Here’s a detail of a car seldom seen by most of us. You doubt? Read on! Marc’s Canadian-spec 1990 Dodge Spirit reminded me I found this car parked in front of a low-rent apartment house in the University District of Seattle about 15 years ago (back when there was still a thing such as low rent in Seattle).
The pic above is what first caught my eye as I drove up 11th Avenue Northeast at 30 mph. I was in the middle of a long thing for AA-bodies at the time, with an almost autistic eye for their details. The SPIRIT grille badge marks this out as a Mexican-market Chrysler Spirit. In the US and Canada, this grille badge would read DODGE. In Europe on the Saratoga it would read CHRYSLER.
I ducked round the block, pulled over, and had a look—fortunately I had my camera with me; at the time I had a 3-function cellular flip phone: calls, voicemails, and texts. The Washington licence plate was current; this car was there for reals. Easy enough to imagine how it got into the US: a foreign national drove it in—which is perfectly allowable, just as Americans can drive their cars into Canada and vice versa—and then sold it on, which is not.
The bigger question is how it managed to get registered in the States. In theory that should’ve been just about impossible, for the car is not manufacturer-certified as compliant with US safety or emissions regulations. There’s an exemption for cars over 21 years old for emissions and over 25 years old for safety, and those timeframes were the same in 2003 when I spotted this car, but it was only 11 years old, so that’s not it. The car’s VINs are all original and correct, so there were no monkeyshines as sometimes seen with late-production air-cooled VW Beetles brought in from Mexico (or late classic Minis and late Land Rovers from the UK), falsely declared and titled as 1967 models or suchlike. Perhaps when it was first registered in Washington, the state did not check VINs to see if they show up on the master list of US-market vehicles. Other states did check at that time (and most all of them do nowadays); if the VIN isn’t on the list, they require US Customs clearance papers before they’ll issue a title. CarFax claims to have 12 records on this car by VIN, but I’m not into paying the $40 just to read ’em; I could wish for a friend in used-car-shopping mode right about now.
Whatever which way it came to be there, there it was. The owner came out and asked why I was checking out his car. He seemed a little dubious when I explained it was unusual; said he didn’t know anything about its history and he’d just bought it as cheap transport from a local used-car lot. Still, he humoured me and even opened the hood to let me take pictures. The left rear quarter glass was busted: “I broke that myself so if someone breaks in they can just open the door instead of breaking glass”, he said. Erm…okeh, let’s look at some details:
This badge is bizarre from top to bottom. First off, what’s with the goofy typeface? And liter is an American spelling; elsewhere in English and French it’s litre, and in Spanish it’s litro. This from the same company who had long been badging American-market Cherokees and Wranglers “4.0 Litre”. This badge was never placed on non-Mexico cars, for the engine it refers to was never installed outside Mexico (…yet that Mexico-only fender badge doesn’t say Inyeccion Multipunto…). The Mexican first-year 1990 Chrysler Spirit came with a carbureted 2.5-litre engine that took leaded gasoline and had a tubular exhaust header rather than a cast-iron manifold. In 1991 Mexico decided exhaust emissions control would be a good idea and immediately ramped their standards up to near-US levels of stringency. That year, the Spirit’s standard engine became a multipoint-injected version of the 2.5, with a full American-type emissions control package. Meanwhile, the American, Canadian, and European market versions of the same car were saddled with a wheezy, lower-power, less-efficient and dirtier-running TBI version of the same engine. No fair!
Here’s the engine referred to by the badge, and there’s lots to see here. The intake manifold and fuel rail are not entirely unfamiliar; these were used on turbocharged versions of the K-derivative Chrysler FWD cars and on the US-market Flexible Fuel Spirits and Acclaims of ’93-’95, which also used the air cleaner arrangement shown in this photo. Look smack in the middle of the intake manifold: there’s an intake air temperature sensor that was not present on American turbo or FFV applications. This car’s air conditioner has had a surprisingly complete and expensive R134a changeover done, including the installation of a Sanden compressor and associated bracketry to replace the original Nippondenso item, and a new set of hoses. The radiator fan bears an English-language warning decal, which seems a little unusual, but then again the coolant bottle cap is also in English, as are the engine oil and transmission fluid dipsticks and the oil filler cap. Everyone understands English if you’ll just shout it louder, but the American-type radiator suggests a likely explanation here is a repair made with US parts.
