(first posted 4/5/2016) How long since you saw a first-generation K-car? In one piece, I mean? The facelifted ’85-’89 versions are still seen every odd and then, but the ’81-’84 units seldom are. And that’s kind of a pity. That’s the car aptly depicted making this happen:
…not long after this happened:
It’s fish-in-a-barrel easy to mock the K-cars; just ask Tim. But they really were quite a sensation when they came out, protuberant 5-mph bumpers and all. Advertisements played on themes of jubilant-throngs-fill-streets (and served as what might diplomatically be called “inspiration” for Reagan’s 1984 morning-in-America schtick), and some of the trade-in fodder shown is risible, but the excitement was quite real; the last new small family car range so successfully, so transformatively, so seismically launched by Chrysler—or, arguably, any other American automaker—had been the 1960 Valiant.
For better and worse, the K-car became an enduring North American cultural touchstone, right up (and down) there with the likes of Kraft Macaroni and Cheese. Some years after the K-cars per se had given way to their various begats, Barenaked Ladies (from Canada, where we call it Kraft Dinner and the first few years of K-cars were configured to run on leaded gasoline) lovingingly namechecked them. But they were what they were: inexpensive, basic, one might justifiably say disposable cars. Pretty good ones, especially compared to their competition from GM and Ford, but disposable cars nonetheless. And that’s what happened to most of them: used up and thrown away.
Not this particular one, though (ad archived here). It’s got a bare 23 kilomiles on it, still on its original little-old-lady-and-only-to-church-on-Sunday story, and its near-new condition is all the more astounding given the car’s location in the suburbs of Detroit. Yes, it’s for sale with an ask price of $7500; I repeat myself, when’s the last time you saw one? Check out the 55-in-a-box speedometer.
There’s a devoted purity to the design of the ’81-’84 K-cars. They are so unapologetically upright, so resolutely rectilinear as to make a Volvo 240 look swoopy; perhaps the only curve to be found on a gen-1 K-car is…erm…well, the muffler is round. If there’s a purer expression of the origami school of car design, I can’t think of it at the moment. From any and every angle, it’s all straight lines and corners. It’s boxes on wheels, but designed thoughtfully enough that it’s tidy, taut boxes on wheels—a justifiably extreme reaction to the Brougham brigade’s bloatmobiles.
The ’85 facelift spoiled the effect by randomly melting parts of the bar of soap. Corners were softened and the grilles and headlamps were fused into awkward rounded-trapezoid shapes that really didn’t belong on the still-square rest of the body; maybe that’s why Tim sold his.
But none of that sadness applies to this plucky ’83. It’s powered—at sea level; if you’re at high altitude we’ll just say it’s equipped—not with the regrettable 2.6-litre “silent [Not! -ed] shaft” Mitsubishi Astron engine, but with Chrysler’s carbureted 94-horsepower, 117 lb·ft 2.2-litre engine—penned by the same hand as the everlasting Slant-6—next to the transaxle iteration of the efficient Chrysler Torqueflite automatic.
Hey, what’s that aluminum thing with the vacuum pot on it, to the right of the cam cover, below the air intake flex duct? That’s the emission control air pump, which, yes, was belt-driven off the back of the camshaft because the alternator, A/C compressor, and power steering pump hogged up all the room and belt lines at the other end of the engine. The decal on the air cleaner reads “ELECTRONIC IGNITION SYSTEM”, which in 1983 was celebrating its 10th anniversary as an item of standard equipment on Chrysler Corporation vehicles. Look closer and you see the owner has installed an oil filter with an early-1960s Mopar label on it. Not quite era-correct, but still a nice touch:
Lookit there, the hood release spring and the A/C lines and the dipstick handles and strut mount bearings still have all the factory paint. The underhood decals are all intact. The original hose clamps are in place. Everything plated is still bright and shiny. We can see a dab of yellow paint on the transaxle, probably an assembly line inspection mark. This engine is clean enough to eat off or cook on.
