I had a NEW one of these when they first came out. Lots of room, good performance, and made like crap....but when it was brand new it was fun to drive.
I had an 82 with the 2.2,(someone asked why was one model called the miser it had the smaller volkswagon engine in it thats why, and by todays terms the 2.2 was low in h.p., it still had more h.p than its competitors, and if you were lucky enough to have a turbo gen 1 woot)it went 400,000 plus MILES(not kms) with nothing but the normal stuff tires, brakes batteries.In winter I went up the Niagara escarpment in a snow storm passing an audi quattro that couldnt even make it up.
I has some relatives buy and ship an O24 to Europe some thirty years ago. That POS would break down so often, I was always buying parts and shipping them abroad. The parts guy at the Dodge dealership and I were on a first name basis!
@broxboy86 Because of its alleged 50 mpg highway mileage. Yea sure, maybe if it was being towed. Using the current mileage formula, this figure would drop to about 32-35.
I had a 1980 024. I bought gas maybe once a month...but I also bought a new alternator about once a month too... It was a piece of crap but I loved it!
I had a 82 with the 2.2 litre engine(not volkswagon) it was 2 tone blue, just the basics and ran over 350,000 miles on it then traded it in in 1990 for a turbo shadow,went thru winter snow like a 4 wheel drive vehicle..was really nice..only thing I could complain was the standard brakes(no power) had the pedal higher left very little leg room for someone 6-3..
@jakesaintsrow123 I bought it because it had A/C and it got pretty good gas mileage. I had problems with the transmission and starter and a number of other things. I own a Toyota Avalon now. It's the best car I have ever own.
Had two of these cars and both sucked. The first was a 1980 O24 with the German 1.7L and automatic. Wasn't worth the $1,500 I payed in 1992 and was pathetically slow. The second was a 1985 Turismo I got in 1996 with the 2.2L and 5 spd and was worse than the first one. The shift linkage gave out when I was in 3rd gear and had to get out of the intersection in 3rd. lots of fun when from a dead stop. Then it rattled like hell every bump I hit and though it was going to fall apart. Never buy again
Those cars had no impact crumple zones, side impact protection, air bags, ABS, 5-speed auto transmissions, independent suspension, air conditioning, power windows, acoustic blanketing, and a host of other niceties found standard in every car today. No wonder today's cars are as heavy as the boats of yesterday. Will America's soccer moms roll down their windows in summer again and shift their own gears? I don't think so.
After demise of the real Duster(last yr was '76) Plymouth put a special stripe and a couple of options on a car, then called it a Duster to capitalize on what had been a very good selling car for years. They have done this more than once one more than one Plymouth model.
Don't confuse a Duster package with a Plymouth Duster 1970-1976.
From the late 70's to mid 80's they were testing highway mileage at 50mph. Then it went to a cycle of 50 for one test and then 60 for another cycle. Now highway mileage starting in 2008 is tested at 80mph which is more realistic. That was also with a 1.4 VW engine not the 1.7 engine with a high highway axle ratio probablly a 3.08 gear or lower and of course a manual trans. You never got that mileage cause these types of cars were so underpowered you always had your foot in it.
cars like that 024 back then were so light achieveing high mpg was easy thats a problem today. the engines we have now are all engineered for good fuel mileage but all the safety features weighs the car pretty badly given marginal to poor mileage!!! Car and Driver and motortrend both said that the average car todays weighs about the same as car did in 1973 and look at the boats they were!!! We have gone almost full circle.We got fuel efficient engines they just need to make the cars lighter!
Also the feature creep in today's cars has contributed a lot to the weight gains.
Back then many cars did not have power steering, power brakes,traction control, power windows etc stuff that even low end cars have today all of which add mass.
All the luxury stuff may add 500lbs to a vehicle.
Plus they're always trying to add more leg and head room then last year model .
As for safety in theory they could make them both light and safe see race cars but the excuse is it costs money.
@DamnStraightM35A2 One possible way...hold the clutch, if it's a stick, going downhill. Still, 50 mpg with a 2.2 litre engine with a 4-speed? Don't make me laugh. My father had a 1982 Plymouth TC-3/Turismo with a stick and even at 55 mph, it can't even go past 35 mpg in the highway.
