I'm guessing that the main problem that plagued the Aspen and Volare was poor fit and finish, making it very much "hit or miss" on getting a good one. Seems they have a decent following today. I just remembered one fellow I knew who had one and said the back floor would get so wet that toadstools were growing out of the carpet.

I wonder how many owners of Chev Vegas didn't finish paying for their car before an engine failure.
You could imagine those poor souls were making two payments a month, one for the car loan and one for the engine replacement.
GM really never had a decent warranty on their cars. They were always afraid to guarantee their products for more than 2 yrs, 20k miles. If they included a longer warranty on their products, they would've had money problems a lot earlier. :scratch2:

That's just what the warranty was back then, 1 year/12k miles. I think Chrysler was the first to provide a long powertrain warranty in the 80's, think at first it was 5/50

K cars have outlasted most of their domestic contemporaries at this point. I still see a few Reliants and such on the road here in Phoenix, but it's been years since I have seen a Topaz or Citation. I would recommend avoiding the turbos, unless they have some sort of service history. That being said, I would also recommend that you go for an M body and buy a Diplomat. In an accident, an M body will demolish just about anything currently on the road.

I couldn't agree more, and see more K-cars on the road then any other 80's cars...however, I took this pic a few weeks ago in Phoenix. Ford fans, here you go!

https://i.imgur.com/kjmnDlV.jpg

Looks like a Ford advertisement poster or something. Both white, but look like new.

I can't recall the last time I saw an Aerostar. I saw a dark green Topaz in nice shape parked on the same street quite a few times not that long ago; chances are it's still in use, I just haven't been to that area in a while. Also, last month I saw a teal '92-'94 Taurus wagon, also in nice shape. That's pretty good for cars that were built while this region still had a winter.
Sounds good to me. I would add one of those bumper stickers that say "Your car is my crumple zone".

The only thing I would suggest avoiding in the K-cars is the optional Mitsubishi-built 2.6L engine. My dad had one of those in a 1981 Aries wagon, and it would eat timing belts and fuel pumps on a regular basis. The standard 2.2L engines were quite reliable, in my experience.

Of course, as a lifelong Mopar guy, it kind of galled me to see the "2.6 HEMI" fendertags that came with that POS engine. :no:

Well, heh, it was legitimately a hemi, though. Hemispherical combustion chambers ftw. But yeah...

Even Ford's 1.6L I4 is technically a hemi but fortunately I haven't seen any fender tags announcing this. While I have a soft spot for the early model Lynx and Escort I think the SS (1981 Escort only), RS and GT trim packages are a bit much for a subcompact without a lot of horsepower or low-end torque.

I have heard that the dodge 2.2 was the best motor in the K's. In the photos
of the K's for sale that are still around and running it always seems to have a 2.2.

As for the smog era cars, and I like that term, My uncle's last Chrysler was a 74-76?
Dodge Monaco like the ones on Blues Brothers, and it kinda came apart like in the
movie, just not all at once. It use to take a lot of cranking to get it running, it had
no power, 6mpg, lights and horn were active together at times, turn signals came
with audio accompany. It was the worst car he had, he followed that with a 4WD
Eagle, AMC I think at the time.

By the time that car died mostly of rust. I had got my '89 Prelude, the wife got her
'91 accord, and I talked him into an accord too, they had that car till he died.

On some of the sites about the Blues Brothers movie, they said they got those cars
for $100 -200. from the city as they were replacing them. Also hollywood got
hundreds of '77 Coronets for $35. because of smog system problems that
chrysler did not want to pay to redesign and fix. I remember seeing on PBS
about the decline of the auto industry 70's edition that chrysler and others would
take delivery on stuff like engine blocks by the thousands and by the time they
needed them for production the discovered there was a casting problem and
could not use them, so they would have to idle the factory, re order new run
and wait.... The bad blocks rusted. Same kinda story for GM and using known
bad or under designed bolts in the early Quad-4's. They all knowingly made
and sold crap for way too long....

.

The 2.2 probably is the best K motor, the 2.5 seemed rather problematic to me.

I doubt your uncle's Monaco was a '74 because it's a model made before catalytic converters so it runs good on regular gas. For '75 I believe only the Royal Monaco came with hideaway headlamps, and all '76 models have them.

