(first posted 10/18/2013)
Before we discuss this “Little Dodge Coupe,” a little history-
In the late seventies and early eighties, Chrysler stuck gold in the Personal Luxury Coupe segment with the Cordoba. A combination of solid styling and the right price moved these new coupes out of the Chrysler showrooms as if they were Chevy Monte Carlos. However, over at the Dodge Boys, these same cars languished on the showroom floor, ignored and unloved.
Searching for that Cordoba magic, Dodge changed the only thing they could- The name. Over a six year span, Dodge hung three different names on their personal luxury coupe. Starting with the Charger SE in 1975, they followed up with the Magnum in ’78, and Mirada in ’80. None caught fire and in 1982 Dodge headed in a new direction, captured for you here.
Building on the success of the K-car, Chrysler had developed a luxury K, and planned to market it as the LeBaron. Since Dodge dealers did not typically dual with the Chrysler brand, Dodge received its own version of this new compact personal luxury car, and once again went with a new name- the 400.
Based on the Aries coupe, the 400 came with a unique front clip, unique-ish tail lights, and luxury interior touches. Like the LeBaron, the 400 also came as a convertible, but we’ll save that for the real thing. However, when it was all said and done, the overall silhouette still said “K-Car.” Would a new clip and a new name be enough to move these cars?
Wise men say “No.” Dodge moved 24,090 400s in 1982, and 32,052 in ’83. These sales paled in comparison to the LeBaron’s 81,599 in ‘82 and 80,566 in ’83. While the 400 offered pretty much the same package as the LeBaron, buyers simply did not care to shop for luxury models at Dodge dealerships.
I know when you look at the luxury touches in this interior, you find those sales numbers hard to believe. But history tells us that power windows, wood tone trim, and cloth bucket seats weren’t enough to overcome the stigma of the Dodge nameplate.
In addition, Dodge designers missed the mark by mixing their styling cues. One one hand, this brougham-tastic half vinyl top projected 80’s domestic luxury.
While these fender vents telegraphed big block high performance. Given these mixed messages (and 2.2 liter four cylinder power) it’s no surprise the 400 didn’t deliver on the sales front.
These pictures may not be the best, but trust me when I say improved images would not improve the looks of this car. Dodge seemed to agree, and in a bid to ignite sales, they made a mid year change in 1984.
The change? Back to the well for a new name. Adding 200 more to the 400, they rolled out the 600. Did it work?
Of course not- Dodge does not do personal luxury!
Looks like this example had a steering wheel transplant. The instrument panel is ’82 only, but that steering wheel came out of an ’84-86 Chrysler product.
That is an impressive observation.
+1 on the steering wheel. The original 82-83 steering wheel would have been hard plastic.
I don’t think that’s a transplanted steering wheel. From what I can gather, the 400 coupe retained a much more K-car-like 2-pod cluster through the first model run, whereas the 400 convertibles had an instrument cluster that was identical to the Lebaron’s (except for maybe the 1982 400 convertible, which was the only year that got the coupe’s 2-pod cluster).
Dave, Tom did find a 1982 Dodge 400 convertible recently here:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/cc-capsule-1982-dodge-400-convertible-pepperoni-wheels-make-everything-better/
The Dodge 400 did have one claim to fame, though: it was the first American passenger car to re-introduce a convertible body style, since the 1976 Cadillac Eldorado “last” convertible. The VW Cabriolet was the only open-air vehicle left at that point in time, not counting the Jeep CJ-5 and CJ-7 and removable roof SUVs like the full-size Blazer and Bronco.
Wasn’t it also the 400 (or LeBaron?) convertible that was the first American passenger car to have a CHMSL, a couple of years ahead of their 1986 mandate?
I beleive the first car to have the CHMSL (Center High Mounted Stop Lamp in NHSTA speak) were the GM N-bodies (FWD Grand Am, Somerset, and Calais).
These cars came out in 1985, a year before the CHMSL mandate. By adding the light, GM avoided builidng a one year only wiring harness, and released a 1985 model with 1986 model year styling (Futuristic!).
The 1972 Oldsmobile Toronado had high-mounted brake lights as well, although in that case it was driven by styling, not regulation.
Let’s not forget the high mounted lights on the Citreon DS C-pillars (which may have been turn signals), and the accessory tail lights mounted on top of New York Taxicab fenders back in the day.
I believe the Taxicabs were part of the research groups that established that CHMSL’s did indeed reduce accidents (at least until all cars had them and they became part of the ladnscape).
