Chris_V wrote:
bravenrace wrote:
I was a mechanic in the early to mid 80's, so I worked on a bunch of these along with all the other brands. I did more than a dozen cam replacements on these cars with less than 30k on them. By 40k the doors were literally falling off because the hinges failed. Not to mention that the front ends were badly out of alignment in ways that required a frame machine to correct. These were extremely common failures in an extremely low quality car, and only a small sample of everything that went wrong with them. My own sister bought an '81 Aries that I personally maintained. She sold it to a junk yard with 45k miles on it. They were intended and designed to be cheap throw away cars, and they didn't even fulfill that task well.
But more importantly, they drove like dreck. At the same time Honda and Toyota were already producing cars that would easily go 150-200k without major repairs. How anyone would choose to drive one of these over even other terrible cars from that era escapes me. They were truly awful cars. YMMMV
I always hear this sort of thing from mechanics... of ANY make: "I worked on a lot of them and they were horrible." Well, you worked on broken ones. You obviously didn't work on the tens of thousands of them that gave the owners no problems. Your anecdotal evidence of the broken ones you worked on is countered by the anecdotal evidence of the owners who couldn't kill theirs.
I always hear this from fanbois...
I worked in a general shop. We worked on everything. This wasn't a dealer. I'm also an engineer and have worked my entire career in the transportation business, so I'm well aware of how seeing only the bad can make people jaded.
That's not the case here. Like I said, I worked on everything, and as such got to know all different kinds of vehicles intimately. These cars were the ones that made me cringe when I saw their names on the work order.
Chris_V wrote:
bravenrace wrote:
I was a mechanic in the early to mid 80's, so I worked on a bunch of these along with all the other brands. I did more than a dozen cam replacements on these cars with less than 30k on them. By 40k the doors were literally falling off because the hinges failed. Not to mention that the front ends were badly out of alignment in ways that required a frame machine to correct. These were extremely common failures in an extremely low quality car, and only a small sample of everything that went wrong with them. My own sister bought an '81 Aries that I personally maintained. She sold it to a junk yard with 45k miles on it. They were intended and designed to be cheap throw away cars, and they didn't even fulfill that task well.
But more importantly, they drove like dreck. At the same time Honda and Toyota were already producing cars that would easily go 150-200k without major repairs. How anyone would choose to drive one of these over even other terrible cars from that era escapes me. They were truly awful cars. YMMMV
I always hear this sort of thing from mechanics... of ANY make: "I worked on a lot of them and they were horrible." Well, you worked on broken ones. You obviously didn't work on the tens of thousands of them that gave the owners no problems. Your anecdotal evidence of the broken ones you worked on is countered by the anecdotal evidence of the owners who couldn't kill theirs.
Seriously, there were over 2 million of these things sold in just 8 years. Yes some had problems but others didn't. Evidence that they weren't the greatest cars ever is how few you see on the road now but the newest ones are almost 25 years old now.
We got 175k hard miles out of ours with no major repairs other than an exhaust system (due to a plugged cat) rather late in its life. Well, no major repairs other than fixing the damage that teenage drivers do when they hit things at high speeds.
They were built to a price and built well enough at that price to have been a resounding success in the market.
dculberson wrote:
Chris_V wrote:
bravenrace wrote:
I was a mechanic in the early to mid 80's, so I worked on a bunch of these along with all the other brands. I did more than a dozen cam replacements on these cars with less than 30k on them. By 40k the doors were literally falling off because the hinges failed. Not to mention that the front ends were badly out of alignment in ways that required a frame machine to correct. These were extremely common failures in an extremely low quality car, and only a small sample of everything that went wrong with them. My own sister bought an '81 Aries that I personally maintained. She sold it to a junk yard with 45k miles on it. They were intended and designed to be cheap throw away cars, and they didn't even fulfill that task well.
But more importantly, they drove like dreck. At the same time Honda and Toyota were already producing cars that would easily go 150-200k without major repairs. How anyone would choose to drive one of these over even other terrible cars from that era escapes me. They were truly awful cars. YMMMV
I always hear this sort of thing from mechanics... of ANY make: "I worked on a lot of them and they were horrible." Well, you worked on broken ones. You obviously didn't work on the tens of thousands of them that gave the owners no problems. Your anecdotal evidence of the broken ones you worked on is countered by the anecdotal evidence of the owners who couldn't kill theirs.
Seriously, there were over 2 million of these things sold in just 8 years. Yes some had problems but others didn't. Evidence that they weren't the greatest cars ever is how few you see on the road now but the newest ones are almost 25 years old now.
We got 175k hard miles out of ours with no major repairs other than an exhaust system (due to a plugged cat) rather late in its life. Well, no major repairs other than fixing the damage that teenage drivers do when they hit things at high speeds.
They were built to a price and built well enough at that price to have been a resounding success in the market.
So your one car is more representative than the dozens, maybe even hundreds that I worked on.
Wait, weren't you just saying...
