the C-body. However, from my parents having owned both an ’83 Reliant and a ’91 Dynasty, it always seemed the Dynasty was wider but still rather narrow for its length.
I’ve not yet found any credit for the design of the Aries / Reliant.
“…’91 Dynasty, it always seemed the Dynasty was wider but still rather narrow for its length.”
Yes and yes, the Dynasty SEEMED wider because the door panels and doors were very thin. Chrysler blew out the interior width-wise to make it FEEL like a larger car than it really was. I don’t think I would want to be T-boned in one, precisely the ONE reason why I never bought one, although one of my B-I-Ls owned one for many years and loved it.
Wow, what a wonderfully comprehensive article! I can imagine the kitchen table with charts spread out all over the place in order to make sure all are included in the correct order. Very impressive and a very welcome piece of research.
Thank you.
Let’s just say I learned a lot on how to manipulate spreadsheets in Apple’s Numbers program.
Well done, Jason. Your diligent presentation would make an ideal case study for a college-level Marketing class on “product line extensions.”
Well done! The K really was a flexible platform–it had to be. My sister had an ’89 Shadow 4 door with the 2.2 and automatic. Not much power, but it was pretty well built and handled decent.
We had a neighbor with a 5spd turbo Lancer that had well over 200K miles. He did a LOT of around town running which is hard miles on a turbo car. And this guy was kind of a choad in many ways…most of all, he was about as mechanically inclined as I am a Chinese ballerina. It really said something about these cars’ durability.
The only non-US K variant you missed is the 2nd version of the Mexican Dodge Magnum….basically a Dodge 400 coupe with a revised front clip and the Turbo II. At one point it was supposedly the fasted car you could buy in Mexico. Also, if only we would’ve gotten the Phantom R/T stateside…that’s pretty hot business! That bodystyle deserved a drivetrain that lives up to its looks.
I want one of these so bad:
Not complete without the Dodge Charger / Plymouth Duster, they were K cars too.
These? No, they were based off the L-body Horizon / Omni that pre-dated the K-cars.
A turbo Shelby Charger…Id like to get my hands on one of those….
“These? No, they were based off the L-body Horizon / Omni that pre-dated the K-cars. ”
Not according to Wikipedia.
Where on Wikipedia? The referenced page is where I found the picture used above and as I stated previously, it predated the K-car.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_Charger_(L-body)
from wiki:
“The Dodge Daytona is an automobile which was produced by the Chrysler Corporation from 1984 to 1993. It was a front-wheel drive hatchback based on the Chrysler G platform, which was derived from the Chrysler K platform. “
Daytona/Laser and Charger/Turismo/024/TC3 are not related, despite the somewhat similar appearance.
“Omni 024” and “Horizon TC3” were available in 1980, first K-cars came in ’81.
from wiki:
“The Dodge Daytona is an automobile which was produced by the Chrysler Corporation from 1984 to 1993. It was a front-wheel drive hatchback based on the Chrysler G platform, which was derived from the Chrysler K platform. “
John, get a grip; that Daytona/Laser is a different car, and one he covered in this article. Please go back and re-read it before you call out its (perceived) mistakes.
My mistake.
Thank you for taking the time to help me get my grip because I think I nearly lost my grip. I now have a grip.
But seriously, I like this thread. I havn’t thought about these cars in decades. Those little 024s were nice to look at for a cheap compact car, especially if they had the black and silver(?) paint scheme. A friend’s mom bought one new with that paint scheme.
Somebody should go edit that Wikipedia page. This is the problem with “knowledge by consensus” it is dictated by the lowest common denominator. Everything that I really have a deep understanding of that I check on Wikipedia has some common (usually harmless) misconceptions.
Great article and research! You might have inspired me to write a COAL article about all of the K cars I’ve owned.
Please do.
In researching this, I found a website outlining the relatively few survivors of the K-cars. Hagerty insurance has declared the 1984 Voyager as being extinct.
So if we can document what has been, or is, it would be great. They are still out there too; just last Friday I saw a first generation LeBaron convertible under the Green Line track in downtown Chicago.
I know I said this already Jason, but I loved this article! Clear and concise and better than opening up 50 billion Wiki articles. I love this style of article.