These lights actually made their production debut on the FWD Cadillacs for MY 1985 (introduced in the Spring of ’84).
Call me crazy, but I do kinda like these. It’s amazing how changing the header panel on an Aries can create such a difference in appearance.
Growing up, the retired music teacher at my elementary and high school had one of these in a silver gray color. She had swapped off her ’75-ish Valiant for it. Her son was very good friends with my father, so whenever her son was in the U.S., he was using her car; thus, I saw it up close quite a bit.
Being accustomed to driving on the autobahn, he once got pulled over in the 400. The Illinois cop asked him why (and how) he was driving somewhere north of 80 mph. He explained that’s how people where he lived drove – keep it planted on the floor.
It struck me even then that it was a tarted up K-car, but to my eye Chrysler had done a decent job of attempting to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. Like it or not, they did get good at that exercise.
Oh, and the music teacher’s name was Edna…
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-american/curbside-classic-1971-plymouth-valiant-edna-gets-her-car-tuned-up/
Jason may be crazy, but I agree with him on this one. I always thought that the Dodge 400 was a better looking car than the LeBaron variant. Of course, maybe that makes me crazy too, as the Chrysler sales doubled that of the Dodge.
The rear of this car reminded me a lot of the 1964 Dodge. The front and rear treatment on these was, to me, the best looking of any of the K cars. Today though, the proportions of this car are just wrong.
The 400/600’s rear end kind of does look like that ’64.
What you see there is the Polara 4 door hardtop, and those had the backup lights, unlike the lesser 440’s, and 330’s.
We had the wagon version of the 330, with the 225 slant six and torqueflite that we bought new in ‘summer of ’64, and kept until late summer of ’77 before selling it.
It lasted us over 140K miles, and made, not 1, not two, but THREE trips across the country between 1964-1969.
Great find Dave! I’ve always wanted to see one of these in person, but sadly never have had that fortune.
Many don’t know, but this “luxury K-car” was also sold as a Plymouth Caravelle in Canada. Not to be confused with the RWD M-body Caravelle Salon, nor the E-body Caravelle sedan, the K-Caravelle was marketed similarly to the 400, as an upmarket version of the Reliant coupe. It also had its own front clip and rear styling shared with the E-Caravelle. No convertible however. I think it’s safe to say that this Caravelle wasn’t a huge seller either.
The Plymouth Caravelle was also a Plymouth version of the Dodge Diplomat in the late 70s. I recall seeing one in Canada on a trip to Niagra Falls in 1979. I had never heard of a Caravelle before that. I believe that the Caravelle eventually made it to the US as a Plymouth version of the Dodge 600.
Kee-rect. https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-american/curbside-classic-1987-plymouth-caravelle-se-this-ship-still-sails/
Yes, us Canucks get some automotive oddities from time to time! The Caravelle name was used on three (3) different platforms at the same time for a couple years as mentioned in the excellent post by Brendan Saur. Imagine going to an automotive parts counter trying to find a specific part for your Caravelle!
The root problem goes back to the introduction of the Cordoba in ’75. Originally intended to be a Plymouth, they decided to badge it as a “small” Chrylser, toppling what little logic they had in differentiating their three car brands. They already had enough trouble juggling the competing demands of Dodge and Plymouth. Going all the way back to the ’20s Plymouth was their mass market car “in the low price field,” expect when Dodge wanted more volume. Then by taking Chrysler down market, they ended up with three mass-market brands chasing after volume sales. No matter what, that’s going to leave a lot of orphaned nameplates in each brand’s lineup, like this poor Dodge 400. With generic styling and without any marketing support behind it, it gave car shoppers no reason to notice it.
This problem continues today. They don’t want to have Town & Country minivans sharing showroom space with Grand Caravans, but they can’t decide which nameplate should go, because both are selling in high volumes. And since neither brand means anything to consumers, there’s no basis to make a decision about which brand is a better fit for a minivan. Worse, there’s no logical way to trim down their Chrysler-Dodge-Ram-Jeep-Mopar-SRT-Fiat-Alfa brand lineup, because while Dodge is arguably the weakest brand, it’s also the brand that continues to sell in the highest volume.
GM is not the only one with Deadly Sins.
To me, a deadly sin is a car that is a piece of junk that wrecks a brand image.
So a Dodge Aspen is a deadly sin, but meaningless nameplates like the Mirada, 600 or marketplace confusion over minivans that sell in the millions, isn’t.
