(first posted 8/21/2015) Sedans. Minivans. Hatchbacks. Convertibles. Coupes. The K-Car platform and its offshoots had almost any permutation imaginable, even a factory limousine! If you need a concise guide to the menagerie of Ks, Jason Shafer’s guide is a Must Read. The most interesting K derivatives may well have been the H-Body Chrysler LeBaron GTS and Dodge Lancer, Chrysler’s first and last mid-size hatchback and one of Chrysler’s sportier offerings.
While living in NYC, I didn’t think I would spot one of these almost forgotten K-Car derivatives. After all, these aren’t collectors’ items and didn’t appeal much to older buyers, who generally keep their cars in the best condition. However, I managed to spot not one but three LeBaron GTS, all painted in the same shade of burgundy and mostly looking worse for wear but still running.
The H-Bodies strode a three-inch longer wheelbase than the humble LeBaron/Aries/Reliant triplets with a suspension based on the Daytona/Laser, but Chrysler’s efforts at positioning their products during the 1980s were somewhat puzzling.
The LeBaron GTS was ostensibly Chrysler division’s mid-size offering. It replaced the short-lived 1983-84 E-Class, which shared the downsized New Yorker’s 103.3 inch wheelbase but had cleaner styling. The E-Class, logically, was priced between the LeBaron sedan and the New Yorker.
Although the GTS had a 103.1 inch wheelbase, its base price was actually lower than the smaller LeBaron’s. You could, however, price a GTS above even the priciest LeBaron sedan. The Laser was the cheapest Chrysler of all, priced almost $1k below the LeBaron coupe. Even after the Laser’s discontinuation – it proved to be another short-lived Chrysler like the E-Class – the LeBaron GTS still undercut the LeBaron in price. In the GTS’ last year, the smaller LeBaron was gone and the LeBaron GTS was just “LeBaron” even though a new coupe and convertible bearing that name had launched that year and a much softer LeBaron sedan would arrive for 1990.
Confused yet? It gets more confusing. Let’s look at Dodge and the Lancer. The Lancer was launched in 1985, but Dodge already had a mid-size sedan, the 600. The 600 had been available in a sportier, European-inspired ES trim to rival the Pontiac 6000 STE and Chevrolet Celebrity Eurosport. For 1985, the 600 ES was gone but the 600 remained. The 600/Lancer duo thus occupied the same market space, sold at roughly the same price, but targeted different buyers with the 600 being the more traditional family sedan and the Lancer being a sportier alternative, perhaps one that appealed more to import cross-shoppers.
Perhaps that made sense, but Dodge confused matters in 1988 by introducing the similarly-sized and similarly-priced Dynasty, leaving them with three mid-sizers! For 1989, the 600 was gone but it was immediately replaced with the Spirit, which undercut the Lancer on price.
Despite the presence of affordably-priced base models, the H-Body was always marketed as a sport sedan alternative. H-Bodies featured a semi-independent front suspension with a trailing arm beam rear, and offered three different suspension tunes: Road Touring, Sport Handling and Sport Handling II. The latter two featured tighter strut and shock valving, higher spring rates and front and rear sway bars, with SH II featuring 15-inch alloy wheels on Goodyear Eagle GT tires. Handling was much improved, but the ride was appreciably firmer. Still, those H-Bodies so equipped could outslalom a Mercedes 190E and BMW 528e while costing half as much, and critics generally praised their abilities. Chrysler heavily advertised the LeBaron GTS as a cut-price rival to the Europeans, while the slightly cheaper (generally only by a few hundred dollars) Dodge was advertised as a rival to Japanese imports.
Befitting the H-Bodies’ sporting aspirations a manual transmission was available, unlike rivals like the more expensive 6000 STE (at least at first: the STE eventually got one towards the end of the decade). But critics and owners were none too pleased with the shifter, which was often described as rubbery and agricultural.
Despite the H-Bodies’ sporting aspirations, you could still opt for a front bench and a three-speed automatic. The base engine was the 2.2 single-overhead-cam, fuel-injected four with 99 horsepower. Optional was a 146 hp turbocharged 2.2 that actually had superior fuel economy. For 1986, a 2.5 naturally-aspirated, 100 hp four was added, and a 2.5 turbo arrived in 1989. Turbocharged H-Bodies with a manual transmission were good for a 0-60 of 8.1 seconds.
