The K-Car - One of the cars that helped save Chrysler

[oil_film_movies]

Originally Posted by Dave Sherman
When I took driver's ed in high school, our car was a 1987 Plymouth Reliant. Was also the car used by auto shop class to "practice" on

. .
What surprised me is how BIG those engines were: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cy_RwOsbJ0Y around the 4:49 point:

 

[buster]

Originally Posted by Yah-Tah-Hey
Typical Chrysler junk.



LOL!!!!

 

[eljefino]

A dodge spirit got me into serious wrenching. Did its head gasket in my driveway in March with snowbanks still around.

I started it up and it blew white smoke for a few minutes. Patient, I assumed it was left over water in the exhaust. I was right.

The car itself was boring as sin. The formal rear roofline made it look like a Town Car.

Lets not forget when the things came out we were in a mega recession. Iacocca said they fit 6 Americans. This was huge since a lot of the down sized cars were tight or nasty. The Chevy rear windows didn't roll down because the paper thin door didn't have room for the mechanism! People would have been trading out of cars like a RWD 1974 Nova with huge crash bumpers and the pellet catalytic converter-- this was a step up from that for them.

 

[StevieC]

The blocks I believe were originally designed for the VW Rabbit engine (Cast-Iron) and the heads were aluminum that Chrysler designed and fitted to it. Then drilled holes in them and the block between cylinder 1 and 2 and 3 and 4 for additional water circulation when the Turbo was added to the 2.2 Turbo's although they weren't big enough holes and would regularly cause head gasket failure and cracked heads.

The Turbos on the 2.2's came with a Japanese made for Chrysler Turbo and a Domestic made turbo depending on the years. The Domestic ones would regularly have bearing failure early on, most likely due to coking from the conventional oils at the time and no water cooling. The Japanese ones seemed to last longer but would also eventually fail the same fate. Not sure why they lasted longer. Maybe better bearing machining or oil circulation who knows... The lag on the Turbo's wasn't 1/2 bad. The factory Boost/Vacuum gage was neat to see.

Also the non-turbo models sometimes had the fuel economy pacer LED that would tell you when to shift for optimal economy like in the Caravans that had the 2.2L 4 Cylinder. (Yes it was gutless)

 

[road_rascal]

Originally Posted by eljefino
A dodge spirit got me into serious wrenching..


Oh geeze, I'm going to have PTSD on that one. I bought a new Dodge Spirit ES back in 1990 (white with the white snowflake wheels- looked pretty nice) with the 3.0 Mitsu V6 an the A604 trans. The trans was an absolute pile of garbage (3 rebuilds in less than 70k miles, plus a small claims court case for the 4th rebuild), the V6 started leaking oil like crazy from the cam seals and rear main seal at 75k, valve cover gaskets every 30k, the dash rattled like mad after 40k, and rear end always had some sort of 'clunk' that the dealer was never able to figure out. This car, the dealer(s) attitude, and the management from Chrysler is why I will never purchase another vehicle from them.

 

[caprice_2nv]

Originally Posted by eljefino
A dodge spirit got me into serious wrenching. Did its head gasket in my driveway in March with snowbanks still around.

I started it up and it blew white smoke for a few minutes. Patient, I assumed it was left over water in the exhaust. I was right.

The car itself was boring as sin. The formal rear roofline made it look like a Town Car.

Lets not forget when the things came out we were in a mega recession. Iacocca said they fit 6 Americans. This was huge since a lot of the down sized cars were tight or nasty. The Chevy rear windows didn't roll down because the paper thin door didn't have room for the mechanism! People would have been trading out of cars like a RWD 1974 Nova with huge crash bumpers and the pellet catalytic converter-- this was a step up from that for them.


I wouldn't consider any k car an upgrade from any Nova.

 

[JTK]

Originally Posted by caprice_2nv
Originally Posted by JTK
Like said above, what cars weren't crap back then? A horrible era. For the amount of them on the roads, the K-cars were probably one of the better vehicles.


Most economy cars were junk back then. As someone who still daily drives only cars from that era, ignorant statements like yours annoy the [censored] out of me.

You'll never convince me that there is any car being built today that I could go out and buy and drive for 35 years and still not worry about reliability on a trip, or finding parts etc.

Have you ever heard of the Chevy caprice, Ford crown Victoria, oldsmobile Cutlass, etc?. Those are the cars I think of from that era because they are the ones that were still plentiful 15-20 years later when I was first driving.



I get it. I'd be ornery as well if I was still rockin' it out in an early to mid 80s Caprice, Vic or Cutlass. Those were bad in that era too, just at a higher class level.

 

[eljefino]

Originally Posted by caprice_2nv
Originally Posted by eljefino
A dodge spirit got me into serious wrenching. Did its head gasket in my driveway in March with snowbanks still around.

I started it up and it blew white smoke for a few minutes. Patient, I assumed it was left over water in the exhaust. I was right.

The car itself was boring as sin. The formal rear roofline made it look like a Town Car.

Lets not forget when the things came out we were in a mega recession. Iacocca said they fit 6 Americans. This was huge since a lot of the down sized cars were tight or nasty. The Chevy rear windows didn't roll down because the paper thin door didn't have room for the mechanism! People would have been trading out of cars like a RWD 1974 Nova with huge crash bumpers and the pellet catalytic converter-- this was a step up from that for them.