I agree, Chrysler shouldn’t have tried to ape what was happening at GM by watering down their brand hierarchy.
I think Marchionne is nuts introducing all these new brands. RAM and SRT are primarily pirating vehicles from the Dodge line-up, and branding vehicles as Mopar is just confusing and also seems to overlap with the SRT brand.
IMO, the solution to the minivan “problem” would be to make Town & Country the top trim level of the Grand Caravan.
Sorry for going off on a tangent.
I think Detroit automakers were a smaller, more incestuous brotherhood that we might think. These guys personally knew each other and were often neighbors in the same neighborhood.
So, GM’s mid-20th Century success was more than a big deal to Ford and Chrysler after WWII. Even the Independant makes imagined making a Packard-Studebaker-Nash-Hudson-Rambler and calling it AMC. Believing that success in a five-tier brand structure similar to GM was a strong enough belief for both Chrysler and Ford to copy it.
It took GM over fifty years to regret it, which was fifty years longer than it took Ford and Chrysler. AMC couldn’t happen when Nance and Romney butted heads, and Packard ended up with a bankrupted Studebaker instead of an equal partner. Romney saved AMC only through Rambler, then Abernathy pushed AMC out of it’s shrinking niche into an impossible larger market.
But that Five-Tier Brand Structure GM made work so well for so long did seem like a given within Detroit as the way to go. I seriously doubt that many viewing GMs success at this time questioned the wisdom of it. When the Market grew so quickly, and so profitably after the War, the secondary unintended negative consequences of the Five-Tier Brand Structure probably looked managable.
Look at how much money was lost by Ford and Chrysler trying to do what GM was doing – wow. I bet both companies had moments when they wished they didn’t try.
But these car men were pretty hard-core, and just had to give it the old college try, right?
If Dodge is the brand that continues to sell in the highest volume, how in blazes is it the weakest brand?
Weakest was probably the wrong adjective. It’s just that Dodge is a brand doesn’t carry any particular meaning for most buyers. Jeep sells in smaller volumes, but the Jeep brand has a rugged, outdoor, go-anywhere image that’s meaningful to people who seek a vehicle like that. Ask a Jeep buyer why he or she chose that car, and you’ll get an answer about its Trail Rated(TM) capabilities, validated on the Rubicon Trail. Ask a Dodge owner the same question, and the answer will be that the buyer got a really great deal on it.
Ask yourself what distinguishes a Dodge from any other car. It’s hard to come up with something. Ask the same question about BMW, Toyota, Honda, Volkswagen — even Chevrolet or Ford — and you’re a lot more likely to think of distinctive qualities for that brand.
When you’re selling a generic car, the only way you can get a buyer’s attention is with rebates and cost cutting, which is the road to a third trip into bankruptcy.
I have to chuckle when I see comments that Dodge has no identity beyond a generic appliance vehicle when the thrust of the brand’s products have been decidedly as a sportier alternative in the Mopar lineup since the 1960s and the arrival of the Scat Pack. Charger, Challenger, Viper, Demon 340, Super Bee, Polara 500, Coronet 500, Daytona, SRT, R/T, Stealth, Shelby this and that, hell even the Omni had a GLH (goes like hell) version that impressed the reviewers.
From its inception until the 1950s the Dodge was known for solid dependability, reasonable style, comfort and the advanced engineering that all Chrysler brands had at that time relative to the competition. Beginning with the D500 option on the be-finned Exner models there rose a sporty identity that fully blossomed with the Scat Pack models. Even recently in Dodge showrooms you will find V-8 hemi-powered sedans and coupes that are rare to find from other brands, so saying that BMW, Toyota, Honda, and even Ford or Chevy represent something and Dodge does not is just idiotic.
If anything Dodge brand identity is far clearer today than what is displayed by Honda or Toyota. One could say that with the top three halo cars, the Viper, Hellcat Challenger, and Hellcat Charger, the brand has made a very powerful statement of what Dodge means in the market place. Does Toyota even have a halo vehicle in its lineup? When was the last Supra sold? Is the the Honda S2000 on the showroom floor? What is BMW anymore? Sport or Luxury? The 2002ti wasn’t a luxury car, but is a 7 series a sporting car? Seems a lot of people leasing their new 320i really question if it is the ultimate driving machine.
Fourth, there is a relatively unknown one in the 1950s.