Who says unicorns don't exist? I saw an AMC Eagle rolling down Greenway Parkway last week, and was shocked by how 'good' it looked. At least it was distinctive and had personality, which most modern cars lack.

Did you mean 2.6? The 2.5 is just a 2.2 with a larger bore and longer stroke with a balance shaft added. The 2.5 adds a lot of low end torque, and the balance shaft really smooths the engine out.

I meant 2.5, but I only have experience with one car so equipped and none with the 2.2 so I'm not really a good barometer. The head gasket cracked letting coolant into the oil, the timing belt broke and it blew a handful of frost plugs but never suffered any major damage. It was rather loud for a gas engine, noisy lifters maybe? It seemed sluggish sometimes but I reckon that had a lot to do with its temperamental 3-speed slushbox. If I recall correctly I often had to let up on the accelerator briefly to get out of low gear. I used to drive on a long stretch of level road and make a left at the end to go uphill; it wasn't very steep but that's when I would be mashing it and still be unable to keep up with traffic, no idea why.

Edit: Apparently the engine was getting tired, it sounded just like the one in this Aries (startup at 6:10).

Prob because 'Hemi' is a Chrysler-owned trademark lol

^ This.

It's a shame that some cars get a bad rap just because nobody bothered fixing them. It sounds like it only needed a carb cleaning/adjustment and some ground wires fixed. As if those were uncommon problems in the 70s... >_>

I really like the original Eagles. I mean... they're basically a car bolted onto a Jeep CJ chassis. You can legit go rock crawling with a stock Eagle. A buddy of mine in college once asked if I wanted to ride in his friend's 'AMG' as he was going to get an oil change. I shrugged, and went along because I had nothing better to do. I kept looking around in the parking lot for a Mercedes, but I was pleasantly surprised that the dude hopped in an AMC Eagle! I think my friend was a bit disappointed lol.

A lot of 70s cars sucked, because of auto factory workers' union problems. Strikes and all that.

My '64 Valiant had a 5/50 warrantee on it. Chrysler first started it for the 1962 model and kept it until the 1971 model year, then going back to 1 year, 12k miles. My '82 Dodge Ramcharger had a 5/50 Warrantee. I don't remember when they resumed the warrantee coverage.

And "SS" is a GM-owned trademark but that didn't stop Ford from using it on some first-year Escorts; only the resulting lawsuit did. Geez, grownups today, they're not allowed to kill each other one on one so most of them do it in court, shameful.

Our family was two-time Aerostar users. They were great family vans. Later on in life I considered buying one because the removable seats are a great bonus but:
-They are heavy as hell
-The engines are a MASSIVE pain in the ass to service.

+2 on that 2-2, Jon - My '78 Celica GT 5-spd with a 2.2 could not catch the Mopars, which had an edge for some reason:sigh: My Dad traded a 1975 Rabbit 1.5 L for an '81 Horizon with 1.7L 4cyl with a horrible-shifting 4spd, (VW or Peugot-built IIRC) and what a pooch that was.

That '81 was involved in 4 accidents, last one a sideswipe requiring half a body from a junkyard. Being Orange I guess it was hard to see:D. They just would not total it, so it was traded for the 2.2L in the '85 Omni, which had an automatic, which he always shut the car off leaving it in "D" with the parking brake on, being used to manuals. Even with a 3-spd auto, the 2.2 could spin the tires on dryypavement, with the expected torque-steer of MoPar's front wheel drive.

For my first ride, and under $1000, all I had to chose from were gas hogs nobody wanted in 1980. I had a choice of a 76 Monaco with a 360- probably a lean-burn 2bbl; A 75 LeSabre with 350 2bbl. Since both were smog-sleds, I opted for the 73 Fury II 400-2bbl - the small-town's unmarked squad car, dark green. I was not sorry.

I know of a few 2.5 Liter 4 cyl Caravans turning out to be reliable beaters. Cheap parts is one reason.

A guy in the building I used to live in had a '79 Celica with a 5-speed. I think he had a second set of keys so he would sometimes leave it running with the windows up and the doors locked. In spite of that it still got pinched one day. He got it back but not quite in the same condition.

