At one point in the very early 1990’s, I tried to convince my father that a Dodge Shadow or Plymouth Sundance would be a very wise purchase for him as a commuter car. I was convinced he deserved a new car, having owned only used cars to that point. I completely failed to persuade him though, and I’m fairly certain that was the time he replaced his Fox-body Ford LTD with a used Chevy Celebrity wagon instead. In any case, I for some reason really liked the Shadow/Sundance, so when I came across a final year model Plymouth Sundance in a junkyard a few months back, decided to document it.
Introduced for 1987, the Sundance/Shadow was basically a shrunken K-car, the body looking much like a shorter Dodge Lancer on a new platform known as the P-platform (also AP-platform). Its big party trick was that it was only offered as a 3-door or 5-door liftback, the only versions with an actual trunk lid were the later convertibles (Dodge Shadow only).
It’s not at all readily apparent that these are liftbacks, and I’d not be surprised if some had thought they were sedans all along. Chrysler would confusingly call them 2-door coupes and 4-door sedans for much of the run, and then variously call them either hatchbacks or liftbacks as well, none of which helped, but then again the U.S. market was notoriously anti-hatchback in general at that time.
At first I thought this was one of the “America” editions, which were pretty much a completely stripped down version of the regular car to the point that even the badging was in the form of stickers instead of plastichrome badges – however those were only offered in 1991 and 1992, with the other years having a non-named “base” version, of which this is one.
Quite inexpensive throughout its run, I recall seeing these regularly on various TV game shows of the era: “Bobby, if you solve the puzzle in the next six seconds, you will win a brand new 1994 Plymouth Sundance base 5-door with every single feature that is standard and nothing more except a tax bill at the end of the year!”
The base Sundance was powered by Chrysler’s ubiquitous 2.2liter 4-cylinder, here generating 93hp and decent for a small car torque output of 122lb-ft. Coupled with a sub-2700lb curb weight they were sprightly enough, likely more so with the standard 5-speed manual gearbox than the optional 3-speed automatic (4-speeds were available but only on V6 powered models).
This one has the automatic, along with some fairly drab gray mouse-fur-looking upholstery and gray plastics of a hue and sheen that Chrysler seemed to have perfected as looking low-rent by this time. However, this car has a very unusual combination of safety features. Yep, that’s an airbag. For the driver. Now look at the passenger area. No airbag, but they get a motorized seatbelt which the driver is not forced to endure.
The powered belt was added for the last model year only to comply with federal regulations instead of a passenger airbag. While Chrysler was sort of in front of the ball back in 1990 when they added the driver airbag to the line-up and advertised it as the least expensive car so equipped, by 1994 I assume they didn’t want to engineer a passenger one knowing it was the last year of production. But then they did go to the trouble of incorporating the motorized seatbelt which doesn’t seem that simple either.
Eh, only 133,000 miles, or about what an average consumer might expect from a Mopar product of the time. While better equipped than some others cars we’ve seen, that’s still a fairly sparse instrument cluster, at least there are no obvious blank spots.
With the liftback up, there’s decent room in the back, especially once the rear bench is folded. The cargo cover is a nice touch for that sliver of space that the metal portion of the hatch doesn’t physically cover and the gas struts still work after twenty-five years.
The car really is fairly attractive, or at least not ugly. The flush headlights that replaced sealed beams in 1989 and the chrome egg-crate grille with a not garishly oversized logo look good, or at least so to my raised on Japanese designs of the era eyes. A little generic, perhaps, but perfectly acceptable for the price leader class.
The NL sticker on the back is the euro tag for Netherlands, perhaps this belonged to one of Johannes’ relatives. Or it could be a joke by a resident of the mountain town of Nederland which sits right above Boulder and is about an hour from this junkyard. I don’t see many Plymouths at all anymore, either on the road or off like this one. The Sundance logo has a bit of a whimsical touch the way the letters bounce up and down rather than being buttoned down in a straight line.