@DamnStraightM35A2 You're absolutely incorrect. Economy class Dodge's typically were underestimated for fuel economy, due to faulty test procedures. These tests were performed by a government agency, not numbers pulled out of thin air by an ad company or marketing department.
New milage ratings use a system that takes real-time driving into consideration; i.e. road grade and wind resistance, among other things.
While 50 MPG is unrealistic, I could top 40 MPG in my 2.2L equipped Omni...I'm sure the more aerodynamic 024/TC3/Charger/Duster/Turismo with the 1.7L or 1.6L could probably hit the mid 40's easily.
LOL! My dad had an '83 Aries. The driver's door came from the factory warped. The head gasket went out at 40,000 miles and the computer went at a little over 80,000. Just a crappy car.
I love the Mopar cars of the 60s to mid 70s, though. Those were great cars.
to cincyblows: yeh, my dad bought a new ARIES K in 1989....the head gasket went at about 2000 miles.....fortunately it was under warranty......but we had to fight chrysler tooth and nail to get them to fix it.
@cincyblows Hard to believe? Believe it. Today's cars are twice the weight and three to four times the horsepower, that's why they get shitty gas mileage. This will blow your mind: "The 1984 base Honda Civic CRX had a1.3-liter engine which allowed the car to score amazing fuel economy ratings of 51 in the city and 67 on the highway." (Edmunds).
@boardskins Yeah I had an 84 crx that got close to that gas mileage, however I payed the difference with insurance rates. Insurance on the crx was sky high because they were little death traps and replacement parts were 3 to 4 times as expensive than other models. Just the windshield for the CRX alone back then was over $800! Between the high insurance and expensive replacement parts my crx ended up not being so economical.
It was a pale color yellow. Unfortunately, the transmission went on the car so I got rid of it. This was back in 1991 or so. I really enjoyed it. I actually like the fact that it had no power steering or power brakes
Same here. Not every car needs it. My parents had two Toyota Tercels - one with power steering and one without. You don't need power assisted steering and power assisted brakes on a small car.
The Duster you are thinking of is a special package of options put on a Horizon. Don't confuse that with the real Ply Duster, that was from '70 thru '76.
My friend had an '82 Datsun 200 SX. It was a pretty peppy car. The Dodge might have been faster when it was new but it fell apart after a few years. The Datsun ran and ran until it finally rusted to the ground.
That car looks appetizing! Of course it's for Monsieur Magnetout to eat. :-P
(Man, 50 in the city? Today's hybrid doesn't do so well. :( But then again, air conditioning is considered standard now so that's why things look more inefficient.)
to EgaoNogenki: the old monarchies on DT are gone now...even blood. Although the population has thined out quite a bit in the last few years it is still avery fun game. Hey....I'll make a deal with you....If you come back to the game (darktide server) ....ill give you enough money (mmds) to get started again. It would be great to get people back to the game.
I bought a used O24 in 1989 like the one in this commercial for $175, it was my fist car. The shift linkage was loses. I tighten it and the car ran flawless. It had the Volkswagen engine. I was amazed how good on gas mileage was, now I see why - 50MPG highway! This was one of my favorite cars I have owned, I have always regretted getting rid of it even more now with today's gas prices.
@boardskins It was VW please read the Wikipedia article: "Dodge Omni 024"
--"It used the same chassis and engine options as the Omni but had a fastback and a new front fascia. The base engine was a 1.7 L Volkswagen inline four producing 70 hp (52 kW), with a 2.2 L, 84 hp (63 kW) Chrysler inline four as an option beginning in 1981."--
@jakesaintsrow123 Do yourself a favor: Sell it to some poor soul for $50 more immediatly. It's not worth all the shitty driving experiences and attachment that comes with a first car. Get something stylish from that era, like a Riviera or anything luxurious, you wont get any good gas mileage but you'll at least get some power with a V8. Seriously. Dont spend a dime on that car: It will never appreciate.
