(first posted 8/21/2015) In the Chrysler Corporation’s lengthy history of badge engineering, a tradition that appears to be drawing to an end, usually you could count on the clone bearing the Chrysler nameplate to be the fussier-looking variant. Particularly during the 1980s, “Chrysler” often meant wire wheel covers, a vinyl roof, perhaps an upright grille and a smattering of chrome. The 1983 Dodge 600 bucked the trend by looking messier than its Chrysler E-Class counterpart, but the 600 endured while the E-Class was quietly discontinued after just two years.
Both the E-Class and 600 eschewed traditional Mopar nameplates for blatantly European ones. While the E-Class favored plush luxury, albeit not quite as plush as the related New Yorker, the 600 wore two hats: conventional family sedan and quasi-sport sedan. Plymouth missed out initially on a version of this E-Body relative of the K-Car, except in Canada where the Plymouth Caravelle debuted in 1983.
The range-topping 600 ES was Dodge’s attempt at a cut-price Euro-fighter, a Mopar alternative to the Pontiac 6000STE offering uprated suspension and instrumentation as well as bucket seats and a console. You could option it with a baulky five-speed manual transmission, although initially the only engine was the same 2.2 four featured in the Aries. Journalists compared it to the 6000 and various European and Japanese rivals and found it lacking in both mechanical refinement and build quality but it was not entirely without charm, boasting competent handling and steering. It still lived in the shadow of the critical darling 6000 STE. Sales of the ES generally accounted for 30-50% of the 600’s already mediocre volumes.
Those seeking more performance would have been pleased to find a turbo join the 600 range for 1984, and it was available in either plain, six-seater base trim or in the fancier ES.
With the arrival of the Lancer hatchback, the 600 was revised and repositioned. It lost the Mirada-inspired grille and fender vents, and adopted simpler lighting assemblies. Effectively, it was a Plymouth Caravelle with a crosshair grille. The European-style ES was dropped, leaving a choice of base or SE sedans. You could still get a turbo four, but the 600 was now plain old family transport.
Never a strong seller, the 600’s sales volumes dwindled over its 1983-88 run despite the even older Aries selling strong right up until its demise in 1989. For much of the 1980s, Dodge simply lacked a strong-selling mid-size sedan. The Lancer experienced an even harder fall from grace.
By 1988, Dodge had launched the even more conservative Dynasty with an upright roofline and an available V6. Finally, for 1989 the boxy Spirit arrived and the 600 was gone. Despite the Taurus’ revolutionary styling indicating a change in consumer tastes, the dowdy Dynasty and Spirit sold considerably better than their forebears. The 600 would become one of the forgotten Mopars of the 1980s.
Related Reading:
Car & Driver’s July 1983 “Escape from Baja” comparison test, one of my favorite comparison tests, which pitted the Dodge 600ES against the Pontiac 6000 STE, Audi 5000S, Datsun Maxima, VW Quantum, Saab 900 Turbo, Volvo 760GLE and Toyota Cressida
It looks like Iacocca and Co. were flaunting their Ford influence on these: The Fairmont-cribbed roofline, the Mark V vents cut in the side, the ads shamelessly comparing the car to a Mercedes…
I’ve never totally understood why the Dodge 600 (and its E Class/Caravelle twins) sold poorly and is so difficult to find today. Was it that they didn’t offer enough improvements over the Aries/Reliant to justify their existence? Or was it that their “European” names had zero equity or memorability, and people forgot that these cars existed because there was nothing to call them? Sounds like Acura in a nutshell…
It wasn’t just the 600 that sold poorly, relative to its Chrysler and Plymouth K-car twins. The Aries and 400 seemed to come up far short of the other division’s K-car sales, as well. I get the feeling that consumers were either going to buy the cheapest possible K-car they could get (which meant a Reliant) or they were going to go the opposite end, and get the most loaded K-car possible, which would be one of the disguised Chryslers. IOW, the Dodge K-cars were neither fancy, nor cheap enough, to sell.
Or maybe it was just that no one really believed any of the sporty hype that Chrysler marketing was putting forth for a Dodge K-car. A cheapo Plymouth or tarted-up Chrysler were much easier to promote.
I like your link to the Car and Driver test. Read it a while back, and if I recall, didn’t they Pontiac 6000 die and they just left it on the side of the road in Mexico?
That was back when C/D was fun to read. Now? Not so much.
Agree.
No, it was the Maxima that died. They drove it through several feet of water and fried the PCM. They also damaged the 600ES.
I really don`t have too much to say about these cars, but it is good to see snippets of Brooklyn, NY in the photos.