It’s the kind of article I’m surprised Allpar hasn’t done. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a site brimming with plenty of info and I am grateful it exists, but I’m always struck by how disorganized the information is. It’s ripe for a renovation, and they could take notes from Austin Rover Online on how to organize information.
Thank you!
Allpar was a great resource in researching this. However, like you, I am amazed at how disjointed some of their information is and I was thinking of ways the entire site could be revamped.
My intent was something concise and easy to read. At nearly 3,800 words, I’m not sure if I met the concise portion!
Great article. It reminds me of my kid’s books “Something from nothing” Bought two minivans 90 Dodge three speed auto good, especially with the OHC six really liked to wind. 96 T&C loved everthing but the 4 speed trans, second failure now sits at curb. Chrysler was really down with turbos too bad they were before their time.
The police car referred as being Mexican is in fact from the Policía Federal Argentina (something similar to the FBI).
IIRC in 1991 the PFA bought 400 Chrysler Spirit and Dodge Shadow as police cars. They came to replace the Falcons they still used. Unfortunately, they weren’t enough to replace all of them. Today they are rarely seen due to the lack of parts to keep them running.
I think the PFA bought also 40 undercover police cars painted as a regular sedan, 10 of them with the turbocharged engine.
Thank you for the clarification; I will update the article to reflect it being from Argentina.
Thank you for such a comprehesive and enjoyable article Jason. Everybody knows someone that has owned a K-car or EEK car.
Fun to reminisce, watching a Motorweek review of the ’85 Aries wagon:
I love those cheesy old Motorweek episodes! I remember watching them on PBS religiously; they were pretty much the only road test game in town on TV.
Someone needs to get a 131″ wb Limousine and re-trim it as a Imperial….all white, of course. The penultimate in K-car tacky!
Fun fact: did you know that the doors of the early Aries/Reliant, from 1981-84 were held on by large cotter pins? Later versions from 85-89 had normal-sized door pins. I know, I checked – cotter pins on my uncle’s ’81 Aries sedan, and on my BILs ’84 sedan. But my ’85 Aries had reg. door pins. I guess a penny saved is a dollar earned.
Too many memories of these to even attempt to bore you all with. You’re welcome. I’ll just say they all held up quite well. It took an LH to ruin my Mopar loyalty.
Riddle me this, Shafer: Dad’s ’82 LeBaron sedan had a manual transmission. 4-speed or 5-speed? I honestly don’t remember and I wonder if he does.
From what I’m seeing here, transmission choices were a four-speed manual or a three-speed automatic. So I’ll say four-speed.
http://www.automobile-catalog.com/make/chrysler/le_baron_2gen/le_baron_2gen_sedan/1982.html
Works for me, thanks. I know the ’85 GTS that replaced it had a 5.
Has anyone else noticed that the Aries/Reliant K “face” resembles that of their father?
back then they didnt put crystal hood emblems yet…
That’s actually a Plymouth emblem inside the Chrysler pentastar on the hood. It must be a one-off since they all got a regular pentastar when they did put a hood ornament on any K-car (the Lebaron and Chrysler versions got the plastic ‘crystal’ version). I don’t recall ever seeing one, but maybe someone has a shot of an Aries with a hood ornament comprised of a fratzog inside a pentastar.
It’s actually a solid foretelling of how Iacocca would accelerate the eventual killing off of Plymouth by eroding its identity. It began with the identical Omnihorizon twins, and, soon enough, Plymouths would be virtually indistinguishable from Dodges in either appearance ‘or’ price. It was a far cry from the sixties when the only thing shared between Dodges and Plymouths were drivetrains, roofs, and glass and Plymouths were always priced lower.
I have noticed that and I can’t even explain why! Something about Lido’s square head and those headlights, and the wire frame glasses everyone wore in the early ’80s.
It’s reassuring to know I’m not the only person who has thought about the resemblance.
A very comprehensive summary of a 15 year shell game in which enough consumers were fooled to keep the con going. With so little development costs those must have been very profitable years for Chrysler.
They had good ways to waste too. Playing some Formula One!