I had a NEW one of these when they first came out. Lots of room, good performance, and made like crap....but when it was brand new it was fun to drive.
nightwatchdog 2 months ago
@nightwatchdog Was yours a Lemon? I Have a 78' Plymouth horizon 4 door hatchback and Love It. It's still In Great shape
jakesaintsrow123 1 month ago
I bought the O24, my sister the 200SX the SX outlasted the Dodge by 6 years.
urah2525 4 months ago
"RANDOMLY recruited from the LA area..." (wink), lol
TheSRalston 4 months ago
lol, what an awful commercial.
The "final score" sounds like something they pulled from an NFL game.
MaestroTJS 5 months ago
I had an 82 with the 2.2,(someone asked why was one model called the miser it had the smaller volkswagon engine in it thats why, and by todays terms the 2.2 was low in h.p., it still had more h.p than its competitors, and if you were lucky enough to have a turbo gen 1 woot)it went 400,000 plus MILES(not kms) with nothing but the normal stuff tires, brakes batteries.In winter I went up the Niagara escarpment in a snow storm passing an audi quattro that couldnt even make it up.
moocowdad 7 months ago
@moocowdad and no nee for power brakes or steering it was so light it would be a waste of h.p.
moocowdad 7 months ago
I has some relatives buy and ship an O24 to Europe some thirty years ago. That POS would break down so often, I was always buying parts and shipping them abroad. The parts guy at the Dodge dealership and I were on a first name basis!
itsmegp46 7 months ago
a miser? why would you call your car that?
broxboy86 8 months ago
@broxboy86 Because of its alleged 50 mpg highway mileage. Yea sure, maybe if it was being towed. Using the current mileage formula, this figure would drop to about 32-35.
itsmegp46 7 months ago
I had a 1980 024. I bought gas maybe once a month...but I also bought a new alternator about once a month too... It was a piece of crap but I loved it!
gooperella 8 months ago
What's funny is they still make the "200SX". It's called a Sentra. ;^)
Kevbox2008 10 months ago
I had a 82 with the 2.2 litre engine(not volkswagon) it was 2 tone blue, just the basics and ran over 350,000 miles on it then traded it in in 1990 for a turbo shadow,went thru winter snow like a 4 wheel drive vehicle..was really nice..only thing I could complain was the standard brakes(no power) had the pedal higher left very little leg room for someone 6-3..
moocowdad 11 months ago
Voiced by the great Ernie Anderson!
voiceaddict 11 months ago
50 MPG! Thats unbelievable. Then, why are todays cars not that good? This O24 was relatively cheap, too.
bigpowerfulpeople 1 year ago
Comment removed
TheLizardKing1967 1 year ago
@TheLizardKing1967 You bought a piece of shit? lol
boardskins 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@boardskins You are a piece of shit ! lol
TheLizardKing1967 10 months ago
024 vs a s12 ???
are you americans retarded ?!?!
Crazybenjiwoo 1 year ago
How is it that 30 years later,few cars get even 35 mpg but cost 5 times as much? I will be impressed when Smart cars get 100 mpg.
ghauler1 1 year ago
50 mgh highway---what a joke, it couldn't get 50 mpg going off a cliff.
Srd1126 1 year ago
50 MPG on HWY? Hell, you pretty much need a hybrid for that today!
Xcorgi 1 year ago
I owned a 1980 Omni 024. This car was a piece of shit !! LEMON !!!
TheLizardKing1967 1 year ago
Comment removed
jakesaintsrow123 1 year ago
Comment removed
jakesaintsrow123 1 year ago
@TheLizardKing1967 I Have one..it still runs good haha
jakesaintsrow123 8 months ago
Comment removed
jakesaintsrow123 7 months ago
@jakesaintsrow123 I bought it used in 1985. I got rid of it in early 1986
TheLizardKing1967 7 months ago
Comment removed
jakesaintsrow123 7 months ago
@jakesaintsrow123 I bought it because it had A/C and it got pretty good gas mileage. I had problems with the transmission and starter and a number of other things. I own a Toyota Avalon now. It's the best car I have ever own.