The most LOLworthy aspect of this car is the 600 SE nameplate on the trunk lid in the exact underlined font used by Mercedes
Would that Mercedes-Benz sold a 600 SE. Oh wait, There was the 300 SEL 6.3. I drove one once that belonged to a friend. The car was 35 years old but impressed the he!! out me. Then again it cost almost the same as two Cadillacs when new.
Poor American manufacturers: When they did decide to follow the European paradigm they got the size right and packaging, to a certain extent, but they really dropped the ball in terms of performance and quality – two things the Big Three was renown for just a decade or two earlier.
These cars really should have sold better. In many ways, they were what the original K-cars should have been; a little bit longer, less boxy looking and with smoother styling. I particularly like the post-1984 models that took on the Caravelle look. Pitching these against the 6000STE as a performance model was a mistake with that wheezing 2.2 4-banger.
Which still leaves the question: what was it about these cars that the buying public just didn’t like?
Maybe we need to look at the competition, since that’s obviously what buyers did. 🙂
I think there was more than a little braggadocio going on with Lee and Chrysler at the time. And maybe a little butt hurt (after being fired from Ford) as the kids say now, too. We have a saying in the States, “Go big or go home”, this may have been Lido’s “go big…” moment.
I was never a fan of the blatant copying of Mercedes motifs back then, I thought the cars were as well engineered (but not necessarily assembled) as any other FWD cars of the time. When I came up with the term “Cockroach of the Road” for the GM X-bodies, it was because they were first. Had the K cars launched first, they could have been the archtypical CoTR instead. Except, they actually held up better (in most cases) than the X cars, doing their jobs until the level of neglect dictated their date with the crusher.
Another of the advertising themes during this time was “The competition is good, so we had to be better”. Again, the cars may have been marginally better, but that kind of American “know how” and “can do” appealed (still appeals) to a certain demographic over here. I really believe it helped to sell cars to these people.
One more thought: Unlike today, where we have the same sausage, different lengths philosophy of car making/selling, I think Lido & Co., were trying anything/everything to get people to come into the showroom. Using the metaphor of a pizza parlor, who would go to one that only sold four sizes only of a pepperoni pizza? When I look back now, the amount of body styles and configurations coming out of Chrysler in the 1980’s was really quite impressive, especially for a company that had been on the ropes a few years before.
In the end, they did garner some new buyers (I was one of them), but quality glitches and the fact that they were recycling the K car repeatedly put people off. Even the AA cars (1989+ Spirit and LeBaron), while probably the pinnacle of K development (WRT to durability) sold OK, but folks were ready for bigger, flashier cars. Chrysler couldn’t do that with the K’s, but the LHs were waiting in the wings.
On these and the convertibles i find the Mirada-inspired front clip strangely attractive. Supposedly there was acoupe…never seen one though.
Recently i came across a gold ’85 turbo ragtop. A 3 owner car it was in great shape. The blackout trim and ‘pizza wheels’ meant that it in no way said ‘chick car’ despite being a small droptop. I wanted it as a summer cruiser to flip in a year or so. But his firmness on price ‘sentimental value’ left no meat on the bone…
The coupe was originally called the 400 and was a twin to the K-car Chrysler LeBaron (or looked at another way, a fancier Dodge Aries). I did see a few of these back in the day, but buyers far preferred a Chrysler badge, much as they did earlier with the Cordoba over the less prestigious Dodge Charger/Magnum/Mirada alternatives. Later coupes were badged 600 rather than 400 because, well, it must be worth more if the number is higher. It was still a non-stretched K-car without the sedan’s extended wheelbase or higher trunk lid.
I may be in the minority, but I prefer the styling of the 600 to the Chrysler E-Class. While arguably busy, the Mirada inspired front was distinct and clearly conveyed Dodge’s “face” to the world. The E-Class, with its LeBaron nose, looked exactly like the cars positioned above it (New Yorker) and below it in the line-up.
As others have noted here, I don’t think the names on these cars did them any favors either. The names were utterly forgettable, and the cars were far from European, so it was probably hard to get people excited over them, versus just going for the understandable, basic transportation offered by the Aries/Reliant.
The 600 shared its nose with the 400, which was Dodge’s short-wheelbase Lebaron K-car twin. The problem with the Dodge’s nose is that they just didn’t have the assembly precision or quality of materials to pull off the horizontal bars. They looked misaligned or damaged when they arrived in dealerships.
I actually remember hating this car when I was a pre-teen and noticing cars on the street.
Something about that c pillar kick.
The K-Car and K-Car based offshoots were nothing more but boring generic cookie cutter cars that I would never even considered even if one is given to me for free. Between these, the Pontiac A6000 (Dodge 600’s chief competitor) and the Mercury Sable, I would rather get the Mercury Sable.