The rusty areas are a bit of an odd pattern but overall the basic attractiveness of this car still comes through besides the wheel choice, which is the basest of base designs that they likely felt they could get away with without offering a hubcap on a black steelie.
Built in November 1983, this was about four months before the last one would roll off the line in favor of the new Neon which was certainly a far more interesting car, no matter how much I may have liked this one. These were built in Sterling Heights, Michigan, although there was also a version for Mexico, the Chrysler Shadow, that was built in Toluca, Mexico. Europe also received it as the Chrysler ES for several years during the run.
Advertising for the Sundance seems to have been cut from the budget for its last year so the best I could do is this ad from a few years prior in 1991 regarding the new for the time America trim level. It talks about the payment being $128 per month or about $4 per day, less than one might spend for lunch. In hindsight, maybe that was the reason I couldn’t convince him, my Dad always brown-bagged it…
Looking for more? Here you go!
Brendan’s comprehensive overview of the Sundance and Shadow
William Stopford discusses the Sundance Duster
Andrew Parker on his Grandmother’s Sundance and the Shadow/Sundance in general
I never knew these were hatchbacks. I don’t remember seeing the combo of airbag on one side and a motorized belt on the other either.
These got criticized in the car mags back then, but I thought they were pleasant enough looking and priced well.
My cousin bought a Shadow convertible and it wasn’t a bad car, and affordable enough, and had nice honeycomb wheels.
Cheap car, but there were worse.
The 1988-1994 Ford Tempo/Mercury Topaz were exactly like that. When you got the optional driver’s side airbag (only available on 2.3L 4-cyl/3spd auto, not available with cruise), the driver’s side motorized belt was replaced with a manual 3-pt belt but the passenger side retained the motorized belt. That’s how Ford complied with the passive safety restraints.
There wasn’t a lot of additional cost in having that odd setup. Canada didn’t get the motorized belts, they were all manual. So the trim, belts, etc for both the manual belts and motorized belts were already there and paid for, nothing additional had to be designed for a single model year.
Having owned and loved my Dodge Lancer ES turbo, I was delighted to see the release of the P-cars in 1986. A friend of mine traded off a Taurus for the Shadow ES turbo version of this car. It was a hell of a lot of fun for the times; I really thought about trading off the Capri and getting one of these with the Mopar tuned engine control instead.
By the time the “America” series of small Chryslers were available, these cars were pretty long in the tooth. The basic ones were very basic, but their utility cannot be denied. At a minimum they were more modern than the positively antique Omnirizon that was being offered immediately before and they looked like a car that belonged in the 1990s, at least the early part of it.
I’ve always liked the faux sedan styling on these, the hatch was incredibly handy and with the base motor and a 5 speed, the car should have been pretty durable. In addition, that particular style of steel wheel was pretty clever. That’s one thing I miss on contemporary cars, is a decorated steel wheel option. Here in Rust Country (TM), with our patented PotHole 2.0 technology, replacing a damaged steel rim is about half of what an alloy will cost you. Ask me how I know…
Nice find, Jim. This along with a few other small cars from the era, really give me a case of the “feels”… LOL!
Classic American econobox. I too didn’t know these were hatchbacks….. Leave it to the Americans to make it where you couldnt tell the difference. Knock on it all you want these were good cars built off of the K-car platform that would produce anything from super economy cars to luxurious ones (90-93 Imperial)……. Simpler times to be sure.
I will join you in your Sundance/Shadow sort-of-fan club. I thought these were nice cars for their day and segment. This was that maddening era when Chrysler was *almost* there. Their quality was pretty decent (if you could avoid the Ultradrive) and they were not bad looking. These followed that longtime Mopar pattern – in durability, assembly quality and good looks you could usually get one and if you chose carefully you could get two. But you almost never got all three. But this one came tantalizingly close.