The data plate on the radiator support panel shows us several things: this is clearly not a US VIN, because US and European AA-bodies were designated by an “A” in the 5th position, while Mexican units got a “1”. Let’s decode the VIN:
3: Mexican built
C: Chrysler branded
3: Passenger car
B: Driver and front passenger manual seat belts, no airbags
1: AA-body (in Mexico)
4: “High Line” (standard trim level)
6: 4-door sedan
W: 2.5-litre MPFI engine without balance shafts
0: [VIN check digit]
N: 1992 model year
T: built at Toluca assembly plant
323827: Vehicle serial number
On the tag immediately to the left of the VIN, we see the character M, which indicates this is a Mexican-market vehicle. (U = USA, C = Canada, B = International Export, M = Mexico).
Here’s the VECI (Vehicle Emission Control Information) label. It’s very similar in format to those affixed to US and Canadian vehicles. We can see several interesting things about the vehicle from this label:
• CATALYST: Same as everywhere else in the world except the Middle East, this vehicle is equipped with a catalytic converter.
• This vehicle complies with the standards in effect, applicable to 1992 model vehicles, [and this compliance is] certified at the altitude of Mexico City. Mexico City has unique pollution problems and is at very high altitude, so cars intended for sale there must be emissions certified at that altitude.
• Basic [ignition] timing and the air/fuel mixture have been preset at the factory. Refer to the service manual for adjustment procedures and all other information. Any adjustments not in the service manual are considered unauthorized. Caution: apply parking brake when servicing [vehicle]. This is just about a direct translation of the language found on a US, California, or Canada VECI.
• Spark plug type: Mopar M48, Champion N12Y. Gap: 0.035″ Now this is interesting. N12Y is the Champion number for a non-resistor spark plug without a copper core. Outside Mexico, the spec is RN12YC—same heat range and configuration, but with a resistor and copper core. Champion discontinued non-copper-core spark plugs in this line ages ago in Northern North America. I can only guess that they were still available in the more price-sensitive Mexican market. Non-resistor spark plugs would generate EMI and RFI and interfere with radio reception. I would say the same about operation of the engine control computer, but Chrysler did install EMI/RFI-shielded ECMs in some vehicles in some markets. Perhaps that’s what was done here, in recognition that people would install cheap non-resistor spark plugs.
• [Ignition] Timing: 6° BTDC, no other adjustments required. Outside Mexico, the nonturbo 2.5 engine’s basic timing spec is 12° BTDC. Clearly the W-code engine has different advance curves in the engine control computer.
Looking at the vacuum diagram, several more interesting things become apparent: this engine uses a barometric pressure read solenoid in conjunction with its MAP sensor. This was not implemented on North American vehicles except in turbocharged applications, and the US 1992 Factory Service Manual says “The baro read solenoid is tied into the MAP sensor vacuum hose. It switches the pressure supply to the MAP sensor between atmospheric pressure and manifold vacuum. The engine controller operates the solenoid. Atmospheric pressure is periodically supplied to the MAP sensor to measure barometric pressure. This occurs at closed throttle, once per throttle closure but no more often than once every 3 minutes and within a specified RPM band. Barometric information is used primarily for boost control.” My guess is that it is used on the W-code engine, at least in its Mexico City Altitude form, to enable more precise fuel-air mixture (and possibly ignition timing) compensation for changing altitude.
And no rollover valve is shown in the line between the [vapour] canister and the Tanque de combustible (fuel tank). Such a valve prevents fuel leakage in the event of a vehicle rollover, and is present on all US/Canada 1992 VECI labels. Whether it was left off the diagram or not installed on the car is unknown.