Great article indeed and I loved my family’s 1995 AS-body with the 3 Liter V6 and 3 Speed Torqueflite. Cannot believe 12.8 Million K-Car derivatives were built and believe it or not certain configurations of Chrysler’s K-Car based Minivans were recommended by Consumer Reports to the very end. Shame the K-Car Club of America will not let them in.
Thank you, Jason, for pulling this together. K cars brought my family back to Chrysler, and the early ones were pretty honest about what they were, and cohesively, if not memorably styled. And while they never lost the tinny quality that was noticeable compared to a contemporary Buick Skylark, the upscale models had pretty decent fit and finish – the “corduroy” cloth seats in my mom’s ’85 Town and Country looked great and wore well.
After an interesting turn with the G and H bodies, things went downhill with the Sundance/Shadow and Acciaim/Spirit/AA LeBaron. The proportions were off and the varying chrome trim around the side windows looked both odd and cheap.
Thanks for a wonderfully comprehensive article on all things K-car! While we never had one in the immediate family (last Mopar was a ’74 Dart), I think I knew someone who had almost every variant. Aries/Reliant – both Grandfathers. (each had one.) K-body LeBaron – neighbor had an early convertible, friend’s dad a late Turbo sedan. G-body Daytona – Dad’s co-worker. (Gorgeous, immaculately kept ’84 Turbo Z.) J-body LeBaron – same co-worker (traded the Z), youth minister at church. P-body sundance – neighbor in college. (Duster version.) AA-body Acclaim – co-worker/friend in college. C-body Dynasty – Friend’s mom. S-body Minivan – too many to count, but notably my grandfather (traded in the Reliant).
I’m missing a few – E, H, and Y-body sedans, Q-body TC – but still. That’s a lot of people and a lot of coverage for one humble platform!
Perhaps oddly, if I had to pick one, I’d pick one that no one directly connected to me ever owned – a Shelby Lancer. Always thought the H-body hatches were the best-looking variant (perhaps tied with the LeBaron coupe but more useful.)
Very nice article
One possible ommision, what year were the minivans introduced?
Good catch.
It was 1984; I’ve updated the text.
Thanks Jason for a great read and a trip down memory lane. I got married in the fall of ’87 (still am). Mom and Dad’s wedding present was our honeymoon to beautiful Solvang, CA and a rental car to get us there. My choice was the then new LeBaron coupe. Thrifty didn’t have one available that day, so they upgraded us to the Shelby Lancer Turbo. They were worried that the e-brake lamp wouldn’t go off and hesitated, but I didn’t care. What a thrill for a twenty-one year old! By far the most exciting car I had experienced at the time. The Shelby hauled butt! It even had a factory installed CD player; so new to me I had to stop and buy a CD to try it out. Guess I was very lucky to drive one considering so few were built.
Mom bought a used ’84 New Yorker and really liked it compared to the old Falcon it replaced. Grandma still has her ’85 New Yorker. At 91 years young, she stopped driving, but anyone can drive it to take her shopping.
Great article Jason! Do you see a parallel between Ford’s use of the Falcon platform for 20 years and Mopar using the K platform for 15 years. And Lee Iaccoca being the common denominator.
Good question.
Iacocca was definitely involved to varying degrees with all the Falcon offshoots. So even if the decision to continue utilization of this platform wasn’t his, he definitely had an example of how a platform could be milked.
From a business standpoint, using the same platform was rather shrewd. Most consumers really didn’t care what platform their car was on, so long as it functioned they way the needed. And with both the Falcon and K platform, that’s what they got.
Interesting photos.
I have no memory of the 2door sedan version of the original K car.
I was really impressed by the Chrysler Le Baron coupe, chrysler laser, and the Shelby CSX back when they first came out. A friend bought a brand new Plymouth Sundance turbo when they first came out. It was surprisingly quick once the turbo kicked in.
Here’s a pic of our 1981 Reliant 2 door sedan – or coupe. Quite roomy, too. I’ve posted this photo several times already.
My grandparents had a 1992 New Yorker and one of my aunts had an H-body LeBaron GTS sedan (late 1980s? I don’t recall the year) when I was growing up in the 90s. While I was too young to drive, I loved both cars.
