Not every car that is parked on the street in Manhattan becomes a dented and destroyed mess. Not every 1980s car parked on the street in Manhattan is slowly rusting away due to the copious amounts of road salt in the winter time. But still, one would expect a Manhattan-dwelling 1980s Plymouth to exhibit some signs of wear and abuse. Not so this Caravelle.
Maybe this pristine Plymouth was visiting from upstate. It has held up remarkably well, but so has the Caravelle’s design itself, more so than the rather frumpy AA-Body Acclaim that replaced the E-Body Caravelle in 1989 or the titchy K-Cars. The Caravelle effectively replaced the almost identical Chrysler E-Class in American Chrysler-Plymouth showrooms for 1985, although it was first introduced in Canada in 1983. This was Plymouth’s largest front-wheel-drive sedan and was only around a grand or two cheaper than the much older and less fuel-efficient Gran Fury.
Like the Dodge 600 (which I have discussed previously), the Caravelle wasn’t an exceptionally strong seller. It sold about as well as its Dodge cousin, at around 40k units annually. Its successor, the Acclaim, sold much better. Was it internal competition from the cheaper Reliant? Or was it the lack of a V6 engine? The optional engine was Chrysler’s ubiquitous 2.2 turbo four, although the Acclaim would receive a 3.0 V6. Still, the mid-size family segment was fairly conservative and none of Chrysler’s offerings during this decade – Lancer/LeBaron GTS, 600 – were particularly successful and widespread acceptance of turbocharged four-cylinder engines in lieu of V6s was a couple of decades away. With even more conservative styling and available V6 engines, Chrysler would find success with the Acclaim, its Spirit twin and the Dodge Dynasty. These Caravelles are fairly forgotten Mopars today, so it sure is nice to see one in such immaculate condition.
Related Reading:
My grandfather had one of these, even the same colour. I remember him letting me drive it just after I got my license around 1992. It was quiet and quite peppy for the time. Of course I was used to driving my mother’s Escort, so almost anything would’ve felt peppy.
I’ve owned a few of the K car derivatives. I’ve found them to be competent, reliable, but unexciting. In terms of getting from point a to point b, you could do a lot worse.
I can’t say this with 100 percent confidence, but from the looks of it, that Plymouth is indeed from upstate.
In any event, its a remarkable find.
“Upstate” usually means “no fenders, floors or rear quarters” by the time they reach this age.
NYC/Lower Westchester cars are often parked when snow comes, so limited contact with the elements often means far better bodies.
I came to my conclusion because that registration sticker looks like the one they use for all the counties north of NYC, buts its too far away to tell with absolute certainty.
I’d wager it spent at least some time in Colorado, judging by the sticker in the window.
Back in H.S. my best friend’s mom had one of these. Same exact car just in a kind of butterey/yellow/beige/vanilla color. It was the archetypical ‘mom car’ of the late 80s to early 90s. Dull and uninteresting but it did its job without complaint. Much like the bulk of K cars.
I have to disagree on this bodystyle holding up so well though. The overall look is kinda fussy and disjointed. I think some of it is the slanted C pillar just not working with the straight lines of the rest of the car. The basic Ks with their formal rooflines are obviously what was originally envisioned and this was an afterthought. Those paint/aluminum hubcaps are clearly aping Mercedes (and it was a horrible look for those too) and wimpy tires/wheels really make it look all the worse. To my eye, this car is WAY frumpier than the AAs…depending on how the AA was trimmed.
The AAs with their own formal rooflines but a slight rounding of the edges was a more natural progression of the line. While the AA LeBaron was laughable with the Lido brougham treatment, the Acclaim had much the same flavor for a shrinking but still plentiful number of people who found that look appealing. The Spirit on the other hand, wore that conservative look with a bit of contemporary and athletic pizazz so long as it was one of the ES or R/T models with the color keyed grille and wheels. I found those (for sedans, anyway) kind of attractive. They were still classy and restrained but came off as if they werent completely opposed to fun.
Good article on this invisible model. Caravelle? Which one? In Canada, Plymouth sold this E-body sedan, a dressy K-car 2-door coupe (like a Chrysle LeBaron), and an M-body sedan (called the Gran Fury in the U.S., same as Dodge Diplomat, et al.). Sounds like the naming confusion of Chrysler LeBaron models spanning multiple platforms, and Oldsmobile with their Cutlass-………(Calais/Ciera/Supreme/Supreme Classic/Cruiser).
Upstate is even harder on vehicles that Downstate. My family had a Caprice and a Dart from Long Island that would have been rusted out a decade or so earlier if they were in the Southern Tier their whole life.
Was this on the upper west side?
As others have noted, about 90% of the Caravelles produced were that light blue metallic.
I can’t imagine why these sold in lackluster numbers, while the Acclaim did (marginally?) better. Perhaps all those Reliant owners weren’t in a hurry to trade in their cars, and the Acclaim arrived at the time the all Reliants needed replacing.
These were very obviously long K-cars, not well disguised. The GM a-bodies (Century, Celebrity, etc) were long Citations, but so well disguised that they kept selling even after the Citation’s image had been terminally poisoned.
To me, there’s some Rover 800 saloon going in here, especially in the first picture, part way between the first and second series.
What’s the CUV parked behind the Caravelle?
I believe it is a current generation Honda CR-V.
