i have the exact same car mine is the dodge aries turbo .. and its a beast.. had it 4 years.. and there is about 4 more cars in a salvage junk yard brand new.. im trying to work out all the legal issues to get all 4 of them.. the owner says there is no way i will get them cause they surrendered the titles for scrap .. is there any way around ths.. i might just get a lawyer to help me get those cars off the scrap yard and rebuild all of them.. there the best cars
I had an '89 Reliant and that by far was the TOUGHEST automobile I have EVER owned as far as the body goes. Barely rusted, got hit by a bus one time and still kept driving, I didn't even have a dent on it, just a scratch. we both tried to make a light before it changed, and the bus "tapped" (no pun intended) my rear bumper. It was the only two-door I've ever owned in the 15 plus years I've owned a car.
Please check out my music video that features my 1985 dodge 600es convertible here in the UK. You never know if I can get enough hits it might put the value up !!!
these were the savior of chrysler...I had 2: an aries and a reliant,, and they were the most reliable cars I ever had, in fact, most chrylsers built on the "K" frame were all reliable, I had a 1990 minivan that lasted 15 years
I bought a brand new 1982 Dodge Aries coupe just like the one in this video for less than $6000. It had a 4 speed standard tranny that shifted very smoothly. I drove it for 4 years and sold it with just under 60.000 miles and sold it for $4,100.00! Not bad. Never gave any trouble except that I had to replace the clutch at 50,000 miles. These were good cars that got 25 miles per gallon around town. I really loved that little "k" car!
You bought it brand new? Did it ever occur to you that the one you bought was used and abused? Because these engines are solid and there are still lots of these cars on the road today.
@dobadriver Good point! Bought it used and it was abused. Engine compartment was sprayed with undercoating. I was young though. Didn't know any better.
What a load of shit! As soon as you hit the power, weight transfer puts all of the grip to the rear wheels, leaving the fronts spinning. Then, during hard cornering (to avoid children in the road) the front wheels are pushed beyond their grip limits, while the rears aren't even at half. RWD is a much more balanced use of all four corners compared with FWD. Good thing Chrysler went back to using RWD in some of its cars.
Yes I've heard they didn't fare well in snow areas. They were considered a throw away car, cheap to buy then meant to be discarded after a few years. I just bought an immaculate 1986 Dodge 600 Conv that looks almost new. Nothing was that great in the 80's as it was a low point for American cars but I think these were better than most.
@buccaneer43207 Actually the Chrysler minivans were based off of the K platform, they were just an extended version of them. Same body, tranny, and powerplant. Until the Mitsubishi 3L V6 came out for minivans in 87.
The K-Cars were decent cars. Just that. But their manual gearboxes were AWFUL!!!
The best part from the FWD (1981-1992) era from Chrysler was Lee Iacocca. Wish the cars he promoted were as good as he said. Never were. I have to say that, even being a Mopar fan!!!
The government has changed the way that mileage is calculated. It's harder to get the high numbers that used to be possible plus, new cars of the same class weigh more now with air bags, traction control and all of the electronic stuff we can't live without.
you guys complaining about the 41 mpg LIE . if your young i can see ,but older guys you should know better , i have been am MPG freak all my life . this is what i got in 78 i had a 63 chevy 283 3 speed= 17mpg ..in 80,a73 duster 225 auto=23mpg ..86,a 81 dodge colt 4cil 4speed 49mpg! ..today a ranger 4 cil 5 speed 17mpg WHAT HAPPENED!!?? emission controls and ethanol HAPPENED ! this car with manual trans on a good day got 41 ! TRUE !
@CactusBobsPlace That thing couldn't get 41 MPG falling off a cliff. EPA ratings were not corrected for rel-world expectations before the mid 1980s. Low 30s is more like it. Back then they also had really tall top gears so mpg numbers were better but top speed was 75 mph, not safe for today's driving.
I still see a lot of the K-cars around, IMO they were better built than GM's X-body cars (Chevy Citation), I see more K-cars around than I do with the X-body cars
OH PUHLEEZE...here in LA I see a K Car on the road daily, lookin good too, the Fairmonts I see (rarely) are driven by migrant workers and look like they've been through World War III
@DA90027 Oh really... where are they now... those things were yanked out of production years ago, and Chrysler still does not offer an efficient commuter car.
I don't think Toyota sunk the American-small car market because these things were reliable.