When I became old enough to drive, I did have a tough decision to make as to what I was going to buy for my first car, which was around 2006: a pre-facelift LeBaron hardtop coupe (with the pop-up headlights) or my favorites of all time: a first-gen Concorde, Intrepid or an Eagle Vision.
I am probably the biggest fan for the LH platform, but I thought that the 1988-1992 LeBaron was pretty slick for a (slightly) older car (however, I don’t like the 1993+ facelift). Of course, age, reliability and safety were big concerns: a 1993-1997 Concorde was a little newer and had better safety features (such as dual airbags) that a late 80s-early 90s LeBaron convertable/hardtop coupe did not offer.
Fast forward to now, and I have a Chrysler 200 (sedan). I jokingly refer to it as a modern-day LeBaron.
Why didn’t Chrysler call this car a LeBaron? For that matter, why didn’t Chrysler make a ‘New Yorker Edition’ for the 300?
As a non-American, I can’t really understand if there was actually any need for this kind marketing and constant name-shifting. Could anyone explain why Chrysler did things in this way? Thank you.
The name shifting, especially the perpetual use of the LeBaron name, makes no sense to anyone in the U.S., either. All we can do is speculate that the powers that be at Chrysler thought it carried some amount of prestige. Whatever prestige it had was eroded quickly.
All the different varieties of the same platform are more easily explained. For instance, the Dodge Lancer was aimed at the performance minded instead of the basic transportation being sought by Aries buyers. The minivan was unto itself; the C-body cars were to fill a gap as the cancellation of the rear-drive M-body in 1989 left Chrysler with no “large” car. Others may have their own take, but that’s how it has always appeared to me.
Great article Jason – very comprehensive and enjoyable.
We had K-cars (Reliants) as part of our Air Force Security Police fleet in the mid 80s – they were universally reviled for their small size, cheapness and lack of reliability.
Our favorite – the 85/86 Ford LTD with the 5.0. I can still remember laying a good 5 second patch of rubber responding to an armed robbery exercise during a major higher headquarters inspection……….
No comparison between those two! I’d take the LTD over the Reliant any day.
Your not kidding. RWD, V8 power. More room and far superior seats. The only way to get a k-car with adjustable seating was the rare bucket seat option or to move up to the more expensive Lebaron/400 series cars at the time. The basic solid bench seat had no center armrest, recliners and only moved fore and aft and the backrest was titled so far back that many customers had them modified to bring them closer to the wheel. I’m not aware of a split bench seating option ever being offered on the K-car line. If there was I have never seen one.
This was a most enjoyable read.
After being penalized having to sit in the back seat of a 1981 Aries with no A/C and no roll down windows I never had much use for the early K-car variants. That car also had the solid bench front seat which was so reclined it killed what little rear legroom was available if the front seat driver was tall. And of course Mr’s M, who was a teacher at that time, was nearly 6′ tall so there was virtually no room left in back. Well it beat walking I guess. This car also had the stumbly stuttering unreliable Mitsubishi 2.6 which was always giving them fits and eventually blew it’s head gasket on the way to school one morning. The engine made all sorts of funny noises, lost power and eventually conked out. We got out of the car and I remember seeing anti-freeze coming out of the exhaust!
With that car down she borrowed moms 1984 Cutlass Ciera Brougham with the smooth quiet Buick V6 and that car was a revelation. The power driver seat could be adjusted far better in that car so I remember having more useable space, the seats were much plusher and more comfortable and it had A/C that worked very well in the 90 plus degree Summer months she had it. The rear windows also went down to let in fresh air until the A/C cooled things down. It was also much more refined.
They must not have fixed the K-car or did fix it and traded it up for a 1985 Buick Skylark with the Tech 4 but by that time I was driving my own 1979 Ford Fairmont so never got a chance to see how the little Buick compared to those other two cars. I do remember they had that car well into the 90’s so it couldn’t have been that bad.
My 89 Sundance was similar to this one – I later had a sunroof put on. It was THE thing to do in San Diego. I lived on base so I primarily drove it for pleasure. It was only when I got out of the service and got a civilian job did the car start to falter under everyday commuting.