My one car is a counterpoint, I only had experience with one. I didn't discount your experience, did I? Where? Quote the exact phrase where I did...
The early carb'd versions and the crap-tastic Mitsu 2.6 were the biggest issues (the 2.6 was fine if it didn't have that damned jet port added to the head). That and of course rust in areas where rust is common.
Grandparents had two of the 4-doors. The first was a carb'd 2.2 and it was a pain in the butt due to the crappy Holley knock-off of a Weber 32/36 that warped if you looked at it funny. They gladly drove it into the ground before moving to an 85 or 86 with the oddball, tall block 2.5 with TBI. Much more reliable car for them and it still survives to this day.
The family had nearly one or more of each model of the L and K-based cars (including a turbo minivan which is still puttering along). Many from new. The thing we've found is that the drivetrains were stupid strong and would run for many, many years with lots of abuse, early cars had their share of problems and moving to later model parts helped whenever possible. Headgaskets, belts and hoses are maintenance items, especially when turbocharged. We had one broken camshaft on the van, just a few years ago, replaced it and haven't had any further issues, likely a manufacturing defect or it was dropped at some point. Never had any of the V6's, but the 2.2/2.5's are worthy of GRM'ing, IMO.
The 4-door cars didn't suffer the door problems the 2-doors did, but they could still have bushing issues, which were something that could be solved in the aftermarket. The first 4-door K the 'parents had suffered this.
Are they on-par with the imports of the time? Not even close. Were they better than the GM and Ford economy cars of the time? By miles, but again no where near the Hondas and Toyotas. However, how many people race and talk about Hondas and Toyota FWD economy cars from the early 80's compared to K-cars? Aside from the CRX and Civic, not too many and I'd say that means something.
Speaking of K-car wagons:
http://polybushings.com/pages/k-carwagon.html
dculberson wrote:
My one car is a counterpoint, I only had experience with one. I didn't discount your experience, did I? Where? Quote the exact phrase where I did...
You agreed with the previous poster who made the point that my opinion was based on a very small sample size (implying that it wasn't representative of the whole), then disagreed with me because your even smaller sample size contradicted my experience (implying that it was representative of the whole).
dculberson wrote:
My one car is a counterpoint, I only had experience with one. I didn't discount your experience, did I? Where? Quote the exact phrase where I did...
Do you realize what you're doing here, my friend? Defending the K car. Wow, you really do love your cars don't you? 
If it made it this long it was a pretty good car. Some sucked, my dad drove a string of them when I was younger.
You could wear a green dress in that car. But not a real green dress. That's cruel.
turboswede wrote:
The first was a carb'd 2.2 and it was a pain in the butt due to the crappy Holley knock-off of a Weber 32/36 that warped if you looked at it funny.
I just remembered this! Bragging to my friends that my car had a Holley carb!
IIRC, wasn't there an Audi logo on the head?
phaze1todd wrote:
turboswede wrote:
The first was a carb'd 2.2 and it was a pain in the butt due to the crappy Holley knock-off of a Weber 32/36 that warped if you looked at it funny.
I just remembered this! Bragging to my friends that my car had a Holley carb!
IIRC, wasn't there an Audi logo on the head?
No, only the VW 1.7L motors they used on the early Omni/Horizon's had those logos with a similar Holley carb (which made like 3-5hp more than the CIS system used on the Rabbits). The K-cars always used the 2.2/2.5 from Chrysler or the 2.6 and 3.0 from Mitsubishi.
914Driver wrote:
Wow! Build the ultimate sleeper.
I don't want the Fairmont wagon posted above to be pulled into this whole k car pissing contest.
It's a Fox Body Wagon...not a K car.
I didn't foresee a pissing contest. The Fox is the only similar sized hot rod I know of.
Sorry.
How hard is it to yank the FWD unit and replace a 360 w/posi?
Klayfish wrote:
dculberson wrote:
My one car is a counterpoint, I only had experience with one. I didn't discount your experience, did I? Where? Quote the exact phrase where I did...
Do you realize what you're doing here, my friend? Defending the K car. Wow, you really do love your cars don't you?
I'm insane.
Either I love cars of all types or I love to argue, one of the two. Some times it's hard to tell even for me. ;-)
914Driver wrote:
How hard is it to yank the FWD unit and replace a 360 w/posi?
Mopar sold the conversion K-frame control arms, knuckles and steering rack for the K-based cars in their catalog.
You had to fab the rear suspension, fuel tank and possibly the tunnel depending on the transmission you used.
So, not too bad if you can find the parts. Otherwise you'll have to roll your own.
Pat
HalfDork
11/21/13 6:38 a.m.
914Driver wrote:
How hard is it to yank the FWD unit and replace a 360 w/posi?
Why go through all that work just to slow it down?
I can confirm that I too have ridden in a manual K wagon.
bravenrace wrote:
Time to take off the rose colored glasses. Those were some of the worst cars ever made.
Uh, they helped get Chrysler out of the gutter back then to.
(edit: forgot hotlink)