TheLizardKing1967 7 months ago
Comment removed
jakesaintsrow123 7 months ago
Comment removed
jakesaintsrow123 7 months ago
Had two of these cars and both sucked. The first was a 1980 O24 with the German 1.7L and automatic. Wasn't worth the $1,500 I payed in 1992 and was pathetically slow. The second was a 1985 Turismo I got in 1996 with the 2.2L and 5 spd and was worse than the first one. The shift linkage gave out when I was in 3rd gear and had to get out of the intersection in 3rd. lots of fun when from a dead stop. Then it rattled like hell every bump I hit and though it was going to fall apart. Never buy again
Fenncer24 1 year ago
Those cars had no impact crumple zones, side impact protection, air bags, ABS, 5-speed auto transmissions, independent suspension, air conditioning, power windows, acoustic blanketing, and a host of other niceties found standard in every car today. No wonder today's cars are as heavy as the boats of yesterday. Will America's soccer moms roll down their windows in summer again and shift their own gears? I don't think so.
divisioneight 1 year ago
Oh....two, four. Oh!
TheIntruders 1 year ago
Oh my God, these cars are starting to look good compared with some latest hit cars....there's something VERY wrong here!
MattTheSaiyan 1 year ago 5
The 024 "Miser."...wow makes me want to jump right up and run down to the Dodge dealer..lol
StoneCold75 1 year ago
After demise of the real Duster(last yr was '76) Plymouth put a special stripe and a couple of options on a car, then called it a Duster to capitalize on what had been a very good selling car for years. They have done this more than once one more than one Plymouth model.
Don't confuse a Duster package with a Plymouth Duster 1970-1976.
younghoss 1 year ago
yes $5299
PKRPLAYER78 1 year ago
true there was no regulated mpg ratings car companys actually lied to get the consumer to the showroom
djayperu 2 years ago
@djayperu Ever here of C.A.F.E.? Guess not. The fuel ratings were set by the US government through testing.
boardskins 1 year ago
my 1980 model had the Volkswagon engine 1.8L with 4 speed Manual.
dirge71 2 years ago
ha 50 dollars no matter what you buy
bones318v8 2 years ago 2
From the late 70's to mid 80's they were testing highway mileage at 50mph. Then it went to a cycle of 50 for one test and then 60 for another cycle. Now highway mileage starting in 2008 is tested at 80mph which is more realistic. That was also with a 1.4 VW engine not the 1.7 engine with a high highway axle ratio probablly a 3.08 gear or lower and of course a manual trans. You never got that mileage cause these types of cars were so underpowered you always had your foot in it.
jas4925 2 years ago
@jas4925 actually, the miser models used a Peugeot 1.6L engine.
ducatinova 2 years ago
cars like that 024 back then were so light achieveing high mpg was easy thats a problem today. the engines we have now are all engineered for good fuel mileage but all the safety features weighs the car pretty badly given marginal to poor mileage!!! Car and Driver and motortrend both said that the average car todays weighs about the same as car did in 1973 and look at the boats they were!!! We have gone almost full circle.We got fuel efficient engines they just need to make the cars lighter!
1978mtb 2 years ago 13
Comment removed
Membrane556 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Also the feature creep in today's cars has contributed a lot to the weight gains.
Back then many cars did not have power steering, power brakes,traction control, power windows etc stuff that even low end cars have today all of which add mass.
All the luxury stuff may add 500lbs to a vehicle.
Plus they're always trying to add more leg and head room then last year model .
As for safety in theory they could make them both light and safe see race cars but the excuse is it costs money.
Membrane556 4 months ago
50mpg in 1981, does any Dodge car get that, nearly 30 years later?
iasip77 2 years ago
no dodge ever got that, that was when you could put whatever you wanted as highway mileage.
DamnStraightM35A2 2 years ago
@DamnStraightM35A2 One possible way...hold the clutch, if it's a stick, going downhill. Still, 50 mpg with a 2.2 litre engine with a 4-speed? Don't make me laugh. My father had a 1982 Plymouth TC-3/Turismo with a stick and even at 55 mph, it can't even go past 35 mpg in the highway.
Rlotpir1972 1 year ago
@Rlotpir1972 We're talking about the 1.7 L Volkswagen engine, not the 2.2. The 2.2 was rated at 36mpg hwy.
boardskins 1 year ago
@DamnStraightM35A2 You're absolutely incorrect. Economy class Dodge's typically were underestimated for fuel economy, due to faulty test procedures. These tests were performed by a government agency, not numbers pulled out of thin air by an ad company or marketing department.