@SteelCity1981 I do, I met quite a number of people who had the manual transmission and routinely did 35 and up on the highway. If you had the automatic, there wasn't any way of getting close to 40, but the stick trans for the first couple of years did really, REALLY well, then the emission controls caught up with them and killed the awesome milage.
@regisiam Remember that was 29 years ago. And also, back in 1993, I owned one of these cars. I am not ashamed to say that they are not bad looking cars for being "econo-boxes" unlike some of the cavaliers.
@Ian74263 Nothing wrong with the neons. I've owned 3. We still have our 05 SXT with 125K miles and our 99 with 200,000, neither of which have had to have any major repairs while we owned them.
My Grandfather had a 82 k-car he had nothing but problems out of the transmission. Then the paint started fading after like 5 months. He traded it in for a new Chevy Van.
I had a 1982 reliant for about three years back in the mid nineties. It had one of those motors Chrysler had the nerve to call a "hemi". Hello i associate that with a big block V8, not a Mitsubishi 2.6 four banger. Ok the motor was a great improvement over the 2.2 americanized four banger., but the rest of the car was questionable.
I still don't understand how this rolling hemorrhoid revived Chrysler. It was ugly, made like garbage, slower than a slug, and as reliable as any other Dodge. Back then, you really had no choice but to go foreign.
Yes, they got 41 MPG on the highway because you couldn't drive them over 55 MPH. We had one of these puppies in New York and couldn't drive over 40MPH on a 20 degree grade.
I drove an '81 Aires K. Though it was underequipped, I thought the damn thing was nearly bulletproof. It was last seen still in service with 160,000 miles (without any overhaul, I might add). They may not have all been that good, but it could be done.
You are right about that, they are slow. I don't know about this car but I had a 1988 BMW 525e and it got somewhere around 32mpg. 41 sounds ridiculous but it would be nice.
Oh, no.... When I was about 6 years old, my folks had an '82 Aires they bought from this old lady. It looked nice and had about 80k miles. But within a year, it just completely junked itself. My grandpa joked it should have been called "Achilles" because it fell apart with godspeed...
actually the styling of this and the 1981 chev celebrity were pretty awesome at the time. The sharp crisp lines were usually only found on American luxury cars like the Lincoln town car. Sure they were a little gramma compared to the joys of Mazda, Honda, Nissan etc but there were still allot of gramma types left back then... heck you could order it with a vinyl roof....
They might seem underpowered, slow, and have outdated styling today, but they were great cars in their day. They turned Chrysler around and gave it a future.
My 82 Dodge Conv just got an engine swap with a 86 Reliant, it is now fuel injected and gets 30 mpg. These were great cars. AC blows cold, everything works as it should. New cars are ugly as hell, they all look like hot wheels.
lee Iacocca is the man! He went to the government in 1979 to bail out chrysler and paid them back completely in 1983 (7 years early)He turned that company around to become a huge profit maker in the 80's. Unlike today Iacocca had a plan and a design team when he went to the government!
if chrysler still built the k car they would have gone bankrupt 10 years ago. everyone and their mom would have one and they wouldn't sell any if they made them for 30 years. thats why car companies change up cars. :-)
yep but they were all on different platforms and improved vastly over the years....which is why they are still hits. if they still sold the k cars....they would have to be the same because they were the k platform and you can only do so much with one platform. if they made a new platform and called it aries, it would no longer be a "k car" now would it? nope. it would be whatever the new platform is called (such as the LH and LX platforms) so you were missing my point.
My point is the platform is irrelevant to show room customers. Automakers are ill advised to market their products via platform type. Seldom in the modern era was was this used: CC (K-car) & GM (X-car). By saying CC should have kept K-car. I mean an affordable, compact 6 passenger FWD car in 2 door hardtop/ convertible, 4 door sedan, 5 door wagon. When CC/ Daimler got rid of Plymouth brand and went upscale, they lost a huge segment of their customer base.