My best friend’s sister had a “light blue” 1986 Caravelle. She loved that car. She got it in 1990 from an older couple that had kept it in mint condition with almost no miles on it too. Sadly, she totaled it within a few months. I had driven it a few times and found it to be a very comfortable and peppy car. In fact, I was very surprised at how nice it actually drove.
I have to say that these triplets (Plymouth Caravelle, Dodge 600, and Chrysler E-Class) looked so much better than the Chrysler New Yorker Turbo, which was the same body with a hideous vinyl covered roof cap with stainless steel bar and opera lamps.
I think the metal roof and exposed c pillar window gives the car a lighter look, and actually a bit sporty (well, kind of).
These cars drove well and had the most comfortable seats for them. Our neighbors brought a brand new Chrysler E-Class to replace a 1978 Cordoba. The exterior was two tone black over silver, with a red interior. It looked very nice. It also had the full wheel covers that mocked Mercedes wheels.
Funny how Mercedes offered an E-Class sedan, but I don’t think it was at the same time these Chrysler E-Classes were sold.
Great find!
As easy as it is to bash Chrysler for some of its ’70s cars, it is positively refreshing to hear a tale of Chrysler earning a repeat buyer!
I’ve been guilty of some Chrysler bashing myself, but for the record, the Cordoba always seemed competent in its segment, and I had some personal experience with the E-Class and found it to be a comfortable and competent car after driving it a handful of times.
I think the styling has held up well but then I was 10 in ’86 so to me most of the ’80s styling still looks fresh. It very much resembles the Fairmont/LTD.
I don’t think they sold well because A) Chrysler did very little, if anything, to promote them B) there really wasn’t much of a difference in these versus the Standard K Car C) Chrysler was throwing everything it had at the infinitely more profitable minivan and D) by 1986, the competition had really stepped up its game. The Taurus was new, Ford offered the LTD/Marquis as well, The A car was getting traction at GM, and the Accord was new and the Camry was getting some traction as well. The K Car was fleets and frugal folks for several years and then the Acclaim and Dynasty etc looked new enough to be enough of an advancement people bought them. The ’86 New Yorker did much better and was EVERYWHERE for a while.
All the K cars disappeared around 10 years of age here in Atlanta. People don’t remember, but they were floppy things that were . . . adequate, at best, and didn’t inspire any real passion. A lot of people drove them until something broke and didn’t bother having whatever it was fixed and the car got junked. Also a lot of these ended up being handed down to broke teenagers/college students and again, when something broke, the car got thrown away. You know how people will spend thousands of dollars immaculately restoring and tracing down all the problems with something like a Maserati or Porsche and don’t flinch at repeated four figure repair bills? This is the opposite.
A couple of teachers I had in elementary school drove these. Very Genericar.
Almost bought one last August. Had to be the first time I ever saw a Caravelle. Twas an 88 with 65,000 miles and the owner in his late 70’s. Not a bad driver and the body was in great shape with the typical droopy headliner inside. He wanted to smog it before selling and it was failing. Failed four times before it passed, you can check on CA vehicle test site, as it was running rich. I knew the problem was a leaking throttle body leaking fuel across the top of the throttle plate like a waterfall. He wanted 1500, it was worth maybe 1300, and I offered 1000 and I would deal with the smog issue. He turned me down but in the end he spent more than 500 to get it fixed and smogged. Oh, well…
Oh, it was not blue but white.
These sold really well here in Canada, since they were built in Bramlea, they could be sold at a low price, as the Canadian dollars was low at the time. By this time, any bug in the platform was long gone but with the volumes Chrysler had on these cars meant that a lot of the actual parts in the cars were just plain cheap. Stuff broke on these cars all the time and sooner or later any owner was going to give up.
Dodges always seemed to be owned by people looking for a “nice” car with a low price and nice looks. They still are for that matter and they were always the most neglected cars I came across.
I was the occupant of the back seat of one of these when it was new…high school carpool. VERY nice interior materials, upholstery and carpet were both amazing, plenty of room for 3 teenaged boys too. The one I rode in was a deep burgundy with maroon interior. It wouldn’t have been my first choice to drive, but as a passenger, I had no complaints.
I had no idea this sort of design was done in the US at the time. From the back it has shade of what Alfa Romeo was doing (the Alfa 75 and Alfa 90 spring to mind). The sides are inspired by whatever the Japanese were at. There are a lot of lines running along the flanks. The front is more generically American. Time and again Chrylser served up cars that were as close to looking like a generic car as was humanly possible. It is a very curious way to sell an emotional product. I will look up a little more about this car with interest. Thanks for the post!
I suppose they are rather generic, but I always thought these Carvelles (and their 600 sedan contemporaries/E-Class predecessors) were pleasant-looking cars. Not super distinctive and a few of the details were awkward, but I like the overall shape. And I quite like the color-keyed wheel covers!
There is a white Caravelle with burgundy interior that I’ve seen a few times around Richmond. It’s been a few months since I saw it last, but the chances are good that it’s still kicking. Stands out nicely amidst a sea of taller, more rounded modern machines.
I bought a used ’85 silver-grey Dodge 600 with the Chrysler 2.2L engine in 1990. It had 80k miles and actually was in very good condition. No warranty…it drove fine on the test drive.
On the way out of the dealership parking lot, I stopped and it idled very roughly..coughed and sputtered. Never stalled, once you put your foot on the gas it was fine, adequate power and good gas mileage. The car was comfortable and roomy.
I never felt good about the rough idle and got rid of it a year later. The next owner rebuilt the engine but it still ran rough.