New milage ratings use a system that takes real-time driving into consideration; i.e. road grade and wind resistance, among other things.
boardskins 1 year ago
wasn't this a mitsubishi or something?
timppa600 2 years ago
Oh, the voice of Ernie Anderson!
mrceleb2006 2 years ago
my prefernce is a datsun best quality an economical car , dodge is very deficient
zukomatico 2 years ago
$5299 for a brand new car. Man, to think I just paid more than that for a used Kia. Inflation is a remarkable thing.
palebeachbum 2 years ago
While 50 MPG is unrealistic, I could top 40 MPG in my 2.2L equipped Omni...I'm sure the more aerodynamic 024/TC3/Charger/Duster/Turismo with the 1.7L or 1.6L could probably hit the mid 40's easily.
omnifocus 2 years ago
Comment removed
jakesaintsrow123 2 years ago
Sadly I think he made kinda a demolition car out of it.
Coolpix7900 2 years ago
Comment removed
jakesaintsrow123 2 years ago
LOL! My dad had an '83 Aries. The driver's door came from the factory warped. The head gasket went out at 40,000 miles and the computer went at a little over 80,000. Just a crappy car.
I love the Mopar cars of the 60s to mid 70s, though. Those were great cars.
cincyblows 2 years ago
to cincyblows: yeh, my dad bought a new ARIES K in 1989....the head gasket went at about 2000 miles.....fortunately it was under warranty......but we had to fight chrysler tooth and nail to get them to fix it.
inkey2 2 years ago
typical chrysler
FantomLightning 2 years ago
50 mpg? Bullshit. Say, didn't Chrysler get a bailout around the time they made this ad?
cincyblows 2 years ago
1980. It was the K-car that saved the company. The Omni/Horizon/024 and minivan helped.
Luzern76 2 years ago
50 mph at 55 mph in a light, aerodynamic car with an economy-oriented 5 speed is achievable.
Infinitrium 2 years ago
@cincyblows Hard to believe? Believe it. Today's cars are twice the weight and three to four times the horsepower, that's why they get shitty gas mileage. This will blow your mind: "The 1984 base Honda Civic CRX had a1.3-liter engine which allowed the car to score amazing fuel economy ratings of 51 in the city and 67 on the highway." (Edmunds).
boardskins 1 year ago
@boardskins Yeah I had an 84 crx that got close to that gas mileage, however I payed the difference with insurance rates. Insurance on the crx was sky high because they were little death traps and replacement parts were 3 to 4 times as expensive than other models. Just the windshield for the CRX alone back then was over $800! Between the high insurance and expensive replacement parts my crx ended up not being so economical.
wppdoes 1 year ago
holy crap, this commercial brings back memories, I had an 81 Dodge Omni 024, my first car, Wow, so great to see it again.
buffalocrotch 2 years ago
50 mpg? Bullshit. Only in America.
swankrecords 2 years ago
I had the 1980 Detomaso version, I have never seen another one like it. I don't remember getting 50 MPG highway.
pacalamike 3 years ago
Thats why it says "Your mileage will vary. Actual highway mileage lower."
DamnStraightM35A2 3 years ago
I had a 1987...no power steering no power breaks ...and guess what..I loved it
Libitina72 3 years ago 3
Is it Charger?
takutaq 3 years ago
no but they were the same thing. Same body type. I think there was also a car called the Duster that looked the same.
Mine was a yellow 024..
Libitina72 3 years ago
Comment removed
jakesaintsrow123 3 years ago
It was a pale color yellow. Unfortunately, the transmission went on the car so I got rid of it. This was back in 1991 or so. I really enjoyed it. I actually like the fact that it had no power steering or power brakes
Libitina72 3 years ago
Same here. Not every car needs it. My parents had two Toyota Tercels - one with power steering and one without. You don't need power assisted steering and power assisted brakes on a small car.
Luzern76 2 years ago
Yes.
Plymouth Duster and Dodge Charger is same car.
Yours was Yellow O24?
Nice!
I love it too!