What I don’t get is that a New Yorker K was barely wider than a Reliant, let alone a Sundance. Was Mopar in such bad shape that they couldn’t make the cars wider? The New Yorker/Imperial/5th Avenue/Dynasty were much narrower than the competition.
Great history Jason, thanks. There are still K cars running around Vancouver, I spot a variant maybe once a week. A mild climate helps, I just got back from a business trip to Toronto and was shocked to see vehicles just caked in road salt, what could last long through that?
Well written article.
Never owned one, never rode in one, never drove one… never cared to either. Just not for me, but clearly a whole lot of somebodies bought them.
Yep. I have never even so much as sat in an original version K car. At the time I thought the original K cars were a sick joke and seriously wondered what was wrong with people who willingly paid money for them. But there must’ve been something very very good about them. Gradually they evolved into cars that did appeal to me. Maybe I evolved a little too.
While many people refer to the ’70s as the “malaise” era, it looks like more like that name should have been applied to the ’80s. Other than the Daytona/Laser appear to be the only Chrysler cars I would be interested in. While Chrysler seems to have fared the worst during this period, GM and Ford didn’t have much of anything I wanted either. I bought one new car in the ’80s, a Pontiac Fiero.
To me, the the “malaise” era was roughly 1976-1984. Arguable and with exceptions of course. I’ve heard some say the malaise period ended when the American factory option convertible came back.
I never knew that the K-Limo was on a 131 inch wheelbase, the same as a 1958-60 Lincoln, IIRC. Looking at the picture, that Chrysler Limo almost needs to double in width to have decent proportions given its length.
In so many ways, the later higher trim versions should have been credible competitors to the big GM fwd cars. If only Chrysler could have found a way to add some additional width to the car. But as it was, these poor things were always punching in too high of a weight class for what they were.
Quite the Magnus opus.
I had a cousin-in-law who had an early Aries wagon equipped with a 2.3 HEMI engine.
I know it sounds unbelievable but that’s exactly what the emblem said on the fender.
This was in 1981 or 1982. I remember he told me that he bought it from a car show that came to town. At the same time, he told me that he was shown plans for a van that would be small enough to park in a garage.
I recall being in total disbelief of such a thing. But sure enough it came to be a few years later.
The early ones had a badge that said 2.6L Hemi–hey if you don’t use your trademarks you lose them–haha
I had a 1989 Chrysler LeBaron hardtop with the four wheel disc brakes, first year airbag and the 2.5 four cylinder with an automatic. It went about 200k before the rust was too much. Wish I still had it. Yesterday, I put a water pump in my dad’s 180k 1993 Plymouth Acclaim. If he hadn’t been on chemo, he would have done the work. The Acclaim is the second one, it’s been a very reliable car for him.
20th December 2014 – London N11- sorry it’s so lo quality
And here’s where it all began – the K platform, from a 2008 visit to the Walter P. Chrysler Museum.
Congrats to Lee for milking 12.8M K-Car derivations over 15 years. He finally read the writing on the wall when the Taurus was eating the Dynasty for lunch and closed down the K-Car rabbit hutch.
Lee did similar work with the Falcon/Mustang/Maverick/Granada chassis.To show the similarity, junkyard Granadas are prized because the disc brakes on the front end can be retro fitted on older Mustangs. Talk about leveraging your design.
My parents gifted me with brand new Dodge Daytona turbo z as a hs grad gift in 1987. I blew out the turbo once trying to race a buddy of mine in his ’71 Mach 1 429. Needless to say he blew me in the weeds. My Daytona was under warranty at the time of the turbo blowing out but the dealer said the warranty excluded abuse, but he fixed it anyway. I really didn’t learn my lesson until it happened a second time, along with a head gasket failure at 22,000 miles. The dealer said no to a warranty fix deeming abuse. I was pissed and the mechanic was pissed, so it was bike commuting until I could secure enough cash to fix that pos Dodge. My dad told me that I was reckless and that I should not own a car. I was in college and my parents would only foot the bill for my tuition and rent, food and clothing. So I ended up selling my Daytona to a dorm mates buddy for a paltry$4,000. The Daytona was a tick over two years old and had 22K on the odometer. My parents paid $14K for it new. It had almost every option It was so embarrassing to loose so many stoplight races, except against Ford Escort GTs, EXP’s and those fugy ’80s Monte Carlo SS’s. Those were easy to dust off in a race. Now that I’m an old fart in my 40s my testosterone levels have tanked. Instead of smelling turbo chargers burning up in poorly made ’80s american cars I can smell the roses as I cruise on by in my hybrid Hyundai Sonata. The “good old days” are the here and now, and certainly not back then!