It was just chrysler then. I believe under new management....lee iacocca. he did wonders for chrysler. this was before daimler came into the picture and screwed them up into what they are now.
it was a real good car i must say, silver over red. A cv joint broke on it and that cost 675$. The engine was surprisingly good for an american made 4 cylinder. But the hondas and toyotas and datsuns of the day made a better and lighter engine. I could not break that engine and tranny in that kcar when i was a crazy kid, so that says something about the dodge folks back then. Overall that was a real good car. Why did these cars get better mileage?
to jakesaintsrow123: Yeh, I love the old K cars. Good cheap basic transportation.....like the old Ford Model "T"......and.....they looked surprisingly good in a station wagon. The one my family has is....silver gray with a gray interior, bench seats, and the larger 4 cylinder. The head gasket actually blew at about "2,000 miles" (yes, only two thousand miles). The Chrysler dealer put us through hell with the warranty work.
Yesterday, April 30 of 2009; Chrysler went on bankruptcy. Lets help Chrysler Corporation buying their cars instead of all that asian crap that is now running on our highways.
Our family had one of these. A 1981 4-door Aires SE fully-loaded. Cost $9100 new. Had the 2.6 Mistubishi Hemi engine. Total piece of crapini. Haven't owned a Chrysler since.
ya the chrysler engine was MUCH better then the 2.6 they had carburation problems and were poorly built chrysler should of never put those engines on there cars as an option aside from the chrysler built 2.2l motor
They sold and manufactured the Mitsubishi Astron 2.6's here in Australia as well, fitted to the Sigma & Magna models. Quite a powerful and torquey engine for its time, but unfortunately they didn't age well.
My Astron 2.6 (an M7 Magna model) was very reliable, but seemed to have a persistent oil leak and was pretty noisy in comparison with similar 4's of the era.
These were actually decent cars for their time, though Iacocca tried to do everyhting with them without continuing development on them. Mechnics were easy to work on as well. EVERYTHING on the engine is easy to reach, you can't say that about any cars today.
My 82 Dodge 400 Conv has a 4cyl, cruises down the freeway at 75 without trouble, gets almost 30 mpg costs $20 to fill up and has working AC and is WELL BUILT for the era of 80's junk. How many 27 year old cars can do that?
I know some people laughed at the one I had in high school (an '81 K model sedan) because it was a faded banana yellow, but no one complained when they didn't have to ride the bus home. Everything was fine with it until the driver's side door fell off and the motor went ka-put.
@gajda1984 They sure did! You know they said in 1980 that if you bought a Cutlass without looking at a LeBaron, "you're making a mistake!" Well, I don't know about that, but I think personally If you were considering at a Fairmont without looking at an Aries or a Reliant in '81 THEN you were making a BIG one.
these cars get a bad rap because of how they performed and looked not to mention the barenaked ladies song. The thing of it is this car is what helped Dodge survive to be what it is today.
the EPA changed how they publish ratings twice since then. In the 1980s they just lowered results to get closer to real life. Last year they changed the test to reflect more real-world driving. That is why those old figures look so high. Reality is low 20s. Also then top-gears were higher for better mileage but top speeds of about 80mph.
Srd1126, you are largely correct. They still do the EPA gas mileage test the same, but changed the posted figures starting in the 1985 model year. EPA reduced the City figure by like 15% and the Highway by like 25%. The 4-speed manual K had very tall and widely spaced ratios. I think Car & Driver's test of an '81 showed 96MPH in 3RD and 92MPH in 4TH gear. This was not an uncommon occurance for cars of the times.
This has been flagged as spam show
i have the exact same car mine is the dodge aries turbo .. and its a beast.. had it 4 years.. and there is about 4 more cars in a salvage junk yard brand new.. im trying to work out all the legal issues to get all 4 of them.. the owner says there is no way i will get them cause they surrendered the titles for scrap .. is there any way around ths.. i might just get a lawyer to help me get those cars off the scrap yard and rebuild all of them.. there the best cars
rippac86 4 weeks ago
I don't see why people hate on the square styled cars. I think they look kind of classy!
hottdylan1993 1 month ago
I'm surprised they didn't offer these cars with the V6 engine considering they were optional on the GM's X-body cars
Doobie1975 1 month ago
@Doobie1975 I Have a v6 X-Car. 1985 Mint Condition Buick skylark and Love It
jakesaintsrow123 1 month ago
Agreed that they turned Chrysler's fortune around but even then they were hideous as far as styling is concerned.