Count me in as a fan of these also! I can’t quite say why, but I always have found them kind of cute and at the very least, something different. Higher-trimmed versions like the Sundance RS were even dare I say sophisticated looking.
As is often said here, the right options can make all the difference. The car on the cover looks fantastic.
It’s weird to think that 133,000 miles was an “average” lifespan for a domestic back then. Even a trash Cobalt/Caliber will run to 150K-200k now pretty easily.
Probably one of the last cars sold without a passenger’s side mirrior? I know the base Honda Civic came that way up until the mid-’90s, but I can’t think of any others. Strippo features gone forever along with “styled” steel wheels, no tachometer, and unpainted gray bumpers.
This car was built about six months after I was born, and seeing it in this junkyard surrounded by scrapped mid-2000s iron (or plastic, rather, like the Saturn ION behind it) makes me feel absolutely ancient. It seems like just yesterday there was a Sundance/Shadow parked in every crappy apartment complex and Taco Bell parking lot. Haven’t seen one on the road in probably five years.
You aren’t alone in your affinity for these but they are getting mighty scarce. A few years ago Eric703 and I found a very base Sundance (or Shadow) still doing its thing here and I’m still seeing it. When my father and I went car shopping for me I entertained one of these although I ultimately got a four-banger Mustang. I’m still not sure if that was a great choice or not.
Jim, the title you used got me curious so I had to search youtube for an episode of The Price Is Right with a Sundance. While I didn’t see one of those, what I did find would have worked much better for JP’s Maverick from yesterday.
I thought of that Sundance as well — might be the last one I’ve seen on the roads. Here it is below — a 1993 model. We saw it three years ago.
I too liked the Shadow/Sundance for what it was, and I wouldn’t have been too disappointed to have owned one at the time.
Looking at Jim’s pictures here, I think this car represents Peak Mousefur, though. We all may complain about boring colors in today’s cars, but this interior is not just dull, it’s downright depressing.
Chrysler put most of their marketing effort into these between 1987 and 1989. With interesting alloy wheel and varied trim options, plus turbo and Shelby versions. By 1990-91, much like the late 80s Omni/Horizon, and Aries/Reliant, they were mostly sold on price, proven underpinnings, and a decent standard features list for an entry level car.
Jason’s fun starts at about the 2:55 mark….
Just based on my own recollections, it seemed like the Cavalier was the cheap car that was always given away on game shows like The Price is Right in the 1990s. Although my memories might be from the later 1990s, after the Sundance/Shadow had gone out of production.
I owned a Dodge Shadow from new in the early 90s. They were rugged, reliable, and cheap to run, given they used much of the basis of the K-Cars under their skin. Obviously less refined than more modern (and expensive) competitors. The Shadow/Sundance consistently beat the older Tempo and Cavalier in then current reviews, but lagged the Civic, Corolla, etc. New car reviews on these were starting to criticize Chrysler for not developing the chassis further. As Mopar was saving a buck with the long lived K-Car underpinnings.
Mine lasted over 350,000 kms with no major issues or repairs with the 2.2 litre, though some of the paint was peeling on the roof. As was common with Chrysler at the time. The 2.2 litre was like the Slant Six of the 80s in many ways. By 1994 the Neon was well overdue, and a better car all around. If not as rugged.
Aside from that left front fender dent, this Sundance looks still road ready to me. Mechanical problems no doubt led it to being here. Price of labor/parts soon exceeds the value of said car. Too bad. I rather like this one.
Extra points for being an orphan brand too.
When I was in college in the late ’90s, my then-girlfriend had a ’94 Shadow 4dr (non-hatchback) in almost the same electric blue color as the feature car. Even as a base model it was surprisingly fun, peppy and nimble. I recall being quite pleasantly surprised at the time by how…pleasant…it was to drive, as my expectations were quite lower due to the ambivalent-at-best contemporary motor press reviews of the Sundance/Shadow. These cars were everywhere back then, and considering their price point I can see why. My ex never had any issues with hers, either.