Earlier I mentioned the 1990 models; here’s one of them. Engine management was essentially a 4-cylinder version of the Electronic Lean Burn system introduced in the US and Australia in 1976. Obviously no catalytic converter was used. Isn’t it strange to see a mishmash of ’70s, ’80s, and ’90s technology and design like this? Here the spinning-fan warning is in Spanish, but the oil fill cap and dipstick are in English. Can’t tell about the coolant bottle cap, but the Mexican cars got heavy-duty radiators with metal tanks rather than the light-duty plastic ones we got:
That leaded-fuel ’90 engine might’ve been technologically primitive, but it must’ve been well calibrated, and that tube header must’ve helped it get this notably high fuel economy rating; the figure on this label translates to 26.85 miles per US gallon, combined city/highway, though I know nothing about Mexico’s fuel economy test protocol:
Next, here’s a peek underhood of a ’94 non-turbo Spirit. Same W-code engine (2.5 MPFI, no balance shafts), but with full US-type emission control. The rollover valve missing in the ’92’s diagram is shown here in the ’94 as valvula antivuelco (“Anti-roll valve”). This ’94 label calls for Champion RN12YC spark plugs, and doesn’t indicate certification for Mexico City altitude:
So why did Upper-North-American and European-delivery cars get the cruder, dirtier TBI version of this same engine? Probably because Chrysler never met a penny without pinching it, and in these markets they perceived no demand for better than that on base-engine toasters. In Mexico Chrysler had a somewhat more upmarket niche and were perceived as better engineered—for awhile in the ’90s their corporate slogan was Ingeniería Chrysler—Chrysler Engineering—and just compare the tone and premise of these two ads. Still, though, I’m not convinced of that, either; how does deleting the balance shafts and thus worsening noise, vibration, and harshness fit in with making a car to suit a perception of refined engineering? There’s no real power gain until engine speeds far higher than anything like a stock Spirit is ever going to see, so that’s not it. I understand there was a version of the 2.5 with multipoint injection and balance shafts; perhaps that one went in the flossier LeBaron? Donno.
As you might see in the Mexican ad, late-production Chrysler Spirits also got a grille never used up North or abroad: it’s the same as the ’93-’95 US/Canada Dodge Spirit grille, but chromed. In this pic the original is installed on the car, while a Taiwanese aftermarket replacement sits atop:
So there we are: three cars that look almost just like their run-of-the-mill American counterparts, but with more and more differences the deeper we dig. Mexico (still) doesn’t have any statutory vehicle safety standards, so some cars there are built with more-or-less American safety equipment, some with more-or-less European, some with a mix, and some with ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ .
Ask, and ye shall receive! This…is an interesting Carfax. No wonder the VIN was never checked – it had already been registered in Texas and Ohio by the time WSDOT got ahold of it.
Date: Mileage: Source: Comments:
06/10/1995 16,913 Texas
Motor Vehicle Dept.
San Antonio, TX
Title #00022200047128713 Title or registration issued
03/01/2001 Texas
Motor Vehicle Dept.
San Antonio, TX
Title #00022200047128713 Registration issued or renewed
Passed safety inspection
06/01/2001 Texas
Motor Vehicle Dept.
San Antonio, TX
Title #00022200047128713 Registration issued or renewed
Passed safety inspection
06/02/2001 31,895 Ohio
Motor Vehicle Dept.
Columbus, OH
Title #2504737917 Title issued or updated
04/09/2002 Washington
Motor Vehicle Dept.
Silverdale, WA
Title #0209609003 Title or registration issued
New owner reported
05/10/2002 Washington
Motor Vehicle Dept.
Seattle, WA
Title #0209609003 Title or registration issued
New owner reported
04/03/2004 137,774 Washington
Inspection Station
Seattle, WA Failed emissions inspection
04/27/2004 139,675 Washington
Inspection Station
Seattle, WA Passed emissions inspection
07/14/2004 Washington
Motor Vehicle Dept.
Kenmore, WA
Title #0213017605 Title or registration issued
New owner reported
03/30/2006 170,638 Washington
Inspection Station
Seattle, WA Passed emissions inspection
06/09/2008 Washington
Inspection Station
Seattle, WA Passed emissions inspection
06/11/2008 Washington
Motor Vehicle Dept.
Everett, WA
Title #0419622314 Title issued or updated
New owner reported
Exempt from odometer reporting
Vehicle color noted as Beige
Am I correct in assuming this car is registered as a Dodge, since there were no “Chrysler Spirits” in the US?