Until 1960, most Dodge, DeSoto, and Chrysler dealer franchises were paired with Plymouth. (A few dealers had all of them, but that was rarer.) The idea was to give dealers who sold the pricier brand something cheaper to sell alongside it, which was a useful hedge during the Depression. Toward the end of the ’50s, there was talk of letting Plymouth become an independent division, but that never actually happened, perhaps because it would have made things tougher for Chrysler dealers.
So, instead, Chrysler paired Plymouth solely with Chrysler, placating Dodge dealers upset about losing their entry-level models by giving Dodge its own versions of Plymouth models. Chrysler had a hard time trying to move Plymouth upmarket at all because (as we’ve previously talked about w/r/t the Plymouth VIP) it became easier (and more profitable, I assume) for salespeople to just put someone in one of the low-end big Chryslers instead.
For much of its history, the vast majority of Chrysler brand sales were of the low-end models. (Before the introduction of the FirePower, I was startled to find how few Chrysler eights were sold.) Even in the ’50s, senior management was getting uneasy about that and at one point actually wanted to drop the low-end model (which at that time was the Windsor) to try to move Chrysler more upscale. Again, they didn’t do it because that would likely have been crippling to dealers, especially if they’d also split off Plymouth — it would have deprived franchises of like fourth-fifths of their business.
Giving every Chrysler, Dodge and DeSoto dealer the Plymouth franchise was key in providing an instant National dealer network which would be crucial in launching Plymouth as a real competitor in the low price field. Plymouth went from zero to sixty almost overnight with that kind of dealer network that nobody but Ford and Chevy could outdo. The eventual tradeoff was that as Ford and Chevy began to march up-market in the 60s, Plymouth was stopped because the higher-prestige Chrysler Newport sat in the same showroom for not that much more money.
“Moving up to Chrysler” usually came at the expense of Plymouth and Dodge. . . .
More so when Desoto was dropped as most franchises were “DeSoto-Plymouth” dealers. Mopar made concessions by offering those guys Chrysler in place of DeSoto. Dodge always got what they wanted to whining and like over at GM, most Mopar brass came up through the ranks with Dodge (much like GM top dogs came up through Buick); naturally there was some Dodge Division nepotism. This was true in the late 50’s when Plymouth was (supposed to be) a standalone. Slap 2 came for MY 1960 when Dodge got the Dart, priced like a Plymouth which predictably ate into Plymouth sales. Ditto the Lancer . . . . Demon/Dart Sport . . . on and on.
So true. History repeated itself time and time again over at Mopar where they usually competed with themselves. The main reason the Dodge 400 saw mild sales were due to the same reasons the lower rung Mopars had lower sales; their bigger brothers had essentially the same car with a more prestigious name at a slightly higher price.
For a buyer to “take the plunge and move up to Chrysler!” was a tempting offer. This was no different in the eighties.
On a separate note, I kick myself in the ass for not buying that ’83 Dodge Mirada on the showroom floor in October of ’83 that the dealer was desperately trying to move . . . . oh well . . .
The nameplate cracks me up. Look! The number sits on a line! Just like a Mercedes!
Of course, if you want REAL luxury, move up to the E-Class (Chrysler). It differs from the Dodge in many important ways, such as, uhhh.
I noticed that too, lol nice try Dodge!
The Benz like number was done that way on purpose . . . to give the illusion of being ‘important.’
I had a Dodge 400 coupe that was also a “talking car.” As in, “a door is a jar.”
Many years ago I was asked to move one of these in a driveway and was startled and annoyed by the car barking “your door is ajar” at me. At the time I thought that a talking car isn’t very useful, but a car one can talk to might be.
Fast forward 30 years and now I drive a car I can talk to. I guess that’s progress.
I got a ride in one of the talking K-cars once, I believe my only experience riding in a K-car. When you started it, it would announce, “All monitored systems are functioning normally.” I quietly muttered, “You must not be checking very much then.”
Yup, in the 80’s a gf’s Dad had one of those. As the mighty turbo 2.2 clanked into life it would make the serene announcement, and I would counter with “you must not be checking the engine”
I too think Jason is crazy, I don’t think the stigma was the Dodge nameplate per se, but even with the design tweaks this was obviously a K car.
In other news, it’s a banner CC day in Hamilton Ontario, a story about an Amphicar made the front page of the paper. Must be a slow news day..
http://www.thespec.com/news-story/4162961-mahoney-a-car-with-water-wings/
There are some brands I know a lot about, but have never appealed to me. One of those American brands is Dodge. I live in the heartland of the US, where there are a surprisingly large contingency of Dodge products and Dodge owners, but I seem to be completely immune to what Dodge offers.