Those after performance could purchase a special Shelby Lancer (later Lancer Shelby), fettled by Carroll Shelby. Four-wheel disc brakes, an even firmer suspension tune – some said an uncomfortably firm tune – and a 175 hp, 175 ft-lb turbocharged four were standard. These came fully-loaded with leather seats (power adjusted up front), power accessories and a 10-speaker premium sound system with a (then quite rare) CD player. 0-60 was quicker than the regular H-Body turbos, at 7.7 seconds, but you paid dearly for the mildly improved performance: around $17k, or roughly $7k above a Lancer ES Turbo. Only 800 Shelby Lancers and 487 Lancer Shelbys were built between 1987 and 1989.
The H-Body cars were a sales disappointment for Chrysler. Initial sales were adequate, but nose-dived after 1986: Lancer sales went from 51,897 units to 26,619 and LeBaron GTS sales tumbled similarly (73,557 vs. 39,050). By their swansong year, the H-Body hatchbacks were selling in paltry numbers of a few thousand each.
You can blame the Ford Taurus, but also the 1987 P-Bodies (Dodge Shadow and Plymouth Sundance). These smaller, K-derived hatchbacks were cheaper than the GTS and Lancer but had very similar styling and available turbo engines. One can add cachet to a cheaper car by styling it to look like its more expensive sibling without negatively impacting sales of the latter, but that generally works only with premium brands. Instead, buyers came to Mopar showrooms, saw two similar-looking hatchbacks, and just bought the cheaper one.
Those who chose either would have experienced the same subpar build quality common in 1980s Chryslers. The interior was handsome enough, but squeaks, rattles and cheap plastics prevailed.
The Mopar minivans may have been extraordinary upon their launch and created an entirely new segment, but that segment has endured over the years. The H-Bodies, though, were mid-size hatchbacks. Although a practical body style and size, in North America that format was a 1980s phenomenon that quickly died. Victims included hatchback variants of the Camry, 626, Corsica and Stanza.
The LeBaron GTS and Lancer, too, would die before the nineties. These were cars that could have used a little bit more refining, like a better stickshift, smoother power delivery and higher-quality interior assembly. For the price, though, they weren’t bad and were cleanly styled and quite fun in turbo form. They wouldn’t be the last sporty mid-size Mopars, as the hotter Spirit R/T would arrive shortly thereafter, but despite their K-Car bones the H-Bodies were a departure from what Chrysler usually produced. Never again would Chrysler offer a mid-size hatchback.
Related Reading:
Curbside Classic: 1994 Chrysler LeBaron
Curbside Classic: 1983 Dodge Aries
Curbside Classic: 1985-89 Merkur XR4Ti
Yes faster than the BMW that was optimised for fuel economy not performance including the low traction tyres, but I guess that part didnt get into the advertising. Chrysler seems to be the same car sold in a bewildering array of badges and names with little to differentiate them, easier to go to the Ford or Toyota store I reckon.
My favorite K-car by a longshot (the van comes second). Have never seen one with a manual transmission, though. And its semi-failure is not surprising as Chrysler came up with a pretty good driver’s car at a very affordable price, so the market stayed away in droves. Guess they’d rather have a brougham.
Mencken was a genius.
back in 1985 my boss sold me his 2 year old plymouth horizon which had a lot of highway miles on it. loved that car as my first reliable transportation (excluding my schwinn of course). he purchased a dodge lancer w/ manual transmission. that car was really cool. much larger than the horizon, still w a manual, great sound system, comfortable seats. i got a few chances to drive it and it drove as good as it looked. years later i looked for a used one but never found a manual. his must have been almost a unicorn. they dropped out of sight fairly quickly not only in annual sales but in the used car market too. depreciation must have been awful.
This. The one K-Car variant that didn’t look like it was designed by a resentful intern at a Chinese refrigerator factory.
But pitching it against Mercedes and BMW was just idiotic. Either Chrysler was really stupid or they thought their customers were.
Since they were half the price of the German cars they weren’t really competing with them. It’s like when 1965 Ford Galaxies were advertised as being quieter than a Rolls Royce. I’m sure there are other such ads for other cars or other products.