250GTLUSSO 3 months ago
41 mpg in 1981? I don't believe it
EpicScandinavian 4 months ago
I don't remember seeing any of them wrecked. Lol :)))
MegaRadio90 4 months ago
I'd hate to see one of these in a modern day crash test.
somewhatlongdong 5 months ago
the 1981-1989 Dodge Aries was assembled in
Newark, Delaware, United States
Toluca, Mexico
Detroit, Michigan, United States
Annihilator1111 7 months ago
I had an '89 Reliant and that by far was the TOUGHEST automobile I have EVER owned as far as the body goes. Barely rusted, got hit by a bus one time and still kept driving, I didn't even have a dent on it, just a scratch. we both tried to make a light before it changed, and the bus "tapped" (no pun intended) my rear bumper. It was the only two-door I've ever owned in the 15 plus years I've owned a car.
jvlivs2 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please check out my music video that features my 1985 dodge 600es convertible here in the UK. You never know if I can get enough hits it might put the value up !!!
jamesbagatel 7 months ago
I should note the axels on these where so durable, me and my dad used a K-Car axel to make his trailer a few years back.
KosaiAvonej 9 months ago
@KosaiAvonej Lots of people do,
michaelpack1988 7 months ago
Seats 6, provided they are very friendly and don't get muscle cramps easily. Still, they were great cars.
freethoughtmusic 10 months ago
these were the savior of chrysler...I had 2: an aries and a reliant,, and they were the most reliable cars I ever had, in fact, most chrylsers built on the "K" frame were all reliable, I had a 1990 minivan that lasted 15 years
GW12345678910 10 months ago
front wheel drive can't drift and understeers, so much for traction...
ChevroletStockCar358 10 months ago
I bought a brand new 1982 Dodge Aries coupe just like the one in this video for less than $6000. It had a 4 speed standard tranny that shifted very smoothly. I drove it for 4 years and sold it with just under 60.000 miles and sold it for $4,100.00! Not bad. Never gave any trouble except that I had to replace the clutch at 50,000 miles. These were good cars that got 25 miles per gallon around town. I really loved that little "k" car!
ncmountaingal1960 11 months ago
If you're considering buying a boring, boxy Ford or a boring, boxy Dodge, buy the car that will let you fit more people to entertain you...
My great-aunt had an '85 and it wouldn't start below 40 degrees. I think the car thought it was Italian.
TurboVW2004 11 months ago
Good thing I'm not considering a Ford Fairmont.
needstoregister 1 year ago
"Which is a better idea?" A 1972 Plymouth Barracuda with a 426 Hemi!
blabblab1212 1 year ago
@blabblab1212 They've stopped making the Hemi's on the Barracuda's/Challenger's after 1971
Doobie1975 1 month ago
@Doobie1975 Yes, and a "better idea" would have been to put them on 72's.
blabblab1212 1 month ago
$6000 for one of these pieces of shit. HAHAHA
blabblab1212 1 year ago
I owned one of these. Worst piece of shit ever built. I'd take a Chevy Vega over one of these. Quit on me a dozen times.
blabblab1212 1 year ago
@blabblab1212
You bought it brand new? Did it ever occur to you that the one you bought was used and abused? Because these engines are solid and there are still lots of these cars on the road today.
dobadriver 1 year ago
@dobadriver Good point! Bought it used and it was abused. Engine compartment was sprayed with undercoating. I was young though. Didn't know any better.
blabblab1212 1 year ago
Superb traction of front-wheel-drive...
What a load of shit! As soon as you hit the power, weight transfer puts all of the grip to the rear wheels, leaving the fronts spinning. Then, during hard cornering (to avoid children in the road) the front wheels are pushed beyond their grip limits, while the rears aren't even at half. RWD is a much more balanced use of all four corners compared with FWD. Good thing Chrysler went back to using RWD in some of its cars.
JETZcorp 1 year ago
Yes I've heard they didn't fare well in snow areas. They were considered a throw away car, cheap to buy then meant to be discarded after a few years. I just bought an immaculate 1986 Dodge 600 Conv that looks almost new. Nothing was that great in the 80's as it was a low point for American cars but I think these were better than most.
DA90027 1 year ago
Comment removed
jakesaintsrow123 1 year ago
@buccaneer43207 Actually the Chrysler minivans were based off of the K platform, they were just an extended version of them. Same body, tranny, and powerplant. Until the Mitsubishi 3L V6 came out for minivans in 87.
gajda1984 1 year ago
God bless the k-car!
marshalljimduncan 1 year ago
The K-Cars were decent cars. Just that. But their manual gearboxes were AWFUL!!!