So, like a vast majority of buyers, I like the LeBaron, but never gave two hoots about the 600 – even though I thought the 600 was an attractive take on the K-car. So those sales figures don’t surprise me. Also, the Plymouth Caravelle offered in the States during this era was the stretched version of the K-car, which I think was the Dodge 800 at that same time. I think I recall a running joke during that time of driving a brown Dodge as some kind of a punch line in a popular comedy series – WKRP? I think Gordon Jump’s character drove one and that was meant to be some kind of a joke, and was. That seems to have been the going cultural image of a Dodge back in these days. Unfair, I’m sure. On the other hand, I couldn’t take personal offense since the brand never personally attracted me.
I see that Dodge is doing pretty well today. Finally killing off Plymouth has given them all the needed attention they have craved over the past sixty years. But mostly I think Dodge has benefitted from it’s truck line, the popularity of SUVs and minivans has helped them, and bringing back the Dodge Charger and Challenger helped them with sales among guys who remember those cars from forty years ago, and other seniors.
But I’d rather have a Chrysler over a Dodge – any day and in any permutation.
I’d almost forgotten that these existed, it has been so long since I’ve seen one. Funnily enough, I do remember when the convertible 400 was introduced, a New Orleans Dodge dealer hosted an unveiling “party,” perhaps trying to rekindle the magic of days gone by. Well, my Pop and I went to the event (pretty lame), but I do remember the 400 convertible on the showroom floor. It was white with a red interior, and it was nice to see a convertible again. I also thought the upgrades versus the Aries were pretty decent, though it did beg the question why? After all, Chrysler was supposed to be the “premium” brand, right?
Well, maybe not so much. I dated a girl in high school, whose Daddy loved to spoil her. When she got her driver’s license, he “treated” her to a brand new Chrysler LeBaron convertible with the Mark Cross package. The leather inside was very nice, I will admit. Which was good, since the thing was so slow, you spent a looooong time on those seats. I remember driving it and being amazed that you could press the pedal to the floor and not much happened except more noise (the experience amplified with the top down but no wind in your hair). It just wanted to go at its own pace.
Her Daddy, while well-intentioned, definitely had misguided judgement on cars for his kids. When her younger brother got his license, he was “treated” to a Fiero. Oh well, it was better than the school bus.
Woof!
There is a very nice one that I see around once and a while. It has an attractive two tone paint but the coupes always looked truncated and too short somehow. The 400 front clip is quite attractive in my opinion.
With these models, Chrysler fell into the GM and Ford early 80’s trap of trying to graft the styling of their discontinued larger cars onto the new compact front-drivers. The nose on this was basically a scaled down version of what had previously been on the Mirada.
I worked for a woman who had one of these, and when I asked her why she had bought it, her answer was, “I like Dodges.” That was all she could come up with, so we left it at that.
Um, FWD Fords of the 80s were pretty radically styled, very much unlike any thing GM (or Chrysler) was doing, and unapologetically ushered in the aero era with flush-fitting front ends, highly raked front and rear glass, and wrap-over doors. I don’t see how one could possibly mistake them for being styled like 70s LTDs.
Maybe take another look at what JohnC said, erm, 8½ years ago. He compared this 1982 Dodge to what GM and Ford (also ) did in the early 1980s, and he was right about it. The aero Fords you describe didn’t come along until the 1986 Taurus.
Don’t forget the Tempo (1983). It was the first FWD Ford in the size class under discussion here. And for the very first front-driver from Dearborn, the ’81 Escort, they only slightly softened – and apart from chrome grills did not at all Broughamify – the skin over Ford of Europe’s hard points.
Groan. I had forgot. Thanks heaps! X-)
I actually like the styling, I thought the K-Car (and the Fairmont) were very well executed 3-box designs for the time compared to the broaghamtastic barges we’d been subjected to for the past decade. They were foisted on us by parents as cheap college transportation because they were semi-reliable and viewed as ‘safe’ because of their sluggishness and tons of metal ‘between me and another car’. The parking lots at school were filled with them in 1985. My roomate had a 74 Torino, I was driving a 76 Cougar XR-7. His best friend had a Cordoba…
I’m glad Dodge didn’t go to further excess with the 400, it’s right on the edge of broaghamania and overplushness but still has dignity and excellent gas mileage as a bonus. I wouldn’t kick this car out of bed…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mexican_Chrysler_Magnum_1983-1988.jpg
Meanwhile, south of the border…..
Magnum P.U.