I actually had a 1985 LeBaron GTS with a turbo and manual transmission. It had more rear seat legroom than most vehicles in its class, had decent acceleration and handling. I traded it in for a 1987 Shelby Daytona for my last sporty looking vehicle before my kids were too tall to fit in the back seat. The hatchback was one of the most practical ever. I hauled a new dryer in the box home with the hatch closed. I often surprised and impressed friends with the LeBaron’s utility and versatility.
I personally like these a lot. They had all the utility of a hatchback grafted on to the excellent space utilization of the K car. They are far roomier than for example the Mazda 3 or Focus modern hatchbacks that their dimensions most resemble. The 2.5 engine was fuel injected, balance shafted and overhead cam like a modern engine, and there were turbo options aplenty. A five speed was standard with every engine. The seats were excellent, the Chrysler and Dodge versions were styled for young people. Even the base suspension was sporty. The K bodies had less teething problems than the GM X and these were late enough to be of good quality.
So why didn’t they set the world on fire. The people who this car was aimed at simply did not want to buy domestic. Their reasons may be rational or not. This model proves that there was no reason to bother trying to appeal to them. Their biases were too strong.
Grear. point about the P body Shadow/Sundance. I also forgot about the Mazda 626 hatchback!
Amazing that you found even 1, but 3!!!
Mostly due to their rarity, I would really want to own one of these, a Lancer preferably, but finding one in any condition is near impossible.
Not following Chrysler’s history in the 80s and 90s, I had no idea how much segment overlap existed inside the various brands. And I can see why potential buyers might buy a Shadow or Sundance since it was basically the same car for less money. You have to wonder why Chrysler didn’t put the Mitsubishi V6 in the Lancer/GTS….or did I miss that? Anyway, something/anything to make buyers consider the more expensive car.
BTW, Mazda offered a hatchback that looked nearly indistinguishable from the “regular” Mazda6 off and on into the 2000s. I believe the Mazda was offered with 4 and V6 power with at least the 4 being available with a manual transmission.
The Mazda 6 hatch was very popular with vendor merchandisers who drove their own cars in the mid-00s. It was a sporty midsize car that looked and drove like one but didn’t force you to wiggle store displays past a parcel shelf; they were mostly replaced with Prii when gas got expensive and the Prius still owns that niche.
I always liked these, great space inside.
The interior left something to be desired, pretty much everything Chrysler sold at that time had the same cheap looking IP (The burgundy in the picture was a very popular color).
Yeah, instrument panels sure have come a long way from this obviously made-by-Mattel, hard-plastic fest. Imagine the squeaking and groaning on a cold-winter morning drive.
I won’t lie, I REALLY like the LeBaron GTS (not to mention the Laser as well). Never knew you could get either for less than a rather horrible K-LeBaron sedan. The hatchback bodystyle definitely limited their appeal however. I actually always saw them as something of a budget Saab 9000, although I doubt many cross-shopped the two.
If I was the age I am now in 1985, I seriously would’ve considered a LeBaron GTS with Corinthian Leather (it was still advertised as such in the GTS and Lancer!). They were by no means perfect, but one of Chrysler’s best efforts at making something not overly-Lee Iacocca in the 1980s. Their lack of sales success sealed their fate of being given and more attention/improvements to refinement by Chrysler though.
I’ve only ever seen a few in the metal in my lifetime, and never a high-trimmed version. Also, I always noticed a heavy similarity between the styling of these and the J-body LeBaron coupe/convertible, minus the hidden headlights.
Incredibly rare find! Relatively low production to begin with, and as you note, these were not typically bought by older customers, so less likely to be babied. Also, based on my very limited exposure to the car, I’m not sure how many owners would have even wanted to preserve them. Back in 1989, when I was at my first job, one of the younger managers (he was in his early 30s) had a LeBaron GTS, and I rode in it once when we went to lunch. His black on black car looked exactly like the car featured in the Ricardo Montalbano ad, and it was a stick shift. I liked the styling a lot (very sleek for a K-car!), and the leather seats were really attractive and plush. But…and it’s a big but..the quality was abysmal. I’m not sure the exact year of his car, but it couldn’t have been more than 2-3 years old at most, and it was coming apart at the seams. I’ve literally never been in a another car, ever, that rattled so much. We drove over relatively smooth streets, yet the squeaks, groans, shakes and shimmies were so loud that even the stereo, turned up to high volume, couldn’t drown them out. I also remember him wrenching the balky shifter from gear to gear, and the car would lurch and shudder each time. It was a far cry from my Prelude’s 5-speed… Needless to say, the guy hated the car and felt like he’d been duped. I doubt his car even made it through the 1990s–I imagine it would have been junked by mid-decade.