I would too, but remember the Sable arrived a few years after the 600.
I had a friend who was a Chrysler/Plymouth salesman at the time, and I remember him telling me how impossible it was to sell a Plymouth Caravelle after the Taurus dropped. Customers would look at this antiquated-looking thing in his showroom, laugh, and just walk away.
I’ve never found this vehicle very attractive. Its body is attractive, but the front end is hideous!
Some pristine Dodge 600s are still seen in Michigan running around with municipal plates, in 2015.
Lee Iaccoca was willing to try just about anything to get people to forget the “Bad Old Days” of the 1970s Chrysler Corporation wasn’t he?
Could you get the SE with turbo AND 5 speed manual? That would be interesting but only if it had an aftermarket transmission parts fitted to improve the throws and shift quality.
Only in 1984 could you get the 5-speed and the 2.2 turbo. Once they switched to the luxury themed SE in ’85, it was automatic only.
Had a Reliant wagon with the 5-speed, it was indeed baulky. There is no “feel” whatsoever, it’s like the shifter isn’t even connected to anything. That ad claiming driving superiority over the Benz is hilarious too. They didn’t understand that bullshit ads like that actually hurt what little credibility they might have had? And spoken in such an authoritative and confident tone, too
Also they were comparing it to a 300D. The non-turbo W123 diesels were *notoriously* slow and far, far from a sports sedan. So saying that your “sports sedan” can offer a better driving experience than, essentially, a diesel taxi (though a very well assembled and appointed one) isn’t exactly a herculean achievement!
Sports is about cornering the ability to carry speed through tight turns, 0-60 is superfluous if you have no reason to slow for turns.
Plus the fact that a 0-60 sprint must have been highly illegal in the days that the national speed limit was 55.
“Advanced front wheel drive performance” Now there’s an oxymoron…
Apparently you’ve never driven an Acura Integra GS-R or RSX or any Audi product.
I think the lack of sales for the 600 and the E-Class is attributable to lack of a V6 and as with the Lancer discussed earlier…too many products from these 2 brands clustered around 1 price point.
The 600 looks like a Ford LTD (the smaller one) but Ford wasn’t foolish enough to try to sell that with a 4 cylinder.
Actually Ford did sell Fox LTDs with the 2.3 Lima.
I recall Dodge using FWD as a selling point for the Omni-based Charger 2.2, unlike the Camaro and Mustang that still used “old-technology rear wheel drive”. How times have changed…..
But there was a widespread perception in the early ’80s that FWD was modern and RWD was becoming obsolete. Certainly, if your car had FWD at the time you promoted that fact (sometimes on a little plaque on the car itself), and if it was RWD you just didn’t mention the drivetrain.
You need a five minute in town sprint in a Peugeot you’d never bother with RWD again.
Count me among those who like the Mirada-inspired nose better than the equivalent E-class, though I could have done without the fender vents. As I’ve mentioned before, I actually quite like the proportions of these cars. I’ve never driven one, and have only ridden in one of the convertibles, so I can’t say a lot there. But in the looks department, they work for me. Seems much more appealing than the stubby 400 or the staid Aries, or even the overly severe Dynasty/
Chryslers badge engineering makes Rootes Group look like absolute amateurs or is that where they got the idea its certainly the same business plan, take one reasonably well made car and trim it in a multitude of ways to fit every pocket with slight powertrain variations to suit.
If I ever bought one of these (I can’t foresee that ever happening, but ya never know) the first thing I’d do is file down the drip rails to end at the rear quarter window. Crude ‘shop:
Second quick PhotoShop. The extended drip rail (likely concealing the roof join line) always bugged me on these.
Isn’t it ironic how the Chrysler version of this car was named E-Class way before Damiler had any interest in Chrysler. The name E-Class didn’t work for Chrysler, but it surely works for Mercedes Benz !!!
I always thought the E-Class and the 600 looked way better then the New Yorker Turbo model with the formal vinyl roof cap, chrome roof band, and opera lamps. That model as just way over the top.
A friend of mine who I’ve known for over 45 years now has had many bad bad cars. He’s had some good ones, too, but most of the early ones were bad. And his ’85 600 was the worst, nothing else comes close. It was blue, mid level trimmed, and I can’t remember what engine it had, but it never went long without being behind a towtruck. A couple of times, it actually died within sight of the dealership right after spending a couple of days there getting “fixed”. It was always electrical issues. After a couple of years of torturing him, it decided to strand him a mile from the dealership, and as he walked there, he decided, no matter what, it wasn’t coming home with him. And it was gone. Traded that day for a Caravan, one of his best vehicles, no doubt. I always wondered what happened to the 600, and who was the poor bastard who bought it?