Now, what is your car?
takutaq 3 years ago
@takutaq
The Duster you are thinking of is a special package of options put on a Horizon. Don't confuse that with the real Ply Duster, that was from '70 thru '76.
younghoss 10 months ago
@Libitina72 no power brakes on an 87 omni or horizon ??? let me be sceptical. !!!!! My nickname is moparholic by the way !!!
moparholic2 8 months ago
Wow, I remember these blowing up after two or three years. They were real pieces of shit.
JJ2955 3 years ago
My friend had an '82 Datsun 200 SX. It was a pretty peppy car. The Dodge might have been faster when it was new but it fell apart after a few years. The Datsun ran and ran until it finally rusted to the ground.
paktype 3 years ago
Fell apart after a few years? I'm not so sure about that. My 1987 Charger is running strong to this day with just basic maintenence.
omnifocus 3 years ago 2
They built an Intrepid prototype that got 80mpg but never put it into production.
quacksacker 3 years ago
If the American Auto Industry produced the Omni Miser at 50 MPG they wouldn't need any bail out!
MrReminisce 3 years ago
That Dodge was a good car. The seat folded down and turned into a bed. Me and my GF had a lot of sex in that car and didn't care about stains.
txmcxlx 3 years ago
that junk dodge did not compare to the datsun
harley145000 3 years ago
That car looks appetizing! Of course it's for Monsieur Magnetout to eat. :-P
(Man, 50 in the city? Today's hybrid doesn't do so well. :( But then again, air conditioning is considered standard now so that's why things look more inefficient.)
ChomuSclavus 3 years ago
to ChomuScalvus: just happened to see your name CHOMUSCALVUS......do you play ASHERONNS CALL?????
inkey2 2 years ago
Hi, I used to use "ChomuSclavus" but went on to this username.
Yes, I stopped playing in '04 because real life got in the way. I used to name my characters monster names and Chomu Sclavus was one of my mains.
EgaoNoGenki 2 years ago
to egaoNoGenki: actually I have been playing the Darktide (player killer) server since 2001.....I still play!
inkey2 2 years ago
What's your main there? Blood?
EgaoNoGenki 2 years ago
to EgaoNogenki: the old monarchies on DT are gone now...even blood. Although the population has thined out quite a bit in the last few years it is still avery fun game. Hey....I'll make a deal with you....If you come back to the game (darktide server) ....ill give you enough money (mmds) to get started again. It would be great to get people back to the game.
inkey2 2 years ago
The inconvenience of blowing head gaskets?... 024! :P
TaurusLX1988 3 years ago
a car called the miser?????
Justchecking78 3 years ago 3
YUP! & fucking ugly too!
TaurusLX1988 3 years ago
"024" what a catchy name!....
mickeymoose76 3 years ago
I bought a used O24 in 1989 like the one in this commercial for $175, it was my fist car. The shift linkage was loses. I tighten it and the car ran flawless. It had the Volkswagen engine. I was amazed how good on gas mileage was, now I see why - 50MPG highway! This was one of my favorite cars I have owned, I have always regretted getting rid of it even more now with today's gas prices.
markjerno 3 years ago 8
sucks for you.
FILIPINOCD 3 years ago
@markjerno Nope. 2.2 was all Chrysler, not a Volkswagen engine.
boardskins 1 year ago
@boardskins It was VW please read the Wikipedia article: "Dodge Omni 024"
--"It used the same chassis and engine options as the Omni but had a fastback and a new front fascia. The base engine was a 1.7 L Volkswagen inline four producing 70 hp (52 kW), with a 2.2 L, 84 hp (63 kW) Chrysler inline four as an option beginning in 1981."--
markjerno 1 year ago
Comment removed
jakesaintsrow123 1 year ago
@jakesaintsrow123 Do yourself a favor: Sell it to some poor soul for $50 more immediatly. It's not worth all the shitty driving experiences and attachment that comes with a first car. Get something stylish from that era, like a Riviera or anything luxurious, you wont get any good gas mileage but you'll at least get some power with a V8. Seriously. Dont spend a dime on that car: It will never appreciate.
howsitgoingeh1 1 year ago
Comment removed
jakesaintsrow123 1 year ago
Comment removed
jakesaintsrow123 1 year ago