The dashboard doesn’t know what cracks are—though it appears to be familiar with moulded-in simulated stitchwork—and this car was built before the shift from brushed chrome to black. The radio, which to me looks to be an AM unit, nevertheless bears one of the vacuum fluorescent displays Chrysler’s Huntsville, Alabama electronics centre was proud to have introduced for automotive service. Even here inside the car, it’s all rectangles ‘n’ lines, baybay! And some of the rectangles that don’t have brushed chrome have simulated woodgrain.
The windows and locks will still work perfectly even with a flat battery—roof don’t leak when there ain’t no rain—whether you’re sitting in front (lookit that impeccable door panel carpet and unsagged armrest!)…
…or in the back. I recognise that rear door armrest ash tray; the same type was used in Darts and Valiants of the 1970s. Ditto the window crank handle knob, which matches (scroll up) that knob that capped just about every column automatic shifter Chrysler put out between 1968 and 1983; its ’84 replacement was considerably less charming. But this is an ’83, and even the LOCK↑ imprint is still crisp and sharp on all four door lock rockers.
Now see here: I defy you—I dare you—to say the ’85-’89 restyle looks better than this:
One interesting detail here, or lack thereof, is the missing K behind the Aries callout. In one or another of Iacocca’s books, he describes how “K” wasn’t meant as anything more than just an internal car code, but marketing picked up and ran with it (“The K-Cars are coming!”), and so the cars were launched as Aries-K and Reliant-K. For 1983 the “K” was removed, but reportedly such was the outcry that it was subsequently restored.
It’s worth noting these cars were built and sold in Mexico as the Dodge Dart-K and Chrysler Valiant Volaré-K. Even without those names in the US and Canada, in many respects the K-cars were spiritual successors to the much-loved Darts and Valiants. They were not more and not less than what they were: simple, basic, affordable transport appliances for the masses. They weren’t so defiantly durable—the 1980s were not the 1960s; priorities had changed. And that’s why somebody needs to buy this and baby it; another like it will surely not be forthcoming.
I had an 84 Chrysler E-class which is a slightly better appointed version of today’s subject car. It had the 2.2 l engine and automatic. Acceleration was glacial and at 55-60 mph the engine would produce a very annoying harmonic vibration throughout the car. This was the time of heavily enforced 55 mph speed limits, so exceeding 60 mph to eliminate the noise could have been a costly proposition. It was reasonably comfortable and reliable for its day, but certainly a joyless mode of transportation.
Tall, stubby, and rather awkward, yet in an endearing way. I scoffed at them when they were common, but now? This pristine low-miler is actually quite tempting. Hopefully someone will give it the care it deserves.
Like pretty much everyone else who grew up in the 80’s, I had one in my family. My paternal grandfather had a brown 1st-gen Aries K, not sure what year but it was pre-facelift. When he passed away in ’86, my aunt inherited it, and she drove it for a number of years afterward. My maternal grandfather, curiously, also owned a K-car, a post-facelift (’86 I think) Reliant in yellowish tan. He was not so fond of the thing, though, and traded it on a Voyager LE in ’88 or ’89.
Tall…well…sorta. I used to smack the side of my head hard getting into grandpa’s ’83 Aries because it had the same general shape as my folks’ ’84 Caprice, but the proportions were quite a lot different.
I see an offer as to a car for sale, but no way of reaching the seller.
I’m with JP on this.
We had three Valiants and one of them was traded for a new Volare wagon. The wagon was a total nightmare and blew up any shred of trust we had for Chrysler.
So when the K-Cars arrived, I didn’t want any part of it. When the LeBaron and Fifth Avenue arrived, I didn’t want an part of it. Not until the Grand Caravan had been out a year did someone in my family, buy another Chrysler brand. For another decade, it seemed all Chrysler made was a K-Car in some form or another. Never bought one.
The K-Cars looked modern and frumpy, but we were rooting for Chrysler to regain their reputation. Didn’t really ever happen. The Volare/Aspen ended our relationship.
Another reason Chrysler lost me as a customer was that after the Volare disaster, I was open to other brands. Sadly, GM gave me a Citation. But Ford worked out. The Fairmont exceeded expectations, as did the Escort. By 1992, I was working for a Mercury/Lincoln rental car company and all the cars were pretty good.
My wife brought her GM background into my life, and we had many Saturns along with Fords.