Funny thing, my Dad bought a new Dodge 600 in 1986, and it replaced the worst car he ever owned (a 1984 Pontiac Sunbird). The Sunbird was handed down to my youngest sister to take to college, after the engine had been replaced once (I think under warranty) despite dealer maintenance per schedule. It lost its timing belt with less than 1000 miles on it (new car basically) and had other problems like leaky power steering and crispy plastic switchgear which eventually broke. The replacement engine threw a rod, at less than 80k total miles, we junked it as a 5 year old car.
The 600 was OK, but my Dad didn’t have it long before it was totalled in an accident my middle sister had when she borrowed it while her car was being worked on (coincidentally my Dad was in the hospital when that happened) after 3 years of ownership. Funny thing I remember about it that it was the first car in my family that had the high mounted stoplight and also 1986 was the last year you could claim interest from car payments on your federal tax deductions.
His was blue, too (light blue). Replaced with a 1989 Mercury Sable, first of 3 he was eventually to own (followed by 2 Impalas in a row, we still have the last one).
My brother in law had one of these back in the day, it looked exactly like the car in the first ad at the top of the post. I remember driving it (briefly) and being underwhelmed with the acceleration of the atmo 2.2. At the time, I had an Olds 442, so most anything new seemed rather weak…
I actually rather liked the car, it had all of the room of the contemporary FWD K bodies, but we (collectively) were still impressed with the amount of room you could get with the FWD layout. But I don’t remember much more than that, as he only had the car a few years, as my nephews and niece were growing kids back then and a five passenger four door sedan wasn’t going to work for very long.
It truly, truly was the definition of a shitty car.
My impression of Chrysler corp at that time was that they had a huge bin full of car parts. They would slap the parts together in a random fashion, drop in a 2.2, call it a new model then shamelessly advertise it as better than a Mercedes or BMW in some ridiculous category.
I had bought a new 1980 Dodge Omni 024 which was a pretty decent car but by 1982/83 when Chrysler’s flogging of the K platform went into full swing, I was embarrassed to be driving a Dodge. Chrysler’s advertising was blatantly false and insulted the intelligence of their potential customer. It turned me off and probably a lot of other people. Isuzu went the false advertising route with spokesman Joe Isuzu. With Isuzu, you knew they were jerking your chain and found it funny, and it sold cars.
Good article! always liked these larger K-car sedans with the extra C-pillar windows. Here is a photo of the 1983-1985 Plymouth Caravelle sedan with its own unique grill.
Yep, put a horizontal slat grill on it, you got a Dodge, put a vertical slat grill, you got a Chrysler, put an egg rate grill, you got a Plymouth. I suppose if Desoto had been stil around in the 80s they would have slapped some sort of diagonal grill on it and called it an Adventurer.
I always found these cars just a fat looking K-car. I never saw these as a threat to Pontiac in any way. Or Chevy either (Lumina or Celebrity, not sure which was the market competitor).
Piece of garbage. We rented a 1983 600 six-passenger two-door in Los Angeles. On an expressway north of San Diego, our youngest child needed to go. So, first I opened the driver’s door to exit and then open the passenger door to retrieve him. The door to my side was hardly opened when a tractor-trailer whizzed by in the right lane. The airflow around the rig wrenched the door FORWARD and displaced it from its hinges.
The two things I recall about the 600 were the appropriation of the Mercedes font for the model designation, complete with chrome bar underneath it, and the voice warning system for various maladies or reminders. Unlike the better-remembered system Nissan used at the time, Chrysler went with a male voice warning you a door was a jar. In any case, this car badly needed a smooth 6 cylinder engine to compete against the Taurus or even the GM A bodies.
When I think of Dodge, I do not think of the 600 or anything like that. When you told someone one got a Dodge, they would imagine a sporty car – not a 600. Dodge is where you went for cheap sporty cars, not cheap luxury cars.
Throughout the 1970s we see Dodge attempting to hawk a personal luxury car – Charger SE, Magnum, Mirada, all unsuccessfully. The full size cars were also ignored – Monaco, Polara, Royal Monaco, St. Regis. If you wanted luxury from Chrysler – you got a Chrysler. If you wanted cheap – you got a Plymouth. If you wanted sporty – you got a Dodge.
Yet Dodge insisted in trying to sell luxury. Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, we see Dodge offering luxury versions of their cars without success. No one went to Pontiac for luxury, and no one went to Dodge either.
When did Dodge ever offer a successful luxury car? The best it did was during the 1960s with the Monaco, but even the Monaco didn’t survive and was a perennial also-ran to Caprice, LTD, Bonneville and only outsold Ambassador DLO.