When I check the VIN, it comes up simply as a “1992 Chrysler” — no model name given at all. I assume that someone had connections at their local DMV or tag agency in Texas to register it first, and from then on it was smooth sailing.
1900 miles in the slightly more than 3 weeks between the emissions failure and the successful retest. Someone was definitely using this car.
Thanks kindly! Wow, the car’s been around. Wonder what became of it in the ten years since the last entry—I would think it would have been marked as salvaged or crushed or whatever, but maybe not.
Particularly interesting that Texas was its first US registration; that state has long been relatively strict and stringent about such matters. I guess the volume of Mexican vehicles in Texas is such that even if only a small percentage successfully get (or got) registered, it would still be a fair number of cars. That said, I spent a fair amount of time in Tucson in the ’99-’15 timeframe, and while I saw a significant number of Mexican cars with Mexican plates, I don’t recall seeing any US-plated ones.
Very cool find and interesting backstory! I love automotive mysteries!
Presumably the owner must have taken this car to a mechanic for service at some point in its life. I wonder if any mechanics who worked on it noticed that it was different from all the other Spirits/Acclaims they’ve worked on, and what they thought of it.
That is interesting to think about, isn’t it. The US-type radiator, fan, and coolant tank suggest those parts were swapped on, I’m guessing as used parts, perhaps after one or another of them broke and “Hey wait a minute, this isn’t the same and won’t fit”, but the assembly of all three parts went in without a problem.
The rest of the underhood hardware isn’t unknown, it’s just not found in this application in this country. A US scan tool has no problem talking to the Mexican ECMs, so diagnosis wouldn’t be difficult, but I’m betting it’s something of a recurrent nuisance when trying to buy replacement air filters.
For me, the hilarity of this post is Daniel’s reaction of:
“OMGWTFBBQ”
vs. the owner’s response of:
“Meh. I needed a cheap car, I bought a cheap car.”
A frequent occurrence amongst curbivores. I could also mention the time when I was 10 years old and saw an utterly perfect ’77 Caprice, well loaded, dark metallic green with tan interior, and had to have my pic taken sitting on the front bumper.
But yeah, this instance is extra-funny because reasons.
What headlamp is that? It looks rather US/Canada. Does Mexico use US/Canada rules or UN/ECE?
US/Canada equipment safety equipment throughout (except where de-contented, as in the case of the no-airbag steering wheel centre cover). The BUX cars (Built-Up eXport, Euro-spec) were built only in the States, but the Mexican plant built these for all North America, so the Us/Can parts, aside from being cheaper, were already in the house.
Your other question’s answered in the last graf of the post. 😉
Euro-market Chrysler Saratogas used ECE headlamps with glass lenses! Had I known of the existence of the Saratoga back in the day I may have been more willing to buy a LeBaron (fancier version of the Spirit) and found some way to import a set of Euro-spec headlights. Some of Mopar’s plastic-lens headlamps of the ’90s were atrocious.
You could’ve bought the Spirit; in any market all the AA-bodies use the same headlamp. Having driven many miles and many kilometres at night behind both types of AA-body headlamp (and, um, being deeply professionally involved with the technical, regulatory, and performance aspects of vehicular lighting) I can tell you one wasn’t better than the other—the inadequacies and shortcomings were different, is all. They were both low-bid, bottom-of-the-barrel junk. A glass lens, an H4 light source, and an ECE “E-code” mark does not make a headlamp necessarily good, or necessarily better than a US headlamp, though that is a common mythunderstanding. That said, subjectively I found the Saratoga (ECE) headlamps’ inadequacies somewhat less irritating despite their objectively much shorter seeing distance on low beam.
Well that’s a bummer – I’ve never seen the Saratoga ECE lamp’s beam pattern, but indifferent design will make for bad lighting no matter what set of regs are being followed. Still, surely glass > plastic, right? I’ve never seen a glass lens get all foggy and yellow.