So even when Chrysler got its act together, I was happy with other brands at the time.
Neighbors directly across the street traded their 76 Pinto for an 82 Airies right when they were the newest thing.
Was two door/ tomato red/ had a/c.
I recall it had that classic engine sound of the day in no time. (click, click, click, click)
It took our 73 Dart about a year and a half to develop that sound.
If your ’73 Dart or your neighbours’ ’82 Aries was going “click, click, click, click”, there was something the matter with both cars.
Fully agree Daniel, the original, more formal front clip on both the Reliant and Aries suited their boxy bodies more naturally.
It’s not obvious, but it appears from the c-pillar design, and windshield angles, Chrysler was going for an exterior design family resemblance with the restyled 1980 M-Bodies. Though I’ve never heard this attempted design association stated anywhere. Whether it was a specific intended aim or not.
I thought the light metallic blue ’81 Reliant used for the 1981 Motor Trend Car of the Year competition was one of the more attractive of all the K-Cars I have observed. Aided by a nice wheel cover design.
I have long perceived that same M-body familial design to the K-cars.
Also, a bit of the R-body (Newport/New Yorker/St.Regis) as well. From the sideview it looked like a shrinked R-body.
I definitely see that. The Mirada also donated its slatted and sloped grille design to the 400/600.
I also felt this steel wheel design Chrysler offered on very early K-cars was one of the most attractive designs offered during their production. Wished they were more popular at the time.
THIS is the exact car I’m looking for!!!!
If anyone knows where I can find this car….I’m a buyer.
I had the 2 door version of this article’s car, same color inside and outside.
It had the 2.2 4 cylinder engine, 4 speed manual transmission/trans-axle, factory air conditioning….and nothing else. The dealer discounted it heavily because “nobody wants a stick shift today”>
As long as I kept the tires “aired up” it the non-power steering did not steer hard at all. If you didn’t try to be “Speed Racer” the transmission shifted fine. Much better than my previous Fiat 128!
Although not Mustang GT; the 4 cylinder/4 speed powertrain combo was more than adequate for the time period…as long as you shifted properly. #IIRC the fourth gear was like a 0.98 to 1 ratio; making it a slight overdrive transmission. 70 mph was not too loud or unbearable.Merging on Interstate 10, using second and third gears for on-ramp acceleration, never bothered me or felt too dayum slow (again, unlike my previous Fiat 128!).
The cloth bench seat was comfortable and wore well; no fading or rips/tears.
The factory A/C worked well and coped unobtrusively with the extended torrential heat and soggy humidity New Orleans summers.
Other than oil & antifreeze changes, front brake pads and tires the car was “Maytag Reliable” for me.
When I sold it I had 3 alert co-workers laying in wait for it.
The little car that saved Chrysler a long, long time ago.
I have a soft spot for the K car as our radio station news department back in 88-90 had a basic sedan to use. The 2.2 4 cylinder blew a couple of head gaskets, but the car did its job and was eventually offered for any staff member to purchase. No one did.
The little red sedan I’ve attached has been sitting in a driveway in Calgary for a long time judging by the tag on the rear plate. It would make an interesting project as everything is all there.
Maybe the nicest one left? I recall the dash of my grandparent’s ’82 Aries as being metal– thin and collapsable, but a sharp edge on top. I was amazed at how the dash looked so much like the one in their ’75 Dart, which resembled that in their ’67 Dart.
Once as a teen, when chauffeuring my grandfather to an appointment, I hit a bump that made the suspension –and us–bounce so high, it mashed his Homburg down onto his head.
“…The radio, which to me looks to be an AM unit, nevertheless bears one of the vacuum fluorescent displays Chrysler’s Huntsville, Alabama electronics centre was proud to have introduced for automotive service…”
I’m not sure about that, though the photo doesn’t show enough to be sure. To me it looks like the same analog radio that was introduced in the 1974 Chrysler C-bodies, then the 1975 Chrysler B-bodies, then the 1976 Chrysler F-bodies, and the 1978 Chrysler M-bodies. The one in this K-Car has the newfangled satin chrome faceplate instead of the old black one, and shinier knobs, but it sure looks like the same radio, complete with mechanical pushbuttons for station presets. I believe the LCD radio had a bigger display window which was ABOVE its electronic pushbuttons.