They were ALL hatchbacks, there was no sedan. The only version with a trunk was the convertible Shadow.
I’d swear on my grandmother’s grave that hers was a non-hatch, but after looking online you are indeed correct. They were all hatchbacks. It’s odd how I don’t recall that at all, since we used the hatch (trunk?) area of my ex’s frequently for groceries, etc. Guess my memory ain’t what it used to be!
I had a turbo ’89 Sundance for several years and really loved it. White over bronze two tone with a sharp pinstripe velour interior. It had similar mileage to this when I sold it, it was totaled in a front ender about two years later and had over 150k then. Mine was absolutely loaded, but had a stick, so it was as I would’ve ordered one. Much more fun to drive than most in that category, and much nicer interior than GM or Ford offered that segment. Compare to today: that upper dashboard and door armrests are soft touch, the rest of the door cards were nicely upholstered. Being a 1989, it had the 2.5 version of the non-intercooled Turbo I setup, port fuel injection with a smaller Mitsubishi turbo that could spool up fast, and a balance shaft for smoothness. It was indeed quiet and smooth, too. The reason domestic compacts are so derided is far more people experienced versions like the photo car, and not enough a loaded one like mine.
Drove/rode in a few of these as government fleet cars. I’m 5’7″ , but they still felt really uncomfortably cramped, compared to either Omnirizons or K-cars. Especially the passenger side. My knees were in my face. I too had forgotten they were hatchbacks. And I can’t recall when I last saw one.
^This. Besides the ‘not ugly’ meh styling, the ergonomics, while not horrible, were still bad. My most vivid memory is that of the straight, up-and-down pull handle on the doors (you can see it on the passenger side on that interior shot). The problem is the armrest was so short, and the handle was so far back, you couldn’t comfortably rest your arm on the armrest! I mean, c’mon, who the hell was in charge of designing the interior on these? How hard is it to design a proper armrest/pull handle that doesn’t interfere with your arm?
I will admit I kind of like the basic, no-blank instrument cluster with proper gauges, though. Does anyone really need a tachometer with an automatic transmission small car?
Then there was the ‘son-of-Road Runner’ Duster/ES version that came with the V6. I can still recall the road tests of these where the torque steer was so bad that, even in a straight line, these weren’t so great.
It fits perfectly that these were a prize on game shows when they pulled back the curtain and proclaimed, “A new car!”. Game show cars were always the slow-selling craptaculars that the dealers were having a tough time getting rid of.
Frankly, this was a downturn from the previous Omnirizon. The follow-up Neon was better, but there were still issues, like still having a 3-speed automatic (at least it was reliable) and the power window option which got you front power windows but manual winders on the back doors!
Neons had an awful door armrest design too that cut off your arm in a different way, by having it swallowed by a sideways cup at the end of a very slanted armrest. Overall, ergonomics were just as bad, maybe worse, than in the Sundance.
My brother-in-law bought a Dodge Shadow America 2-door, so I knew it was a hatchback. He got it to replace a Subaru that had succumbed to the Pennsylvania state mineral… salt.
2.2L, manual transmission, mouse fur interior. Air conditioning and a radio which he replaced with the aftermarket Kenwood from the Subaru.
His commuting pattern changed for the longer shortly thereafter and he wound up running it for over 175,000 miles with very little work required other than scheduled maintenance. The timing belt, he did himself on a weekend.
It was an unexciting but solid car. It held up against rusting well, and was still not rusted through when it went to a neighbor kid who drove it for a couple more years. Can’t say anything about the factory paint; due to a full-left sideswipe it was repainted same-color in Imron when almost new.
In my grade school, the custodian’s wife drove one of these. Hers had the motorized belts on both sides. Hers was a mid line model because it had power windows. I was friends with her son and rode in it a few times. Seemed like a decent car for the time, bit then again it seemed like every other person in our area drove Mopar.