I guess living in the USA, most of my experience with ECE lamps was from older cars that were originally fitted with sealed beams that I immediately replaced with Cibie or Hella H1 or H4 replaceable bulb units that were vastly superior to the American lights of the day. That’s probably the source of the “ECE is better” misunderstanding (or “mythunderstanding” as you put it; I like that word). I do however prefer the sharp low-beam cutoff typical of ECE lights, especially in foggy weather – although some newer DOT-spec headlamps seem to have it too).
True ’nuff, but there’s glass and then there’s glass. If the maker will spend for strong glass, then yeah, glass is better in the long run. If (as in the case of the junk Chrysler bought from Wagner for the Saratoga) it’s thin, unhardened glass, then it’s very easily cracked, holed, or broken.
I assumed for a long time that the ECE headlamps were superior to the crappy American ones. That came from my experience of fitting Hella 165mm H4 and H1 capsules in my Chevrolet Celebrity. They greatly improved the driving experience at night on rural roads in Texas. And from driving our personal import, 1977 Mercedes-Benz 450SEL (that we brought to the US in 1982).
After I moved back to Germany in 2006, I started to read auto motor und sport magazines once again. The ams team does the annual headlamp comparison tests. That was eye-opening for me as they pointed out many things that could make or break headlamp performance. I also started to drive in Germany more often and observed more closely how the ECE headlamps perform in the real world, especially on the unlit rural roads. So I have to say, Daniel’s been right all along.
I never forget the first time I drove the second generation Dodge Intreprid with Valeo headlamps at night. One of the best American headlamps I’ve driven. On the flip side, the car hire agency picked out Ford Tempo with composite headlamps for me. One of the shittiest headlamps ever! Not even high beam could help me on the dark country road in Texas.
The bottom line: how much the manufacturers are willing to spend on the headlamp technology determines the quality and performance regardless of whether it’s US or ECE. Many European manufacturers offer two or three different headlamp packages at different prices like this Mercedes-Benz C160 in Germany.
You’re spot-on, Oliver. Good headlamps are better than bad ones, regardless of which standard they’re built to, and both standards have way too much room for bad ones. A sharp low-beam cutoff is fun to look at on the garage wall, but the amount and distribution of light under the cutoff is much more crucial than how sharp the cutoff is (or isn’t).
In my collection I have a 7″ round halogen sealed beam, built to comport with the American beam philosophy, that is a phenomenally good headlamp I would happily drive with. Excellent performance and focus, well-controlled glare, no upward stray light, etc. It was made in Japan by Koito, and used in markets that didn’t explicitly require US- or European-spec headlamps. I say it was “built to comport with the American beam philosophy” rather than “built to conform with US regs” because while the 55w low beam filament is okeh, it has a 70w high beam filament, 5w too much for the US regs.
More has now been written about the Chrysler/Dodge Spirit than anywhere else, including in its marketing materials.
I hope y’don’t think I’m done…!
I was in the middle of a long thing for AA-bodies at the time, with an almost autistic eye for their details.
A frank and honest self assessment. I’m not so sure about the almost though. 🙂
The post was delayed on account of the argument I had with myself, over whether to include or omit the “almost”.
Ca. 1997 I used to see a Hyundai Pony, the only one I’ve ever seen, presumably brought in from Canada, parked near North Seattle Community College. I didn’t own a camera of any kind at the time.
That poor car, for the first nine years it gets used to drive maybe 4000 miles per year but includes a border crossing and then heads sort of northeast but then all of a sudden in 2001 – BAM! it heads to the PNW and all of a sudden is running over 35,000 miles per year! The car must have been thinking “What the…?” Or maybe just “Que?”
That odometer’s in kilometres.
I’ve seen several obviously former Mexican cars registered hereabouts. I suspect it’s very common in Texas.
On my daily commute I often see what I’m almost certain is a Mexican VW Beetle — the telltale sign being the front turn signals on the bumper. But I guess that would be allowed if it was from the 1980s or early 1990s.