Very well researched and I enjoyed the read. I had an 85 Reliant and I got 300K kms out of it over 10 years. Then I gave it to a sister in law who had it another 2 years for mostly dependable service. My problem with it was the fuel pumps that kept failing, and it was an expensive repair. I had like 3 of them go on me. She went in a straight line though and was a good vehicle when my kids were small and in car seats in the back. It was my first front wheel drive car and it was nice to never get stuck in the snow.
I ordered a new 1981 aries, 2door, four speed, 2.2L engine, $25 heavy duty suspension option, cloth seats instead of vinyl, and a $25 extra sound insulation option. Interest rates were 19% or more for new car loans and unavailable for used cars. The dealer offered me a special deal because he could use my money for 90 days no interest before he had to pay Chrysler. I kept track of every fill-up and oil change for 60,000 miles, overall mpg of 27.5 but up to 41 on the highway. it only used 1 qt of oil in the 1st 1000 miles and I never had to add any between oil changes. The only repair was a thermostat that failed open on a -7 winter morning, no heat at all on the ride to work. I had to run the engine before I changed the thermostat so I could touch the metal without getting frostbite.
I will take the Toyota Tercel instead parked next to that K-Car.
Very well done. Thanks for re-running this, I didn’t take time to read it the first time.
Of all the K-car variants, the one I see the most is the LeBaron coupe/convertible. Have they survived in disproportionate numbers or do I notice them because they are nice to look at? Saw a beautiful burgundy convertible today (hidden headlights) and a red coupe yesterday (unfortunate turd-style facelift headlights).
We passed an early eighties Reliant yesterday afternoon coming home from Indianapolis. It was pretty rusty and was laying down a minor smoke screen but it was capable of 60 MPH or so. I was going to take a picture but couldn’t get to my phone in time. Given the prodigious use of road salt here in the Midwest I’m surprised the Reliant hadn’t completely dissolved by now. When I worked for the Army National Guard in the 1980’s the motor pool had some K-cars available for administrative use. It says something that nearly everyone preferred driving an AMC Hornet instead of a Reliant/Aries.
Oddly, one of the few strong points of Mopars of this period was their near imperviousness to rust. I owned an ’82 Charger 2.2 that was wrecked and repaired more times than it should have been (my high school car), and years later it still didn’t show sings of the tin worm even after being taken apart and put back together numerous times. They used galvanized steel at the time, and it really did make a difference.
The other thing about Chrysler products of this time that always sticks out in my mind is the quality of the interior fabrics and panels. It always seemed counterintuitive to me that they made essentially disposable cars, but they seemed almost immune to rust and the interiors seemed to hold up so much better than the drivetrains or any of the switchgear or electronics. Every once in a while I still see a Mopar from this period. Invariably the paint is peeling, but there’s no real rust, and the interior may look taken apart and cobbled back together in attempts to repair various maladies, but the seat fabrics, dashpads and door panels usually look like a good cleaning would make them new again. If the damn things ran as well as they hold up in other respects they might STILL be as ubiquitous 20 years later as they were in the 90’s.
Image #7 caused me bodily harm – I tripped and fell
on my way to the bathroom to throw up after looking
at it! ?
HAPPY NEW YEAR to all Curbside participants and
lurkers!
I can’t believe how many cars the K-body spawned-
vans, coupes, stretches, etc. Even the late-’80s early
-’90s C-bodies, which look somehow longer *and* wider
than the K’s.
Chrysler must have planned in advance the capacity
to lengthen or shorten and widen the K platform. It
really was a company saver. Too bad it took them
until the early ’90s to go “aero” with any of their platforms,
7-8 years after the Taurus debuted. That Dynasty was
crisp, but just too upright for the new decade. The
hunkered down low-nose high-tail bug had already
bitten the auto industry planet-wide by then.