Back then for any Chrysler product including the nonidentical Omnirizons the only good transmission choice was the Torqueflite. By the late eighties they had lockup torque converters and were (at least in O/H’s with the 2.2 engine) geared to do fairly low revs at highway speeds even with only three gears. Some Chrysler shifter was compared to stirring a wooden spoon in a full ice bucket.
Would it be a stretch to say the LeBaron GTS and its contemporary competitors were just 25 years ahead of their time, paving the way for the gorgeous and highly desireable Audi A/S/RS7?
Yes, a huge stretch. Think Dasher
Yeah, I kinda answered my own question there. But the Dasher, now you’ve hit on something interesting. I never associated the Dasher with the 7 before. Hmmm…
With more than a hint of the 84 5000 and NSU Ro 80. I don’t doubt the A7 designers had seen a Lebaron GTS, if that proves anything.
A midsized (after all, Chrysler compares it with a BMW 5-series) 5-door hatchback from the eighties, with great handling and comfort. Then the Renault 25 is the first that comes to mind. Available with humble 4-cylinders, but also with powerful V6 injection engines. Even with a V6 turbo. It’s also the last big Renault model that sold very well.
We had these as a sedan as the Eagle Premier. I never remember seeing the Renault hatch version. Did it sell well anywhere but France?
Almost 780,000 of them were built from 1984 to 1992, according to French Wikipedia.
In French-car loving countries outside of France, like Belgium and the Netherlands, the 25 did very well and was a popular family / executive car.
I had forgotten about the Renault V6 Turbo. Wasn’t in the Venturi mid engine sports car in the nineties.
The most powerful R25 had the 2.5 liter V6 PRV engine with a Garrett T3 turbo charger, it was good for 205 hp. That was in the early nineties. As you say, the V6 PRV turbo engines were also used in the mid-engine Venturis.
The successor of the 25 was the Safrane, again, a 5-door hatchback. It was the last big Renault, and it didn’t even come close to the 25’s commercial success.
Below the Renault Safrane Biturbo. German tuning houses Hartge and Irmscher were also involved. It had a 268 hp 3.0 liter V6 engine with 2 KKK turbo chargers. Plus AWD.
Conceptually, I keep thinking that a close descendant of this car would be the 2004-07 Chevy Malibu Maxx.
You found three? And one with a manual transmission? You are doing something right!
This is my favorite K-car derivative and remember being quite intrigued with them when new. At one point in time I remember sitting in the backseat of a Lancer sitting on the showroom floor – it seemed to have significantly more length for my growing legs than did the Reliant my parents owned at the time.
My take on these cars is that Chrysler aimed for a certain market segment, but that group of folks was grazing in a faraway pasture. Plus, using the LeBaron name likely hurt it more than anything else.
CC Effect as I saw a very nicely trimmed Lancer yesterday, but it was dormant at the entrance of a salvage yard. Too bad.
Thanks for the shout-out.
Agree – not a bad car for the times with great styling and practicality – horrific name in terms of association with a LeBaron . . . with a different name and elimination of the low end Hertz/Avis/National/Budget models this might have had more lasting success as a higher end offering.
Great find(s!) and write-up, Stopford! I liked these, but thought the rear was disproportionately truncated. Did these have decent trunk space?
And I’m still stuck on the fact the LeBaron 2-door somehow cost more than the sleek Laser.
40.7 cubic feet. The Camry hatch had 41.3, and the mazda 626 had 21.0, I expect with cargo cover in place.
The short trunk is this car’s strongest attribute.
One of my favorite Chryslers from the 80s as well. My boss back in those days had a loaded Lancer ES, complete with the digital dashboard and I always thought it was a cool car.