I didn't know the Omni/Horizon came with a 1.7L as standard equipment. Now it's easier to understand why they were named 1982's lemon of the year. A quick check on Wikipedia reveals that the 1.7 and the 4-speed were VW-made.

Ouch, hopefully that 1985 Omni was never parked on steep hills. I wouldn't want to risk leaving a slushbox in gear while parked. I never knew torque-steer was a problem with FWD Mopars; I guess I was just extra careful in slippery conditions. As I recall it was even more of a problem with GM's FWD X-body cars.

Oh yeah, RWD Mopar with a cop motor with a 400 cubic inch plant, cop tires, cop suspension, cop shocks and made before catalytic converters, the logical choice in my opinion.

Little wonder the Blues Brothers were able to beat the heat to Chicago.

tfw when no ignition-shift interlock.

You know, I've only ever been under the hood of just ONE lean-burn vehicle (outside of a junkyard, anyway), and I never had a chance to work on the motor, because it ran just fine. It was a 70-something Dodge pickup, with a slant-6. I've read a lot about the Lean Burn™ system, and it's quite fascinating. But I'd really like to work on one to actually get a feel for it. It was basically a computer controlled engine, except carbureted, and no, the carb was not at all controlled by the computer. It handled ignition only. The only problems I can speculate about the system would be A: it's a 'computer' from the '70s, before computers were really a thing, and B: they put the damn computer in the hottest place they could pick - right on top of the engine.

Chrysler has a long proud history of technological achievements, but putting a computer on top of a hot engine was not one of their brightest moments. Though to be perfectly fair, many carmakers today continue that practice. Mostly GM.

Huehuehuehue.

The Dodge Omni and their variants were powered by VW parts. And back then
Consumer Reports, if I'm not mistaken released one of their tests to the TV news
media that showed that if you were moving at highway speeds and took the steering
wheel and twisted to to one side and released it, the car would on it's own swing wildly
from right to left until it spun out. Tests on other cars showed that they would have
the steering wheel dampen out the flick and return to a center position, provided
you were still on the pavement. An unrealistic hazard in my opinion. I wonder
why the VW's that shared the drive train did not suffer from that symptom?

Maybe because of Chrysler's fun single finger power power steering, where a good
flick of the wheel with one finger often spun it from center to one of the far locks
quite easily.

The early Lean Burns were spark only, the last runs had feedback carburetors too.
But by the time FBC's came into the mix they had to get away from the name Lean Burn.

Speaking of no shift locks, my '86 Prelude has no shift lock, no signs it was defeated
by the previous owner either....


.

Dodge may have used VW engines, but I doubt they would have gone VW on the suspension and steering in a K car.

Neat.

No, that was the Omni only. The Omni was pre-k car. I don't think the VW engine was ever offered in a K car. To the best of my knowledge, the K cars were entirely in-house, at least originally. Ah, the good old days.

There's a lot of information about the evolution of the various Mopar platforms on the website "Allpar". I generally follow it pretty close.

The LH cars were the last of the 'in house' designs, even though the company was being controlled my Mercedes at the time. My understanding is that, in spite of what people claim, the current LX cars are really the old LH platform modified to accept the improved Mercedes suspension components and are not merely a warmed over Benz chasis. Of course, the dreaded NAG1 tranny is a Benz unit, and we all know how craptastic those things can be.

The LH cars were introduced in 93. I had a 94 Concorde, really loved that car. Huge, absolutely huge car for a fwd. I mean, you got in it, you were a mile away from your passenger, and enough headroom for Abe Lincoln with his hat on. Definitely prefer the interior to a Cadillac Deville, also fwd in roughly the same category. Anyhow, Mercedes takeover was from 98 to 08. And there are small but notable similarities between the LH and LX platforms. I'd say it's really an evolution. That having been said, they maintained their own teams of engineers and designers, I don't think it's entirely fair to say 'their last in-house design.' Maybe their last design that didn't involve Mercedes parts in any way, perhaps. Course there was a brief reprise when they were privately held and not associated with any other company. But Fiat had to ruin that.

Mercedes transmissions are actually usually pretty hearty things. But uh... in terms of performance... yeah. Craptastic sounds about right. In the late 80s - 90s, perhaps earlier, idk what possessed them to think that taking off in 2nd gear was a good idea.