The best part from the FWD (1981-1992) era from Chrysler was Lee Iacocca. Wish the cars he promoted were as good as he said. Never were. I have to say that, even being a Mopar fan!!!
delagarza75 1 year ago
The government has changed the way that mileage is calculated. It's harder to get the high numbers that used to be possible plus, new cars of the same class weigh more now with air bags, traction control and all of the electronic stuff we can't live without.
ingledude 1 year ago
you guys complaining about the 41 mpg LIE . if your young i can see ,but older guys you should know better , i have been am MPG freak all my life . this is what i got in 78 i had a 63 chevy 283 3 speed= 17mpg ..in 80,a73 duster 225 auto=23mpg ..86,a 81 dodge colt 4cil 4speed 49mpg! ..today a ranger 4 cil 5 speed 17mpg WHAT HAPPENED!!?? emission controls and ethanol HAPPENED ! this car with manual trans on a good day got 41 ! TRUE !
CactusBobsPlace 1 year ago
@CactusBobsPlace That thing couldn't get 41 MPG falling off a cliff. EPA ratings were not corrected for rel-world expectations before the mid 1980s. Low 30s is more like it. Back then they also had really tall top gears so mpg numbers were better but top speed was 75 mph, not safe for today's driving.
Srd1126 1 year ago
I still see a lot of the K-cars around, IMO they were better built than GM's X-body cars (Chevy Citation), I see more K-cars around than I do with the X-body cars
Doobie1975 1 year ago
OH PUHLEEZE...here in LA I see a K Car on the road daily, lookin good too, the Fairmonts I see (rarely) are driven by migrant workers and look like they've been through World War III
DA90027 1 year ago
6-people in that K car? I guess people were'nt as fat back in the 1980s!
lasuvidaboy 1 year ago
@lasuvidaboy LOL - we weren't!
IstvanN1961 1 year ago
Fairmonts were cheap unreliable cars, the K Cars lasted forever.
DA90027 1 year ago
@DA90027 Oh really... where are they now... those things were yanked out of production years ago, and Chrysler still does not offer an efficient commuter car.
I don't think Toyota sunk the American-small car market because these things were reliable.
Fantafare 1 year ago
Damn, I wish I could buy a car today for $6,000!
somewhatlongdong 1 year ago
41mpg? LOL. Yeah i don't know anyone that had this type of car get remotely close to that mpg.
SteelCity1981 1 year ago
@SteelCity1981 I do, I met quite a number of people who had the manual transmission and routinely did 35 and up on the highway. If you had the automatic, there wasn't any way of getting close to 40, but the stick trans for the first couple of years did really, REALLY well, then the emission controls caught up with them and killed the awesome milage.
65crewcabpw 1 year ago
omg 6 seats?
TheRunescapernerd 1 year ago
5800$ WOW is that real !!!
regisiam 1 year ago
@regisiam Remember that was 29 years ago. And also, back in 1993, I owned one of these cars. I am not ashamed to say that they are not bad looking cars for being "econo-boxes" unlike some of the cavaliers.
In fact, my K car was identical to that one.
Lesrevesdhiver 1 year ago
The mere fact this looks better than some of the latest "hit" cars is, in itself, depressing.
MattTheSaiyan 1 year ago
love how everyone says these saved chrysler, only to go broke, than the neon saved chrysler, only to have recalls and now look at chrysler.
interpol007 1 year ago
41 mpg?
Ihitaparkedcar 1 year ago
Those were epic cars! I don't know why they didn't keep making those through the '90s instead of those shitty Neons.
Ian74263 1 year ago
@Ian74263 Nothing wrong with the neons. I've owned 3. We still have our 05 SXT with 125K miles and our 99 with 200,000, neither of which have had to have any major repairs while we owned them.
65crewcabpw 1 year ago
My Grandfather had a 82 k-car he had nothing but problems out of the transmission. Then the paint started fading after like 5 months. He traded it in for a new Chevy Van.
Manongjojo 1 year ago
I had a 1982 reliant for about three years back in the mid nineties. It had one of those motors Chrysler had the nerve to call a "hemi". Hello i associate that with a big block V8, not a Mitsubishi 2.6 four banger. Ok the motor was a great improvement over the 2.2 americanized four banger., but the rest of the car was questionable.
dressshoeguy 1 year ago
I still don't understand how this rolling hemorrhoid revived Chrysler. It was ugly, made like garbage, slower than a slug, and as reliable as any other Dodge. Back then, you really had no choice but to go foreign.