I wanted them to put the front clip from the LeBaron coupe on this but they never did (I’m just a sucker for hidden headlights)
I’ll share the overwhelming sentiment here. The LeBaron GTS was my favorite version of the K-car, with good dynamics, sleek styling, and an uber-practical five-door body. And it’s rare enough to be interesting.
Not sure where the company was going with these, though. Chrysler’s advertising of the time sold the GTS as an audacious import-beater; a flagship over lesser Chryslers. But the GTS didn’t have a clear market position, its pricing and equipment list were all over the map, and I doubt it wooed any BMW owners its way.
I assume our featured example is an ’89: That was the year the “GTS” identifier was dropped. That was also the year this was the only 4-door LeBaron in the lineup, since the K-body version ended production after ’88 and the AA-body version didn’t appear until 1990.
I had a 1987 Lancer ES turbo for 10+ years, over 167K miles on it when I sold it off to purchase a Dakota. We bought this car when we thought we were going to be parents for the first time. That was a false alarm, but the car stayed.
Mine was the 2.2 turbo and I had the Level 3 suspension (IIRC, Dodge called theirs something different than Chrysler). I also had the sport seats but a cloth interior in that burgundy color that was in the one photo. I had the same instrument cluster as the one in the photo, too. I loved the turbo motor, but it was something of an on/off switch. Once I learned to anticipate when boost would come on, it wasn’t so bad.
This was the first car of my own I took autocrossing, also. The funniest time was when I forgot to take out the baby seat before I left for the race. I was in competition when I heard all of this clatter in the back of the car, I’d thought I’d broken something, but it was just the seat buckle flapping around.
I later regretted selling off this car, it was so very handy. The pickup truck, while nice, never was quite as handy as either the Lancer or my FIL’s old Caravan. I was able to fit 4′ x 8′ sheets of plywood in the back of the Lancer (as long as they were thin) with the hatch closed. That’s a feat I’ve never been able to repeat with any other sedan.
I loved almost everything about that car; the size, the power (for the times), the utility. There were a few things I didn’t like, like the cheapness of the interior, the somewhat crappy assembly and some of the electronic engine management issues that cropped up as the car got older.
I’d love to have one again today, which I rarely say about any of my other former cars. I wish I could post a picture of it, but the few that I took of it were lost during one of our moves.
Farewell, Lancer.
Ours was an ’85 Lancer ES Turbo, ordered right at the start of production. Maybe that was a factor in why yours lasted and ours proved the 5/50 warranty was a scam.
Wow! 3 in one day thats amazing. ive always liked these. Sharp looking cars in the vein of contemporary Saabs, but American style. It’s baffling to me how these and other sporty driver oriented 5 door hatches didnt sweepthe market and relegate ‘traditional’ 4 doors to formal land yacht status.
One of our neighbors when i was in H.S. had a really clean silver turbo Lancer with manual trans. He did an excessive amount of around town driving and he was known for having the mechanical aptitude of a pop tart….actually his competency on MOST levels was pop tart-esque. That little Dodge soaked up over 250K miles of abuse before it was traded on a new but horribly stodgy Dynasty.
Im always keeping an eye peeled for a clean H body in turbo manual trans form. Just NOT painted that horrible black cherry color. Looks like a blood clot!
This car is way better looking than the Dodge 600.
Definitely my favorite K-car offshoot, like so many here. Fantastic looks for the time and respectable performance–what’s not to like? Oh, the abysmal build quality. Right. And by the time that was sorted, it was too late…though really these cars were aimed at people who never would have even set foot in the dealership. To win those buyers back, you have to have either a near-revolutionary product (like the Taurus) or they have to get burned where they are (which wouldn’t happen until much later as both the Japanese and Germans were at the top of their game in the late 80’s.)
Also does anyone remember the movie Short Circuit 2? The villains drove a LeBaron GTS. That memory always stuck with me.
I owned a Dodge Lancer that my mother had bought new and gave to me when she stopped driving. Every new car from the mid 60’s to mid 80’s purchased by my family or close friends were purchased through my grandmother’s nephew. He was a higher up in Chrysler’s western zone division and got them true wholesale prices or lower. You might not get the exact options or color but the price more than made up for it. The K car that my dads best friend bought was a good car. Trouble free and it got good mileage. It was still running great when he gave it to his nephew 20 yeas later.