I’m not sure to what degree Chrysler was hoping for sales magic with the Charger SE, Magnum, Mirada, 400, etc. I’m assuming that even they knew that these were badge engineered cars that that reflected less variance from their Chrysler counterparts then was previously evident in annual model refreshes 15 years earlier.
So, for the cost of a “sporty trim-line,” Chrysler was able to create a different look for its basic models, that for these cars apparently 25,000 to 30,000 people a year preferred over the “Chrysler look.” Kind of like choosing a 1970 Chrysler 300 over a 1970 Chrysler New Yorker. Same car, slightly different approach to trim and packaging.
Real hope for new magic is based on a substantially new and different vehicle, but it was a chance Chrysler could only afford to take every so often. These cars kept the lights on at Dodge dealers.
Yes, I think the key was that Chrysler and Plymouth were sold by one group of dealers and Dodge was sold by a separate group. In Chrysler’s modern history (say after 1970), there was almost never a car sold in one dealer line that was not sold under another name at the other. Even Plymouth got full sized vans in the 70s. With all of the cars sold in the same showrooms today, there should be a lot more freedom to fine-tune the brands to make them more cohesive.
I knew a girl in college who’s dad had a near new Dodge 600 variant. I thought the driving experience was amazingly close to driving my mother’s ’78 Caprice B-body, just on a smaller and more fuel efficient scale. Competent enough at the showroom. I never had much real K-Car experience, so I can’t comment on the long term reliability.
In the mid 90s I bought a 1986 Dodge 600ES (or SE can’t remember now) for my wife. It was a very un-American car experience compared to Mopars from the 70s. But sometimes it was fun to drive because so light I could toss it around recklessly. That is until one day as I was taking a long sweeping S curve the car would not respond to my steering input. The captive nuts holding the steering rack had come loose from the K-member. I replaced the K member with one from a LeBaron, which had a bigger sway bar. While I was at the junkyard I also scored a leather wrapped steering wheel with the crystal Chrysler emblem on the center pad, and leather center armrests.
Soon after my dad offered me his much despised ’89 Pontiac 6000LE and I sold the Dodge to a poor unsuspecting teenager.
that car, along with just about any 1980s Mopar, makes me want to puke
When I was 12 and living in the LA suburbs, the mom of my friend down the street bought one of these new, it would have late ”81 or early ’82. It was brown and looked nice (as it was a new car), replacing a Monza IIRC.
At the time I thought the 400 was an OK car but nothing special. I rode in it several times. I do know that I rarely saw any more of these as I was growing up, the sales numbers explain why along with the renaming to 600. For some reason I’ve always assumed that the 400 was a 4cylinder and the 600 was a 6cylinder. Early K-cars are interesting for me to look at now mainly due to the fact that there are not many left.
A friend of the family bought one of these new in ’84. Since I was nine, I thought it was so cool because (1) it was a new car and I had never been in one before, and (2) it was a talking car, (like KITT!). That, and the digital clock on the AM/FM stereo. I found it odd, though, that it had a manual transmission. It didn’t match the wire wheel covers, the “plush” interior, and the “modern technology”. The car promptly rusted out and our friend gave it to his brother when he bought a brand new ’91 Spirit R/T. I luv’d that car, but not as much as the brand new ’93 Intrepid ES he traded it for two years later.
I remember when these were new, and knowing they were a derivative of the K car even then. That being said, I’ve always liked these cars for what they were, honest cars for the day that did what they were designed to do, keep Chrysler going, and they did just that.
True, the base Aries/Reliant twins weren’t much to look at, though they were pleasant looking nonetheless. They did eventually prove to be utterly reliable, decently economical, and practical for the money being charged. The 400/600 models essentially took these upscale, sort of. However, that said, I’ve always liked the front clips of these MUCH better than the more plain Jane K car front clips, as it gave the cars a much sportier appearance, faux luxury goodies added notwithstanding.
However, I’ve always known that Plymouth was the bread and butter make, meaning a tad plainer, and less powerful, but practical, while Dodge was the middle brand that could do entry level basic car, but its claim to fame was being more powerful/sporty overall, but even by the late 60’s and early 70’s, overlaps were common between Plymouth and Dodge, thus the lines were blurred to some extent.
Then There was Chrysler with its bit larger models, with more luxury, and to get into the grand luxury/size, you bought an Imperial.
However, the lines by the 60’s weren’t as distinct as they could be in many cases and I wonder if that led to some of Chryco’s descent over the years, at least to some extent.