Toodlem 1 year ago
Comment removed
jakesaintsrow123 1 year ago 7
alguien vende uno asi?
turboblood 1 year ago
Yes, they got 41 MPG on the highway because you couldn't drive them over 55 MPH. We had one of these puppies in New York and couldn't drive over 40MPH on a 20 degree grade.
jrusso7660 1 year ago
I drove an '81 Aires K. Though it was underequipped, I thought the damn thing was nearly bulletproof. It was last seen still in service with 160,000 miles (without any overhaul, I might add). They may not have all been that good, but it could be done.
thespawnof66 1 year ago
6 midgets maybe...
StupidShouldHurtBad 1 year ago
....A 6 passenger car? You gotta be kidding. 41 MPG? You gotta be kidding. Eat my DIARRHEA? Oh, yes, of course! :-)
waterfordjim 1 year ago
I had that exact same car in HS, back in 1992. I thought that thing was the shit, even tho it had no features
Weird how I kind of miss it.
Lesrevesdhiver 2 years ago
Look at the gas mileage of the cars from the late 70's and 80's! This car got 41HWY! It's freakin' crazy.
TwiztedAnimator 2 years ago
41 my ass they were full of crap
the only thing they got 41 of was horsepower
kevinl23 2 years ago
You are right about that, they are slow. I don't know about this car but I had a 1988 BMW 525e and it got somewhere around 32mpg. 41 sounds ridiculous but it would be nice.
TwiztedAnimator 2 years ago
Oh, no.... When I was about 6 years old, my folks had an '82 Aires they bought from this old lady. It looked nice and had about 80k miles. But within a year, it just completely junked itself. My grandpa joked it should have been called "Achilles" because it fell apart with godspeed...
Kolfritz 2 years ago
actually the styling of this and the 1981 chev celebrity were pretty awesome at the time. The sharp crisp lines were usually only found on American luxury cars like the Lincoln town car. Sure they were a little gramma compared to the joys of Mazda, Honda, Nissan etc but there were still allot of gramma types left back then... heck you could order it with a vinyl roof....
oxjr 2 years ago
They might seem underpowered, slow, and have outdated styling today, but they were great cars in their day. They turned Chrysler around and gave it a future.
3619Country 2 years ago 5
SHIT CAR
halffliffe 2 years ago
I love the box on wheels styling of the K-cars.
ducatinova 2 years ago
My 82 Dodge Conv just got an engine swap with a 86 Reliant, it is now fuel injected and gets 30 mpg. These were great cars. AC blows cold, everything works as it should. New cars are ugly as hell, they all look like hot wheels.
DA90027 2 years ago
lee Iacocca is the man! He went to the government in 1979 to bail out chrysler and paid them back completely in 1983 (7 years early)He turned that company around to become a huge profit maker in the 80's. Unlike today Iacocca had a plan and a design team when he went to the government!
1978mtb 2 years ago 5
ha ha ha check out his 80s hair!
Sambucacat 2 years ago
41 MPG highway?? That's almost as good as a Prius!
lasuvidaboy 2 years ago 2
lasuvidaboy,
Yes, but the Prius doesn't top out at 35 MPH going up a steep hill.
jrusso7660 2 years ago
when he says "its a better idea" thats a direct cut at fords advertising if the time. which was "building a better idea"
DamnStraightM35A2 2 years ago
If Chrysler still built the K-car they wouldn't be bankrupt today. And that's a fact!
The6000Sabre 2 years ago
if chrysler still built the k car they would have gone bankrupt 10 years ago. everyone and their mom would have one and they wouldn't sell any if they made them for 30 years. thats why car companies change up cars. :-)
sideburns2009 2 years ago
I do not believe that. Toyota is still building Carola and Camry sfter 30 years. Ford has built Mustang for 45 years.
And there are other examples.