The Lancer I got from my mom was a different story. I did not realize that she had had an ongoing problem with the manual window mechanism failing. She had had it repaired 3 times before. The timing belt that she had had replaced a short time before she gave me the car failed within 2 months. Since it was out of the 30 days warranty I was out of luck. A couple of months later the radiator went. This was on a car that was well maintained with less than 80,000 miles on it. Then both the drivers & passenger door windows fell down and would not roll back up. The cost of parts alone for each door was over $400.00 each and the ones I looked at in the wrecking yards weren’t much better. It was cheaply made and it looked to me like an afterthought in like we will design it for power windows and how do we design it to have a crank in the cheapest possible manner. My son’s friend had one at the same time, a turbo version that had the exact same problem. I considered buying doors with power windows which the car was obviously designed to have, but before that happened the car got rear ended and was able to get rid of it. As a free car, I was still in hole when I got rid of it due to repair costs. Only car in 40 years of driving that cost me more than the use I got out of it.
My best friend had a Lancer hatch, his parents had bought it when it was about 2 yrs old, and when the trans let go, my friend inherited it as his first car. We hit the junkyard and got a trans, and were good to go. THese things were HUGE inside, we schlepped our band gear multiple times in it (It was 7-8 years old by then, so we didn’t feel bad about spraypainting “GRUNGEMOBILE” downt the sides… Aaah, youth.) It met its’ demise when my freind fell asleep on the way home from a gig and ran it into a bridge support. (From being tired, no “substances” were involved!) He had a broken wrist, but nothing else was injured. THe car was totalled, though.
A good freind of my parents had a Lebaron GTS, black over black leather, turbo, sunroof, a VERY nice car. They must have sold a LOT more of these in the Midwest where I grew up, since I saw them all over. I don’t know why hatches weren’t more popular, they’re so very much more practical than a sedan.
Oh yeah, I learned how to drive in a Laser, an 84 2.2/5-speed. Those didn’t last because what my parents paid for their base Laser, they could have gotten a turbo Daytona. Also, the Lasers were either basic, or fully loaded (XT) My dad also got the Laser because he thought it would have better resale being a Chrysler instead of a Dodge…
More alsos, my sister had a Duster (fancy Plymouth Sundance) and I had a Shadow for many years so we’re all about the hatchbacks around here.
These and the 1987-1995 LeBaron coupe/convertible are my favorite (non-Shelby) K-Cars. I saw one on I-95 on Connecticut earlier this year: I can’t remember the last time before that I saw one! It had a rear wiper, unlike these.
Those cars are rare to find anywhere these days. I’m thinking it’s been about 10 years since I saw one on a used car lot. I can remember that in the early 1990s, there were quite a few of these running around. Yes, like others have said, these (LeBaron GTS and Lancer) were one of my favorite 1980’s cars which I would have purchased had I been able to afford a new car. The hot – for the time – Shelby Lancer would have been my first choice.
When I moved into my condo back in 1988, my neighbor, a nice gentleman in his 60s, owned a LeBaron GTS. It was brown, with a tan interior and pretty much no options. It was as we say, “a Mexican car”, because everything was “Manuel”… LOL.. No power windows, door locks, seat.. nothing.
But, it was a very nice car indeed. The gentleman kept it in immaculate shape and even though it was never garaged, it always was clean.
I did get to ride in it many times, and I must say it was extremely roomy, comfortable, and solid feeling.
The gentleman had to get rid of the car this year as he gave up driving. His grandson took it over and it still looked and ran new when he gave it to him even though it was 28 years old.
I have to say, those cars as well the LeBaron coupes of that era are my favorite Chryslers of all.
I always thought Chrysler did a good job designing this car with its “hidden hatchback”, similar to the P-cars (Sundance and Shadow). They looked like cars with a separate trunk, but were true hatchbacks. Perhaps the LeBaron GTS would have sold better if it had a different name (as mentioned above), and sold packaged as an only-upscale model, specifying its intentions in the marketplace. (That image problem sounds like the 1958 Edsel now, doesn’t it?!)
I had a GTS somewhere in the early nineties, and it wasn’t a bad car at all. Decently quick, nice driver, and a comfortable interior. They are all gone overhere by now, haven’t seen one for years.