That said, I have always been a Mopar fan as I’ve grown up with them.
A friend of mine had a 600, it was his nightmare car, the worst ever. It had to be towed quite often. The last straw was when he had the car towed to the dealer, fixed, and about two miles down the road, it died again, with a totally different problem than what it came in for. It was the sixth repair in about 2 months, and he had finally had enough. The dealer, who had sold him 3 previous cars, felt sorry for him and gave him a really good trade in and deal on a Caravan. The 600 was given to a tech to “finally figure out the problems no matter how long it takes”, and after a couple of months of fixes, he finally got the bugs out of it, and it was the loaner car for the service department for years afterwards. The Caravan was great, almost no problems for the almost 10 years he had it. The next Caravan wasn’t so great, so he went to Saturn for a while, but the last one, a Vue, was almost as bad as the 600, and turned him off to GM. Now he’s about to say goodbye to Subaru, as the Outback he’s got has been having a lot of issues, like the one before it. I wonder if he’ll ever give Ford a try?
This story re-enforces a belief I have long held. Any given percentage of consumers will have a bad experience with a brand, and vow to never buy it again. Do the manufacturers care? No, because they know the same percentages of PO’d customers apply to other brands, who may then give their brand a try. It’s cheaper for them to write off disaffected customers than it is to do right by them.
That strategy worked until the tight, quality-controlled Japanese came along. Most people who bought a Toyota rarely got a bad one, and never looked back.
That’s not to say it didn’t happen. My dad had an early nineties’ Corolla where a front CV joint suddenly crapped at 55k miles. Luckily, it happened while he was parking and driving slowly. It was repaired under warranty but because he feared what would have happened had it came apart at highway speeds, he traded it for an Outback wagon. He’s since had good luck with Subaru and, as you might surmise, just like with the described domestic scenario, he never bought another Toyota.
At the time, I though the semi-coolest of this line was the 600ES convertible towards the end of the run. Turbo, available manual trans, beefy alloy “swiss cheese” rims and meatier tires. In black or gray. The latter K-derived convertibles had rear seat windows, and a top profile that was a little less boxy than the first examples. My family had a Lebaron GTS Turbo, a 5-door hatchback that was as rare then as it is now. We didn’t have any problems with it at all.
The ’85 N-bodies did not have the center brake light. (I had an 85 Grand Am without it.) But the 85 downsized DeVille did. I believe that was the first car to have it before the ’86 mandate.
I bought a 1983 Plymouth Caravelle in 1986. I had it for 10 years. It was identical to the LeBaron of that year, except for the grill. Interior, exterior, tail lights ( missing a bulb which was easy to add because the wiring was there) It was posh for a Plymouth, and as the years wore on, newer models were cheapened. I recall is being a good car, but I did baby it, and it was in the shop a great deal compared to a modern car.
That said, it never left me stranded, was quiet and comfortable, with good mileage, and with the velvet buckets, wire wheels, crystal hood ornament (swapped from a LeBaron), and a padded half vinyl roof with opera windows and Frenched rear window…it was the intimate in Broughamtastic!
Maybe it didn’t do well because Dodge was the sporty one compared to Chrysler’s upscale pretensions or Plymouth’s value-added schtick? What was sporty about the 400? Or the Charger or Magnum before it? Well, the Magnum had sporty styling, but it was a softly sprung luxury coupe, which was not really Dodge’s forte.
I think Dodge had the same problem moving into the 70s that Pontiac did. Dodge was about performance in the 60s. Dodge was not about luxury. Unfortunately, as the 70s unfolded, sport/performance was out and luxury broughamance was in. At least Pontiac had the Grand Prix, that was pretty successful. The Charger/Magnum/Mirada kept trying for too much sport mixed in with the luxury, and flopped. But at least Dodge was not cannibalizing Chrysler sales like the Grand Prix did with the Cutlass and Century.
Only the 400 Coupe and convertible carried over and became Dodge 600 models in 1984. The 400 sedan died in 1983 because the Dodge 600 sedan was born and offered for the 1983 model year. In 1984 The 400 ceased to exist and the coupe and convertible moved over to the 600 name plate.