The6000Sabre 2 years ago
yep but they were all on different platforms and improved vastly over the years....which is why they are still hits. if they still sold the k cars....they would have to be the same because they were the k platform and you can only do so much with one platform. if they made a new platform and called it aries, it would no longer be a "k car" now would it? nope. it would be whatever the new platform is called (such as the LH and LX platforms) so you were missing my point.
sideburns2009 2 years ago
My point is the platform is irrelevant to show room customers. Automakers are ill advised to market their products via platform type. Seldom in the modern era was was this used: CC (K-car) & GM (X-car). By saying CC should have kept K-car. I mean an affordable, compact 6 passenger FWD car in 2 door hardtop/ convertible, 4 door sedan, 5 door wagon. When CC/ Daimler got rid of Plymouth brand and went upscale, they lost a huge segment of their customer base.
The6000Sabre 2 years ago
"If you're considering a Ford Fairmont" LOL!
How many New Chrysler Corporations ago was this?
Funkywhiteboy63 2 years ago
It was just chrysler then. I believe under new management....lee iacocca. he did wonders for chrysler. this was before daimler came into the picture and screwed them up into what they are now.
sideburns2009 2 years ago
if you guys like k cars search k car burnout. and look for the black one :)
thats my old k
that thing did 12's on the quarter mile.
beanzzz3883 2 years ago
and they don't even mention how you can make the 2.2turbo do an 11 sec 1/4, haha
clonis 2 years ago
haha. very true.
sideburns2009 2 years ago
Glove box! Standard! Lighter! Standard! Spare Tire! Standard! There really isn't any choice!!!!!!!!!
blabblab1212 2 years ago
My late father bought a new kcar in 81.
it was a real good car i must say, silver over red. A cv joint broke on it and that cost 675$. The engine was surprisingly good for an american made 4 cylinder. But the hondas and toyotas and datsuns of the day made a better and lighter engine. I could not break that engine and tranny in that kcar when i was a crazy kid, so that says something about the dodge folks back then. Overall that was a real good car. Why did these cars get better mileage?
barmtrail 2 years ago
my family has an 89'" K car. Belonged to my late father who bought it new. The car has about 20,000 "original miles" on it
inkey2 2 years ago
nice i love k cars there awsome do you like them??
jakesaintsrow123 2 years ago
to jakesaintsrow123: Yeh, I love the old K cars. Good cheap basic transportation.....like the old Ford Model "T"......and.....they looked surprisingly good in a station wagon. The one my family has is....silver gray with a gray interior, bench seats, and the larger 4 cylinder. The head gasket actually blew at about "2,000 miles" (yes, only two thousand miles). The Chrysler dealer put us through hell with the warranty work.
inkey2 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Yesterday, April 30 of 2009; Chrysler went on bankruptcy. Lets help Chrysler Corporation buying their cars instead of all that asian crap that is now running on our highways.
briagadaress 2 years ago
Comment removed
jfrey1 2 years ago
Want want want.
DizzyedUpGirl 2 years ago
Our family had one of these. A 1981 4-door Aires SE fully-loaded. Cost $9100 new. Had the 2.6 Mistubishi Hemi engine. Total piece of crapini. Haven't owned a Chrysler since.
FunkyDL 2 years ago
The 2.6 Mitsubishi was a complete piece of shit engine. I bet you had to add at least a quart of oil at every fillup.
dynamic717 2 years ago
ya the chrysler engine was MUCH better then the 2.6 they had carburation problems and were poorly built chrysler should of never put those engines on there cars as an option aside from the chrysler built 2.2l motor
jakesaintsrow124 2 years ago
the 2.2 and 2.5 chrysler engines were some outstanding engines. the mopar 2.5 in my acclaim had 300,000+ miles on it.
sideburns2009 2 years ago
why was it crap?? what happened to it?
jakesaintsrow123 2 years ago
They sold and manufactured the Mitsubishi Astron 2.6's here in Australia as well, fitted to the Sigma & Magna models. Quite a powerful and torquey engine for its time, but unfortunately they didn't age well.
My Astron 2.6 (an M7 Magna model) was very reliable, but seemed to have a persistent oil leak and was pretty noisy in comparison with similar 4's of the era.
CruisinTR 2 years ago
These were actually decent cars for their time, though Iacocca tried to do everyhting with them without continuing development on them. Mechnics were easy to work on as well. EVERYTHING on the engine is easy to reach, you can't say that about any cars today.
Srd1126 2 years ago
My Father owned an 83 Dodge Aries, ran great for many years; but like any old car, it eventually fell apart!!!! Still got our moneys worth!!!