The LH was really an AMC design as much as anything. Their engineering staff came over after Chrysler bought AM & put them in charge. The (Renault) Eagle Premier was the starting point for the LH & they were built in the former AMC Bramalea factory. Fitting that they were use the Concorde name, as a sort of tribute to the old AMC Concord.

With all due respect, you don't know what you're talking about.

K cars had a very long and also very successful production run, and as pointed out previously they basically saved Chrysler from the dustbin of history. A little more fun to drive than what? A potato? You've apparently never been in a 2.2 or 2.5 turbo with mild tuning done to it, I promise it shits all over that piss poor excuse for a japanese V6 and its impossible to change timing belt. Transmissions? Yeah the 3-sp torqueflite is sorta gay, but once again with a 2.5 turbo attached it most likely shits all over whatever you're currently in.

If you can't tell, I'm tired of people talking shit about my car. And no, I'm not a K-car fanatic. I'm a turbo fanatic. I also have a factory turbo Corvair, wanna fight about it? I'll put my '89 Spirit up against whatever you got, and while it may or may not not win you'll definitely be surprised...

Speaking as a Mopar or no car sort of guy, cool your jets. Nobody is questioning your masculinity. I agree that the K-cars were the best 'small' cars on the road, with room for six Americans, but there is no need to be so darned hurt. Even the rice burners that were supposed to be the death knell of the U.S. autos are long since shredded and turned into toasters, while Reliants still cruise city streets. By the way, the Diplomat was still the better car. A 318 kicks the hell out of a four banger any day of the week, no matter how torquey it may be.

I take offense to that, sir. I have one of those piss poor Mitsu V6's, and I quite enjoy it. Nothing against the 4-bangers, just that the 3.0L is quite a decent engine, especially in its time period. The torque curve is as flat as a table, you have basically 100% of the torque at any rpm you need it at.

And changing the T-belt is only slightly more difficult than any other car - owing the the adapter plate, a whopping 5 extra bolts - but nothing any competent mechanic can't conquer with ease. Come to think of it, its been many years since I last did the job, I should do it again soon.

Also, chill down, nobody's talking shit about your car.

Even so, it wouldn't hurt to be prepared to just brush off snarky comments. Pretty much anyone into anything other than traditional muscle cars is going to hear others roasting their idea of a fly ride. Been there, done that, got the tee shirt.

What are you talking about? They'll do it anyway! The chevy guys and the ford guys are always going at it. And then there's the mopar guys who kind of get shit on by the other two factions, but mostly because they're secretly jealous of the awesome mopars. :3

lol

Yeah I realized later on I hadn't really thought that through. The musclecar crowd probably gets the least amount of crap though. On the flip side, I know there are some Lada enthusiasts up here; I can't imagine how many snarky comments they have to deflect.

I certainly agree that Mopars are awesome.

When I was at your place in Waukegan, IL you didn't seem to be that enthused with Mopars. Many times, most conversations turn to cars.
You had shown me the old VW with the FI conversion and the Mini and IIRC, your wife had some kind of a Japanese SUV.
Mopars are still my first choice, but my daily driver is a Prius. I'm not that crazy about leaving that much money at the pump.
Still have my 2000 Dodge Dakota and my 2006 Jeep Wrangler, both bought new.
BTW, Powerglides and Dynaflows are really Gay.

I read about the Lada years ago and I would like to see one up close.

Fair enough, around here the turbo variant was very rare, so much so that I'm not counting it as part of the normal K car experience. I did know one guy who had a turbo with a 5 speed, and yes, it was a lot better than a normal K car. That car was a real sleeper, and I won't argue that it's pretty cool.

It still had peeling paint, creaky doors, a misaligned instrument cluster, and the other k car defects.

And yes, your 89 spirit would blow the doors off my 86 toyota diesel pickup!

LADA cars are interesting, they were sold in Canada until 1997 when they no longer met emission requirements. The NIVA 4x4 is quite capable. Actually owning one may not be the world's best idea, but I too would like a chance to drive one... I've only been a passenger and it was not recently.

LOL I mean they kinda are. Powerglides apparently are used in drag cars a lot because, well, they're real solid and only two gears. Dynaflows are fascinating... but that's about it.