Here is a pic of a 1983 Dodge 600 sedan(I have a pic of the owners manual for it and it is a 1983) that i saw in the junk yard this past weekend. It is a very broughamy car with plush seats and a cloth top and it was called Dodge 600 Elegante(there was nothing elegant about this big POS now or in 1983) but it has a K-car like interior(nothing like a little Aries K for your E Body) and manual windows, locks, analog radio, no cruise control. In short Dodge wants you to pay more money for pretty much standard Aries K features
That’s a dealer installed package…they never did that from the factory. Not sure why anyone would buy a hack job like this, but people seem to. I see padded vinyl roofs on all kind of cars, even today. Wow!
I remember running across one of these coupes years ago. I was rather impressed with the level of equipment the car had, especially compared to my co-worker’s Aries K car with bench seats and no A/C. I was in my 20’s then, so the whole square rigged coupe styling didn’t appeal to me, but the interior with the nice buckets and console interior really was great. I had never considered one of these before.
But, by the time I thought about searching one out, I had discovered the Dodge Lancer ES Turbo fit my driving needs much better than a 400. I bought one of those and never looked back. But, I would totally rock a 400 Turbo convertible. Just fit it with the “pepperoni” wheels and a monochromatic paint scheme, and we’re good to go! Viva la 80’s…
For those who are not aware, I know the owner of this car. This is THE LAST SURVIVING 1982 DODGE 400 2DR SEDAN IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT ACTUALLY STILL RUNS!!!!!!!!!!!
I don’t want to hear a lot of negativity. This is a luxurious classic from 30 years ago. It needs to be preserved.
Sincerely,
Guy V.Coulombe
The Chrysler K-Car Club
818-219-2587
Thanks for your comment. It certainly does deserve to be appreciated as the survivor it is. Our site is all about finding and appreciating veterans still on the road.
But we’re historians, and don’t hold back in honestly discussing any given’s car place in history, and its strengths and weaknesses. Negative comments about a given model of car in general should not be taken personally about the specific car in question. I know that can be challenging at times, but please be assured that we are all here fundamentally to celebrate the survivors, including this 400.
Paul, I might also mention this car didn’t run for 4-5 years, until 2011. The owner rebuilt the engine.
Here is another interesting Canadian marketing fact: the Dodge 400 sedan was not sold in Canada, likely for the reason that Chrysler and Dodge dealers were linked together. So, having 2 cars for essentially the same purpose did not make sense. However, I rather liked the Dodge 400 sedan.
I agree Marky. The 400 Sedan looks pretty sharp. Sure the LeBaron Sedan was even nicer, but the 400 Sedan had the right look for a lower-priced entry. If I could find a 400 Sedan, I would not hesitate to go for it knowing it’s perhaps one of the least produced K-Cars built aside from the Executive Sedans and of course Limos. And besides, I’ve personally never seen on in all my years.
I now own that Dodge 400. It is the last one in California. It is worse for the wear now than in those photos.
Anyone who studies the history of Ford Mustang and Thunderbird styling proposals of the mid to late 1970s will notice how similar the styling of the boxy FWD Aries, Reliant, LeBaron, 400 and 600 coupes were to some of those proposed Ford designs. And yes, the Thunderbird was modeled as a much downsized “mini-Tbird” reflecting that compact of a size. A lot of ideas were brought from Ford when Iaccoca took over at Chrysler.
I still own that 400. Now doesn’t run due to contaminated gas.
There’s a Dodge 400 convertible I see around here occasionally. There used to be a yellow Dodge 600 convertible as well, but then it disappeared and I saw it on row52 with engine fire damage.
The best and most atractive Dodge PLC was the Mirada, second the Magnum; and the worst, this one.
That crooked stand-up Pentastar hood ornament looks sad.
I remember my grand plan to get a Dodge 400 convertible getting dashed when they were “made no longer”! Grrr.
Tried later ((1990)) for the Chrysler Lebaron convertible. No one would come down to my price though.
My first car was a 83 Dodge 600, light blue with dark blue interior. Bought it off grandpa in 1988 as a freshman in college. How I loved that little car. It was such a perfect size and had such character. The buttoned cloth seats were so nice. All my friends thought it was the coolest ride. God, it was so slow, but got great gas mileage (a great feature for a college kid) and was very reliable. I sold it in 92 after graduation when I bought Dad’s 87 Chevy Celebrity Eurosport. I found one identical to mine online at a small dealership out West a few years back with super low miles for $1,750. I sure wish I had jumped on it, instead I bought a 2014 Cadillac XTS VSport Platinum which cost a hell of a lot more!!
@ Guy ~ do you still have it ? .
-Nate
Yes I do, it looks a little worse now, but I have it stored out in the Antelope Valley at an undisclosed location indefinitely. It is the last one in the Western United States.