I owned a 1985 Lancer ES for several years. Bought it used in 1990 (I think) and drove it for several years. Gun metal blue, manual transmission. The interior seats were fantastic, and it was a nice complement to my best friend’s Shelby Charger. Yes, the clutch and trans did a remarkable impression of a tractor gearbox, but the car just looked sharp. I dumped a rather expensive stereo system into it and did a modest +1 upgrade to the tires and rims. For a college kid, I thought I was driving large! In my mind, perhaps the best interpretation of the K car lineage around.
I had a 1986 LeBaron GTS as my first car. It was the brighter red/burgundy color with an orange pinstripe (well, parts of an orange pinstripe anyway), and a matching burgundy interior. Mom and dad bought it with 42,000 miles in 1991 after mom totaled her 1985 Cavalier Type-10, and they gave it to me when mom bought a new Grand Am in 1996. Apparently the dealer offered them practically nothing on the trade, so dad told them to pound sand. They came home with mom’s new car and the LeBaron, threw a set of keys at my barely 15-year-old self, and told me I now had a car.
Thank you for acknowledging the odd bench-seat column-shift combo one could order as a delete-option (delete center console) in these cars. My car was so equipped. The “bench” wasn’t so much a bench as it was a seat-belted padded fabric-covered insert that went where the center console normally was. While three people *could* fit in the front of my car, it was not a great idea.
My car, besides having the odd column-shift option (which obviously means automatic), was cursed with the 2.5 base K-Car engine. This meant my LeBaron, while being deemed a sports car by the insurance company, was literally slower than a 1990 Tempo with an automatic. How do I know this? A buddy had a 1990 Tempo sedan with an automatic, and we raced them. He beat me quite handily.
Then there was the reliability When mom and dad gave me the Red Baron, it had 102,000 miles on it. It had eaten a head gasket at 48,000 miles. At 72,000 miles it needed a full rebuild because the head cracked. We literally shot video of the odometer turning 100,000 miles because we had never dreamt it would make it. The engine had a horrible tick by then, and given the past history we figured it wouldn’t be long before it went down again.
So, at 102,000, I had the engine rebuilt again (happily mom and dad knew a mechanic with a junkyard at the time) only to have the transmission fail at 110,000. Never before or since have I seen an automatic car peg the TACHometer before shifting from 1st to 2nd! Funny thing was both transmissions had the same exact clunk when going into Reverse or Drive, something I came to call the Chrysler Clunk of Quality. Not too long after the family friend’s junkyard transmission replacement, a CV joint let loose and managed to break part of the subframe when it did thanks to the rust.
The rust was fun. The body of the car looked fantastic! Not a spot of rust was visible, and the only flaw (when I got the car) was where I’d accidentally power-washed away part of the pinstripe. Underneath, though, the car was a mess. Mom had to wear white uniform pants at the time, and she could never figure out how her pants got muddy in a three mile drive to work on paved roads. Turns out there was a hole rusted through the footwell that allowed road spray through it.
After the CV point/subframe episode, the electronics started to go nuts. The car, even when mom still drove it, had an interesting quirk-the door chime would occasionally go off when we hit a bump. By the time I got it, it would also trigger the “Fasten Belts” light. At about 115,000, though, it started to trigger the “Check Gauges” light (Chrysler’s version of a Check Engine light in that car). Then at about 117,000, the electronics finally decided they were no longer tethered to reality. The tachometer would randomly peg itself, bounce up and down, or quit working. The lights would all come on, all go out, flicker, whatever. The door chime by this point just came on randomly and went out randomly, so I’d be driving 60 miles per hour with “Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding” going on for miles at a time.
And the build quality. Oh the build quality! The dash had a permanent squeak I could never solve, despite tightening the exposed fasteners again and again. The chairs used an almost-corduroy sort of fabric, oriented with the stripes from front to back. Needless to say, by the time I got the car, the chairs had long-since split open. Applying Armor-All to the dash buffed away the burgundy dye and revealed the yellow plastic underneath. The driver’s window crank (yes it had manual windows and manual locks) broke off in my hand. I fixed that by taking the passenger window crank for my side.