I learnt to drive in a new 1989 Sundance. Dad purchased the Sundance new largely out of necessity after a used 1985 Sunbird kept overheating and eventually blew a head gasket. Ours was a dark pearl blue with a color keyed blue interior.
@ dave, the early years of these cars were far better than the later years. They were VERY nice inside in the early years with premium upholstery, light packages, soft touch vinyls and cloth, lots of tasteful chrome trim, expensive looking wheelcovers, and a feeling of being solidly put together out of nice materials. In true Iacocca fashion, Chrysler saved by using proven components (the floorpan of the Daytona) and other K bits and increased feature content so the earlier cars were quite luxurious. I think ours went out the door for around $9K and for that money, you were looking at a painfully stripped Civic/Corolla after all the additional dealer markup which didn’t have air, cloth seats, as much power, and Honda/Toyota dealer attitude at the time which was we don’t NEED you as a customer, there are loads of people waiting to pay whatever we ask and we’ll get it and you’ll like it.
The K bits had been significantly improved by this time and anyone who had started with an 81 Aries would have noticed the differences. This car was much more solidly built than the Aries without a lot of the loose and floppy feel. Was it Sporty? Enough. it had adequate power, drove nicely and smoothly and responsively, handled well, beat competitors like the moribund Cavalier and Tempo in terms of reliability, quality, features, and driving experience, was quiet, and had the ace in the hole of the enormous liftback.
Now as then writers complain about the liftover in these cars, but allow me to point this out. If you are carrying something like a dresser which necessitates driving down the road with the liftback open, having that liftover means that all the usual trunk detritus of jumper cables and bungee cords and tools don’t fall out all over the road. That liftback was ENORMOUS and allowed the car to swallow amazing sizes of objects. The split back seats were great for carring fishing poles or other long objects.
Ours was fairly trouble free for a late ’80’s car, requiring what were the usual wear parts of that time, radiator at some point, a/c went out every year, but that was it. We had it for a long time until my brother reversed it at high speed into a parking lot mall pylon. Never really got the full story on that.
This is one of those cars that was derided by the automotive press, but unlike contemporary domestic competition like the Tempo and Cavalier, was far better than its reputation. It had a lot of advantages over the Civic and Corolla.
That justification for the high liftover seems pretty shallow.
The easier justification I could accept for the high liftover is it’s really not that high compared to modern vehicles even though they have low liftover trunk openings, due to the rise in height and bulk.
I’m not sure how these are compartment wise, but I know in my car I toss the bungee cords and jumpers and most any auxiliary roadside item in the spare tire well under the cover, I don’t like messy trunks. Nothing’s falling out of there. Also having removed a bare 302 engine block OUT of a foxbody mustang hatch a car club friend had bought(which is similar in execution to the Shadow/Sundance hatch down to its high liftover), it may swallow those bulky items securely but getting them back out and over the liftover is pretty difficult to pull off in these situations.
Add me to the list of people who had no idea these were hatchbacks.
And I’m another one who kind of liked these cars. I remember a lot of marketing for the sporty “Duster” version in the early 1990s, and I suspect as an impressionable tween I bought into that marketing, and considered all the Sundance/Shadows cool by association.
My wife had one of these so I have a decent amount of time as a driver and passenger in these. Her father bought it new and passed it down to her when it was roughly 12 years old. 2.5L four with the 5spd so it was certainly zippy. Much more so than the 5spd Tempo I had grown up driving. Hers had peeling paint and lots of electrical issues. Eventually had quite a few overheating issues. I think I certainly could have fixed the car with what I know now but not then. A decent car brought down by quality issues (although it was not new)
As someone who vastly prefers the 3-box shape to the typical upright hatch I always liked this kind of hatchback design, I knew the Lancer had it but I either didn’t know or forgot the Shadow/Sundance had them too, very nice.