I looked at the AM-FM Stereo version of that radio from 1976 to 1998!
This one is near me, it’s been sitting a long time.
After all these years the K-car still has this love/hate relationship given all the remarks decades after their passing. Sign that the car really made an impression on car society although I wouldn’t put it into the love/hate directed towards the Vega. I have driven a couple of 2.2 automatics and for around town they were quite capable cars which would have suited many locations other than places like Nevada where it is long freeway drives. I looked at one seven days ago. Not a sexy car but I appreciate the task the car was design for and it did it’s task well.
All these years later, I would imagine there still is very little love for the Vega (at least by any poor bastard who had the misfortune to own one), certainly nowhere near as much as for the K-car.
For the time, the Reliant/Aries was competent enough as basic Point-A to Point-B transportation (at least locally), certainly more so than its primary competitor, the equally unlamented as the Vega X-body Chevy Citation.
Wow, first time I’ve seen this writup. Very nice post, Daniel. Strikes a chord with me since as I’ve probably already mentioned in my forgettable comments here I spent the first 10 years of my life in a ’83 Aries. This one looks better-equipped than the one my family had, but the blood red interior is very familiar! I remember wondering why other K-cars had the “K” badge when ours didn’t.
My dad was quite fond of the car. He admired the clean lines, and I recall him passing lines of cars in the Colorado mountains, a feat only made possible by the fact that ours had a 4-speed manual, and possibly because there were still plenty of malaise-era-mobiles on the roads at the time with most likely worse power-to-weight ratios. That and Colorado drivers can be quite feather-footed. It was a reliable car that made it well past the 200K mark.
This is the only picture I could find of it. I’m sure that with the bikes on the roof, the 2.2 struggled to get the white box with my family in it to wherever this photo was taken.
Like JPC above, I had a hard time getting excited about these. On paper, the competing GM products just seemed better all around.
I recall reading that their stubby looks were partially due to a decision to limit overall length to allow them to get an additional car on transport trains – efficiency was the word for these cars. Add to that a rather unfinished look to the greenhouse, fixed rear windows the year they were introduced, cramped rear seat and I was pretty much done with them.
The 1983 E-Class resolved a lot of sins as perceived by me and I had a bit of wheel time in one. I rather liked it.
I’m glad to find this article Daniel, you know how much I appreciate the ‘K’ Car and all its derivatives. I’m sure you remember riding in ‘killer’ and wanting a car that was as ‘quick’.
It was a very early built 81 having been assembled in October of 1980. This was my first of many K platform cars I have owned and we still own and drive 3 variations, my wife’s 1994 Dodge Shadow a ‘P’ body, my 1985 Plymouth Voyager an ‘S’ body and my 1989 Chrysler’s TC by Maserati a ‘Q’ body. Those 3 vehicles have a combined mileage of 728,742 miles.
As far as dependability, I would rate them as excellent. Sure, there have been several major repairs over the years and lots of normal maintenance, but all in all we have not had to purchase a replacement car since purchasing the Shadow in Oct. 1999. And, they all still run GREAT!
I have read all the ‘ugly’ statements about the early ‘K’ cars, and, having been a dealership mechanic in those days, I can say that they had their growing pains but so did the other American manufacturers. This was all from scratch technology and there was problems, but mostly because they all had carburetors and early emission controls which made drivability headaches for us technicians working on them. Basic engines and transmissions were very reliable with the most engine problems coming from the import engines which includes the 2.6L MMC 4 cylinder. I have repaired them all, give me a 2.2/2.5L any day. The 3.0L MMC engine was the best if the lot, but it didn’t show up until 1987 in the S Vans and then later in the larger FWD cars like the Dynasty and New Yorkers. That engine had it’s problems too with valve guides and oil smoke to the point of mosquito abatement, until a ‘fix’ was found.
Keep crabbing about them, but they were the vehicles that DID save Chrysler at that time.
I had a 2 door 1982 Plymouth Reliant K that had the Mitsubishi 2.6L I4 and drove it every day until 1994. Never had a problem with it.