Lazygreek07 2 years ago
Whoa !! ....aries seats more than a fairmont::::::: NOT
ioriorioriorio 2 years ago
what do you mean not it actually did seat 6
jakesaintsrow123 2 years ago
My 82 Dodge 400 Conv has a 4cyl, cruises down the freeway at 75 without trouble, gets almost 30 mpg costs $20 to fill up and has working AC and is WELL BUILT for the era of 80's junk. How many 27 year old cars can do that?
DA90027 3 years ago
Six passengers in an Aries? Six sardines maybe...
Cadillacjack01 3 years ago
That car got 41 mpg? Damn!
jmkpns 3 years ago
Verry good then, pretty average now though, with modern cars doing over 80 to the gallon
Pyroman1990 3 years ago
It definetely DID! Greatest mileage on any car I ever had !
kapes13 2 years ago
$5880 huh? In 1981, our family bought a new Aires K SE with the 2.6 Hemi (yes, that thing had a Hemi) and trimmed out. It stickered at $9100!
Roomy and comfy, but quality was lacking. We traded it away in 1987 and I have not owned a Chrysler product since.
FunkyDL 3 years ago
I just bought one from an old man for $125. Only thing wrong with it is the carburetor. Interior look brand new. no dents either.
EdwardPack1988 3 years ago
I am going to make an educated guess and say that the price for this car in todays money would be around 14,000 bucks?
inkey2 3 years ago
Ya to be exact its $14,753 USD in 2009.
dodgecrazy1970 2 years ago
cheap, reliable, fast, pick 2. Or in this case. Pick 1.
interpol007 3 years ago
every one was stoned ........including the num-nuts who screwed these cars together.
5/50,000 mile warentee ? Read the fine print it was a scam....that worked !
linoleumcarving 3 years ago
what do you mean how was it a scam??
jakesaintsrow123 2 years ago
what do you mean i read the fine print on this commercial and it dosent say anything about that how was it a scam??
jakesaintsrow123 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Who knew that shitbox got 41 mpg on the highway
gadee1118 3 years ago
I know some people laughed at the one I had in high school (an '81 K model sedan) because it was a faded banana yellow, but no one complained when they didn't have to ride the bus home. Everything was fine with it until the driver's side door fell off and the motor went ka-put.
Belle0010 3 years ago 7
how long ago did you have your 81 k car??
jakesaintsrow123 2 years ago
@Belle0010 Thats how it always is.Everyone laughes at your car but they don't have one of thier own.
thissitesucks74 1 year ago
I like fairmonts better but you have to admitt K cars saved Chrysler.
gajda1984 3 years ago 13
@gajda1984 They sure did! You know they said in 1980 that if you bought a Cutlass without looking at a LeBaron, "you're making a mistake!" Well, I don't know about that, but I think personally If you were considering at a Fairmont without looking at an Aries or a Reliant in '81 THEN you were making a BIG one.
TheMKEWERBY 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
lol, traction of front wheel drive, more like shittiness of front wheel drive :-)
bigvanilla27 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
fairmont way better car,no head cracking junck 2.2 liter
harley145000 3 years ago
these cars get a bad rap because of how they performed and looked not to mention the barenaked ladies song. The thing of it is this car is what helped Dodge survive to be what it is today.
CarCrazy12804 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
fn juck
harley145000 3 years ago
I have a Dodge Aries and still runs great.
chicorompecabesa 3 years ago 3
41 and 25? is that true? seems like a lot for back then...
buggoff 3 years ago
absolutely not i own a '87 and I'm lucky if i get 25 highway
sayheygiants 3 years ago
the EPA changed how they publish ratings twice since then. In the 1980s they just lowered results to get closer to real life. Last year they changed the test to reflect more real-world driving. That is why those old figures look so high. Reality is low 20s. Also then top-gears were higher for better mileage but top speeds of about 80mph.
Srd1126 3 years ago
Srd1126, you are largely correct. They still do the EPA gas mileage test the same, but changed the posted figures starting in the 1985 model year. EPA reduced the City figure by like 15% and the Highway by like 25%. The 4-speed manual K had very tall and widely spaced ratios. I think Car & Driver's test of an '81 showed 96MPH in 3RD and 92MPH in 4TH gear. This was not an uncommon occurance for cars of the times.
snowrocket 3 years ago
If I had $1M, i'd buy you a K-car, a nice reliant automobile
:lol:
pdennis93 3 years ago 3