The cruise control was a joke. It would lose 7 miles per hour when I set it. Hitting Accelerate ran it up 7 miles per hour before it dropped back 4 (net gain of 3). Hitting Decelerate dropped 5 miles per hour. The air conditioning was a joke, as in it stopped working in 1993. The parking brake was a joke, as in the pedal was literally rusted in place. The gas gauge was a joke, as anything below 1/4 meant the car probably wouldn’t restart. Imagine the embarrassment my 17-year-old self felt having to ask my grandma for a ride to the gas station because the car ran fine pulling up to her house but wouldn’t start when I went to leave!
In my junior year of high school, I took the proceeds from my after-school job and bought a 1989 Bonneville for $1,800. The Red Baron was approaching 120,000, and it seemed like every day there was a new noise or a new flaw or something else had stopped working properly. I ended up selling it for $500.
In 2002, I was coming home from university for break, and as I passed the junkyard/last-chance car dealer near my parents’ house I saw a familiar car out front. Turns out that, yes, it was my Red Baron, and with only 4,000 more miles on it than when I had sold it three years before. The interior had been destroyed. The radio had been removed. The exterior had a couple more dents than when I had it. Turns out the people I sold it to ran it for a few months before it quit all together. They abandoned it in their yard for three years before they finally sold it for scrap. The junkyard people figured out that the ECM (or whatever Chrysler called it) had failed, so they put in a different one from one of the junkyard cars.
They were asking $375 cash for the car. That’s how far downhill it had gone, that in 2002 they were asking $375 for a running drivable car.
What’s extra funny is that in the same time frame mom and dad were running the Red Baron, my uncle had a 1986 LeBaron, same exterior color as ours, but the higher-spec version. His had leather, the digital dash, and the Turbo motor (with automatic, though). His liked to eat alternators and turbos. When he was faced with replacing the turbo a third time, he abandoned the car in his yard. It later became his dog kennel before he sold it for scrap.
You wanna know the sick part? Now as I’m in my 30s, there’s a part of me that, if I found a cherry example with a manual and the Turbo engine, I’d have a hard time walking away from another LeBaron GTS. I still think they’re sharp-looking cars, and it’s hard for me to deny how much fun I had in the POS example I had.
I am not sure how I missed this the first time around. I remember giving one of these a test drive in the summer of 1985. I was really into the whole Chrysler turnaround, and liked the idea of the then-modern design of the car. As I recall it, I wanted to try a stick but there was not one of the lot. I drove a gray turbo automatic. I wanted to like the car, but the subjective feel of the experience was a disappointment. The powertrain felt smoother than the Thunderbird Turbo Coupe I tried but the body felt thin and insubstantial to the Thunderbird. Also, while the car matched up on paper to something like the Saab 900 Turbo, the actual car was just not the same thing.
Remember that this car came out before the Taurus and before the Corsica/Beretta, and was really impressively modern compared to the competition. But it was like so many Mopars of that generation, a sport sedan that was maybe 85-90% of the way there. That 10-15% that was missing turned out to be significant.
Echk. I have never liked any version of these.
I purchased a new ’85 Dodge Turbo Lancer. At the time it was the most expensive and well equipped car I had ever owned. I was quite impressed by the styling, given the humble platform the car was derived from.
Unfortunately the manual trans would have been deemed inferior in a J.I.Case tractor that I was helping to design at the time. The car’s durability was not good, as it took out its head gasket at 40K+ miles. It was traded and became my first and last MoPar product. 🙁 DFO
Mom had a Dodge Lancer, plain-jane version of this model, for about six months. It was out of the repo lot but Dad got it with under 20K miles if I recall. Mom liked the hatchback for groceries, but that was about it. We suffered through every other fault mentioned above—abysmal build quality, faulty electronics, paper-thin upholstery, carcinogenic plastics, and a rattly, underpowered drivetrain. It got replaced pretty quickly, and I think it was either this or the Dodge Mirada that ended Dad’s brief romance with Chrysler for good.
We ended up with a few in our rental fleets near the end of their cycle, and I wanted to like it. The problem was that, under it all, was still the light KCar and the car didn’t seem solid. We normally rented Mercury and Lincoln vehicles, so I was used to a more solid feeling car. The KCar derived Chryslers never had the feel and heft until it was weighed down with stuffing and sound deadners like the New Yorker and Dynasty versions.