They joys of deciphering a used import, you’d have a field day with some examples here, Ive had a couple a Mitsubishi and a Nissan, the whole lot are in Japanese, fuses build plate info everything makes it difficult, plus they differ quite a lot from NZ new cars, and of course the Mitsi broke down dead as a door nail in my driveway, I fixed it though substituting parts from a NZ market car thus bypassing all the clever sensor equipment on Japanese models which I was told put a lot of them into scrap yards, the right parts are not obtainable, it was still in use four years after I sold it, the Nissan never went wrong fortunately,
Hercules Poirot couldn’t have done it better than you, Daniel! I learnt a great deal about the AA-Body, especially the Mexican version, now. I have been asking myself whether I should look for the second-hand Chrysler Saratago to buy.
Perhaps not.
A couple years ago there was an absolutely sanitary ’93 Saratoga for sale out of France for €4k. 3.0 Mitsu V6, A604 4-speed automatic. I think it had about 75,000 km on it. Leather interior and the full complement of European equipment: rear seats with integral head restraints, height-adjustable front seatbelts (Chrysler bought the height adjusting hardware from VW-Audi), electric headlamp levelling, the good seatbelts, the good mirrors, the good glass, etc. I wanted it, but the logistics and cost of getting it to North America made it impractical.
Gee, I am itchy all over…tempting, tempting, tempting.
That big chromed grille made the Spirit looking like a mini Dodge Dakota.
Surely does. I think it makes the car look kinda too nose-heavy, but then I don’t like the painted US version of that grille, either.
I had no idea of the variations in these from country to country. As said above, this one would certainly leave some poor mechanic scratching his head.
This was a fascinating trip, thanks.
antivuelco means anti-rollover, not anti-upset.
Thank you for the correction—I don’t speak Spanish, and at the time I did the research on this what I’d found I could only rely on a distant ancestor of today’s Google Translate. Systranbox, it was called.
No worries :). I do speak Español.
Google translator may have left you on a similar situation, so buyer beware there.
AA cars outlasted crosstown competition Tempo and Corsica in the ‘beater market’. Preferred renting Spirits* over the T and C too, 🙂
They are about as tough as Mopar Minivans. Just now, pre-1996 cars have succumbed to rust and wear in Great Lakes Region.
*Should have just called Plymouth’s AA car the Spirit too, like Neon.
This now has me cruising around the web looking for the Mexican market Chevy/Olds/Buick mash-up A-Bodys.
Ahh the Spirit. Never owned one, but had an unusually memorable rental once. Evidently my late wife intended this photo for one of our sons. Caption on the back reads:
“Leaving wedding chapel. Dad & I just back from Korea. We didn’t own a car, so rented one from Thrifty. Visited your uncle in LA, then drove up to Reno and got married. Overnight honeymoon in Carson City with stop in Virginia City for a picnic in 6-mile cyn. Then on to Treasure Island. I lived in the BOQ before you were born while Dad attended language school in Monterrey.”
I was commuting to & from Monterrey every weekend on a motorcycle I bought. My wife liked the Spirit and wanted to buy one. After the decrepit Saehan Maepsy we had in Korea, I think she would have liked anything reliable.
I really wanted a convertible in California though and convinced her we should buy a ’63 Valiant convertible while we built up enough savings to avoid an auto loan. The Valiant was reliable and I loved it. My wife didn’t share that love. She wanted power steering and AC, both of which the Valiant lacked.
In retrospect, I should have gotten the Spirit. She didn’t try to influence my choice of motorcycle. I shouldn’t have pushed what car she would drive. Not buying that Spirit directly led to owning the most unreliable piece of junk I ever owned.
It wasn’t the Valiant though. I was deployed to Africa after language school. On her own and hating the Valiant, my wife traded it for a ’75 Fiat 124 Spyder. It also lacked power steering, but did have AC.
That AC may have been about the only thing that worked consistently on that car. It made our Saehan look like a well built automobile – a feat I would have thought impossible when we got rid of that wretched thing.
For the rest of our time together, I never repeated the mistake of trying to persuade her she should like the same cars I liked.
I want a Dodge Spirit in emerald green metallic with a red interior finished with a set of gold anodized plastic wheel covers and ventiports. But since there are no more Spirits around anymore, I’ll have to keep driving my custom Panther Pink Chrysler PT Cruiser with its crumbling Plumb Crazy purple interior and Go Mango orange rims. It’s a sight to behold!