Sad case: TONS of 80s Fifths getting clunked.

Go here to post pictures, videos, car finds, meet interesting new people, and tell us how your car is coming along.

Moderators: 89ARIES, Webmaster

Sad case: TONS of 80s Fifths getting clunked.

Postby 89ARIES » Fri Dec 02, 2011 8:15 pm

In California, the Chrysler section for 80s cars in pick-a-part for 2011 is only about 20 vehicles now a month getting clunked. At some lots, no
Ks come in at all, or as many as 4. It varies quite a bit now. The shock is that TONS of M bodies are still showing up every month at pick-a-part. I am
now not seeing them on the road as much anymore. Yet, they are still way more of them left compared to Ks both on craigslist and in the yards. I wonder if there
are just a lot more getting clunked than the Ks cause maybe 150,000 or more survive versus my estimate of 60,000 Ks left out of 3,000,000 Ks made. They only made
about 1,300,000 Ms for all lines, and the Fifth was about 600,000. The M also looks harder to work on then a K, yet Ks give us wonderfuel fuel and electrical
issues. The M has way more vacuum lines, large air filter, etc. Many claim the M is more reliable than the K as its a V6 or V8 and better built. Does the M have
a computer OBD1? The M is also known for getting over 20 mpg on the highway, but always poor, 12-15mpg in town. Also, nearly all the Fifths I find are WHITE. I did
see a nice 82 New Yorker -Fifth the other day. :?: :?: :?: :?:
User avatar
89ARIES
Chysler K Car Club Founder
 
Posts: 1851
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 2:04 am
Location: Sylmar, California
Car Information: 1989 Dodge Aries

Re: Sad case: TONS of 80s Fifths getting clunked.

Postby K-CAR_WAGON » Fri Dec 02, 2011 9:45 pm

There are alot of white and grey ones becasue they were mostly sold/marketed are "old people cars". The slant 6 and samll block V8 are more durable than the 4's. They are rear wheel drive so they are less desireable in climates where you get snow/ice. Carbs are more problematic these days with the new fuel blends. Generally I think you generally get better than 12-15 MPG city driving if the car is tuned up and the choke is working properly. They are not overly difficult to work on.
K-CAR_WAGON
Car Fan
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 5:42 pm
Car Information: Plymouth, Reliant Wagon, 1983

Re: Sad case: TONS of 80s Fifths getting clunked.

Postby MyDodgeDip » Sat Dec 03, 2011 12:56 am

Having had at least 7 of both M and K, I'll chime in. :lol:

They're both easy to work on. M bodies are a bit easier and have less to go wrong. Transmissions are easier to swap, plus no axles, timing belt, or generally head gasket problems to worry about. Wheel bearings are easy to change as opposed to pressing in and out K ones. Brakes are about the same on K and M. Amount of vacuum lines is roughly the same on both. M Bodies do not have OBD, just a lean burn computer which people like to blame for everything. 99% of "lean burn" problems are idiots who don't know how to work on a car with a carb. Interior dimensions are very similar, 318 2bbl performance was on par with 2.2 performance, handling is similar but the fifth aves have a nicer ride. Compare a 90's Imperial to a fifth ave and it's a closer competition (and I'd even say the Imperial is better). The K car handling is closer to a Diplomat police car than a fifth ave.

As far as gas mileage, my experience is that they're similar to K's in that some cars are good and some are bad. My 87 Lebaron K can't seem to break 20MPG so far, My Aries coupe does 22-25. My 78 Lebaron M Averages 13 mixed and as high as 16 highway(Although it's a 360 4bbl and I drive it accordingly...) My 84 Diplomats with 318 2bbls got about 15 mixed. My 88 Fifth ave and my brother's 85 Diplomat got 20 mixed and 25 all highway.

Bottom line: The only reason I drive a K car over an M body is gas mileage. I can beat a K car and get 20 MPG. I beat most M bodies and get 15-17.
MyDodgeDip
 

Re: Sad case: TONS of 80s Fifths getting clunked.

Postby K-CAR_WAGON » Sat Dec 03, 2011 1:42 am

MyDodgeDip wrote:318 2bbl performance was on par with 2.2 performance


2.2 NA or Turbo? The 1973 Coronet's with 318 2bbls I've driven could certainly outperform a 2.2 NA.
K-CAR_WAGON
Car Fan
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 5:42 pm
Car Information: Plymouth, Reliant Wagon, 1983

Re: Sad case: TONS of 80s Fifths getting clunked.

Postby MyDodgeDip » Sat Dec 03, 2011 3:24 am

Regular old 2.2.

The 318 2bbl in a 1980s M body is pushing exhaust through not one, not two but 3, count em, 3 Catcons..... :roll: They also had abysmal rear gears. 2.24 was standard, if you were lucky some police cars had 2.94. The stuff they did for gas mileage and EPA BS made for less than stunning performance. The older 318s have the advantage of less restrictive exhaust and steeper gears.

From Allpar:

For 1984 "The Gran Fury two-barrel managed 0-60 in 13.1 seconds"

A chart here: http://www.allpar.com/eek/k/k.html

Shows 0-60 times

Year Model Transmission Engine 0-60 Source
1986 Aries LE Auto 2.5 11.4 Home Mechanix
1982 Aries SE Auto 2.2 16.0 Consumer Reports
1982 Aries SE 4-Speed Manual 2.2 12.2 Car & Driver
1988 Reliant SE Auto 2.2 EFI 12.9 Home Mechanix
1981 Reliant Auto 2.2 12.5 Motor Trend
1981 Reliant Auto 2.2 14.0 Motor Trend
1981 Reliant Auto 2.6 12.4 Motor Trend
1988 Reliant Auto 2.2 EFI 10.6 Car & Driver
1985 Aries Auto 2.6 13.8 Consumer Reports
1985 Reliant LE Auto 2.2 13.4 Popular Science
MyDodgeDip
 


Return to Daily Updates & Club Projects

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests

cron