It’s kind of a shame for Chrysler that Ford made such big waves with their groundbreaking aero designs during these years because Chrysler finally seemed to get their styling mojo back around 86-87 after way too many years of the dorky K car and its very obvious spinoffs. I liked the look of these quite a bit as a little kid when they were everywhere.
A co-worker lo g ago “frank” bought one new , he abused it to no end
One morning his wipers were frozen stuck to the windshield so he left them turned on and burned out the wiper motor
I don’t think he was making payments on it because he wouldn’t bring it in for warranty work
Shame because it was a nice looking car
My friend had a 94 Shadow for a few years with the 2.5L engine and the 3-speed auto. It was surprisingly fun to drive; lots of torque for what it was.
Great piece on a car I haven’t thought about in a while, Jim!
While I did know these were hatchbacks (and to echo a few others, I did eventually come to like the “faux-notchback” looks of these), I never knew they were based on the K.
A friend had a latter-day Sundance Duster, and she liked it, IIRC. I also likes the way the letters on the “Sundance” emblem “danced”.
Near the end of the production cycle, the “American” version was released. Very similar to the K-car, the package was better than barebones, with limited options. Motor Week did a review:
Good thing the tester is wearing those leather driving gloves at MotorWeek- to handle all that power- ha!
There is one of these parked in a driveway not to far from me- I always wonder why (not sure if it moves/runs, but it seems to be in decent shape). I’ll have to take note if its position moves at all- it’s not a road I typically drive on daily..
My friend’s girlfriend had one of these in the mid-90’s…for whatever reason, I always liked the high and low letters on the rear “Sundance” letters too, but otherwise didn’t really like these cars (preferred any honda even used vs one of these new). It’s not a bad looking car and was probably a little nicer than my sister’s ’88 Cavilier, which had a 3 speed auto with harsh 2.0 inline 4 she had in the same mid-90’s era. Come to think of it, the Cavilier she had was not a bad looking car (just a bad car to drive). Our family got it becasue my parents got a good deal on it used, when it was only 1 year old- timing chain was really stretched at about 110K miles, when it was traded in on a used Infinity G20 (remember those?)
I had an 1988 Sundance, bought used, black with a whorehouse red velour interior. I liked the car it was nicely equipped and I grew to like it. I got a 180,000 miles on it, before I traded it in on a Hyundai Accent.
I had an 1991 America 2-door Auto(2.2). Aside from being fairly slow, and the A/C output being just above “Class-Action Law-Suit” functionality, it was a great car. I bought it new with my Grandfather’s Chrysler Employee Discount($7600). I had only normal repairs, and changed the Oil every 3k miles. I drove it to 200K miles(10 years) then sold it($1700). I looked on Carfax to see what ever happened to it. It was totaled in a rear-end collision at 260K miles. Looks like this one had a timing belt failure(non-interference engine). Slap a new one in and this is your new Pizza Delivery ride for another 130K miles! The only reason I sold it was that the rocker panels were the only panel not “Two-sided Galvanized” and were rusting from the inside out. Too bad Chrysler does not exist anymore.
Aww, a used blue (both exterior and interior) 1987 Sundance was my very first car. I spent a year sweating in a fast food kitchen to earn the money to purchase it. Mine was a 2 door with a manual sunroof. No idea whether that was a factory option, or aftermarket. It also had a cassette deck, and I’m almost positive it had a tachometer, even though it was an automatic. I absolutely loved the car. It was just the right size and really fun to drive. Much more attractive than the older style Escorts, Cavaliers, and hideous looking Omnis that were the other standard “teen cars” of that era. I also loved the liftback…we could fit anything we needed back there, as well as the fun “dancing” emblem. Of course, I’ve grown up and owned much nicer cars since then, but none have given me the feeling of freedom and pure joy that I had driving the Sundance at 17. You never forget your first car. Thanks for the memories!