I owned a short wheelbase 85 LeBaron in 06. Paid $200 with a blown head gasket. Car was otherwise mint. Didn’t fix it and sold it for the same $200. I’ll post pics when I get home. Still have some parts from it. Also on 01/24/06 I went to the police auction and, well this is what I wrote in the car diary ” I didn’t photo document it but there was also a 83 Dodge 600 that went for $70 that was a 5 speed! I would think that was kinda rare.”. Except I now know there was no 5 speed in 83. Still it was the stick though.
The literature including period brochures says the 1983 Dodge 600 ES had a standard 5-speed.
I have the vaguest recollection of seeing a Dodge Dynasty doing service as a UW-Superior Campus Security vehicle in the summer of 1992…struck me as being pretty mall-coppy. However, I now realize that what it really meant was that I was in a very safe neighborhood. No one gets a Dodge Dynasty cop car in places where the sh*t really goes down.
Inherited a Dynasty from my FIL, which by then had already eaten three transmissions under warranty, and lasted until it barfed up a head gasket in the Bronx. Would have abandoned it there except I had my two kids in the back seat following a Yankees game. Drove it home sloowwwwly and donated it to Kars for Kretins.
Kept the kids, though.
Two of my brother’s mid-20s friends bought identical black/black turbo Daytonas at the same time in 1984. It was difficult to see inside them, even in daylight. Neither lasted more than a couple of years. Driving through several inches of water cracked one engine block. I believe the other was crashed or flipped.
I’ve always thought the J-body Chryslers were some of the most handsome American cars of the 1980’s.
I really admire how Iacocca got so many derivatives off a platform – he did at Ford with Falcon and Fox (I assume although fired in 1978 he had input on Ford products through the 1980 or 1981 model year) and at Chrysler with K. Had Iacocca not been fired from Ford, he probably would have done more sedans on the Fox platform and there never would have been a Taurus.
Wow that complete production chart linked to at the end… it shows what a juggernaut the minivans really were and how they dominated Mopar sales during the K-car era, building by the year. Far from getting stale as many K variants did by the time they were discontinued, the last-year 1994 models were the best selling yet.
I’m also struck though at how Chrysler could rarely seem to use a name for more than one generation of cars starting in the mid-’70s. I counted at least 15 cars K-derived cars that had new names that were never used again. I can understand this if the car sells poorly or develops a bad reputation, but most of these did neither, and some (like the Dynasty) were outright hits. Instead of building upon that momentum, their replacements got new names, most of which also were short-lived. Meanwhile, Civics, Accords, Corollas, and Camrys are all on at least their tenth generation and are likely the best known models in their class.
In addition to the Reliant I owned as mentioned above, I had two Plymouth Voyagers and a Dodge Caravan, over twenty-one years, and I enjoyed them all. If the need were there, I would get a (Grand) Caravan again today (Chrysler Voyager in the U.S.).
Our only brushes with the folks on this list were a Dodge 600 that was a company car (remember those?) the likes of which made my Dad enthusiastically embrace the Pontiac 6000, a rental Dodge Dynasty that confirmed the decision to keep to the GM faith.
Later on an elderly member of the Country Club I valet-parked at during college years had once of those Executives or Limousines – which one has been lost to time, but that was a strange beast.
Tengo hasta la fecha un New Yorker Landau 1989 V6 3.0 tengo 23 años con él, no lo cambiaría, ya es un clásico y mi padre ya fallecido le encantaba, así como un Le barón 1978 previo a los modelos K, con motor V8 y carburador de 4 gargantas; ambos autos me traen buenos recuerdos y por eso los conservo, eran autos Mopar.
Gasoline is expensive here, so the provincial police used it.
Not a fan of the platform, but still an interesting read. As one who could perhaps be described as a “stats” freak, where is the spreadsheet referenced in the second to the last paragraph?
Click where it says “K Car and Derivative Production”. Takes you right to the spreadsheet.
Nothing says I’m important and cheap at the same time as the K car Limousine