I wouldn't consider any k car an upgrade from any Nova.


The nova's stayed "cool" longer but for the housewife who wants to get the kids to school, get through five inches of snow, parallel park downtown, and get better MPG would have found the K-car leaps and bounds better. New car buyers dictate what new cars come with-- ergo the current batch with tons of screens and very few stick shifts.

We forget the sucky novas with the inline-6 and 2 speed powerglide through our nostalgic rose-tinted glasses.

 

[Wolf359]

Originally Posted by 02SE
In stark contrast was another family member's Taurus, which was a true pile in comparison. Three transmissions, water pumps, alternators, power steering pumps, steering rack, clattering hydraulic lifters from low miles, finally at about 100k a headgasket let go. It wasn't neglected or abused, it had the same maintenance as the 'cheap' Dynasty. The Dynasty lasted twice as many years with no major repairs.


Depends on the generation of Taurus, I know 3rd was pretty bad, not sure about the earlier ones but probably also bad. The 4th gen were somewhat decent, but those started in 2000.

Originally Posted by Cdn17Sport6MT
I'll say it again: when the 2.2 liter engine was stroked to 2.5, given balance shafts, and equipped with Bosch throttle body fuel injection (and lockup was added to the 3 speed A/T) it made an incredible difference in how drivers experienced the car. The 2.2 with electronic feedback carb was s**t. Would NOT carburete properly.

This was brought in, in 1986... with the lock-up on the A/T in '87. My '87 was the 7th model year iteration... and Chrysler ended production with the 1988 model year cars, if memory serves. This car brings new meaning, in my mind, to NOT buying the first model year of a new (north american) car. The Japanese do not seem to be afflicted with this same issue. For my Reliant it was evident in the extreme.

Did I also say how gnarly the wintertime / in-snow traction was... with the standard all-season tires. Unstoppable tractor of a car!


Yeah, my early Reliants had the carburators. Even had them rebuilt a couple times, but it didn't seem to do it any good, got rid of the car with under 100k on it. Snow traction actually wasn't that bad, might have depended on the tires you had. I had the 175/80/13's, I think one of the options was the 185/70/14's so maybe the wider tires made them worse in the snow.

 

[Cdn17Sport6MT]

My '87 had 185/70 - 14 All seasons. Great in snow.

 

[CrAlt]

My mother had a 1988 Aries with the 2.5TBI she got new and I had a 1989 Reliant 2.2TBI years later used. Both 4 door dark blue. Reliable and boring. Basic transportation.
My mom's got knocked out in the mid 90's when she got rear ended. Mine ran until I got tired of it then gave it to my brother. He drove it to the scrap yard sometime around 2015. Rust did in the rear suspension.
The TBI system was very reliable and the cars where great in the snow.

 

[StevieC]

Originally Posted by road_rascal
Originally Posted by eljefino
A dodge spirit got me into serious wrenching..


Oh geeze, I'm going to have PTSD on that one. I bought a new Dodge Spirit ES back in 1990 (white with the white snowflake wheels- looked pretty nice) with the 3.0 Mitsu V6 an the A604 trans. The trans was an absolute pile of garbage (3 rebuilds in less than 70k miles, plus a small claims court case for the 4th rebuild), the V6 started leaking oil like crazy from the cam seals and rear main seal at 75k, valve cover gaskets every 30k, the dash rattled like mad after 40k, and rear end always had some sort of 'clunk' that the dealer was never able to figure out. This car, the dealer(s) attitude, and the management from Chrysler is why I will never purchase another vehicle from them.

The problem with those transmissions was they weren't cooled properly. All the ones we rebuilt and put coolers on lasted just fine thereafter. It had to be a thermostatically controlled cooler though or else it would just go into partial lock-up instead of full lock-up and screw up the torque converter over time.

 

[StevieC]

Originally Posted by CrAlt
My mother had a 1988 Aries with the 2.5TBI she got new and I had a 1989 Reliant 2.2TBI years later used. Both 4 door dark blue. Reliable and boring. Basic transportation.
My mom's got knocked out in the mid 90's when she got rear ended. Mine ran until I got tired of it then gave it to my brother. He drove it to the scrap yard sometime around 2015. Rust did in the rear suspension.
The TBI system was very reliable and the cars where great in the snow.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlmoQTSoQYo

Love that video, been posted here before...

 

[CrAlt]

Was the a604 the trans that made that very distinct fluttering sound when coming to a stop? It seems just about every FWD Chrysler from the 90s made that sound.

 

[ls1mike]

Originally Posted by StevieC
The blocks I believe were originally designed for the VW Rabbit engine (Cast-Iron) and the heads were aluminum that Chrysler designed and fitted to it. Then drilled holes in them and the block between cylinder 1 and 2 and 3 and 4 for additional water circulation when the Turbo was added to the 2.2 Turbo's although they weren't big enough holes and would regularly cause head gasket failure and cracked heads.

The Turbos on the 2.2's came with a Japanese made for Chrysler Turbo and a Domestic made turbo depending on the years. The Domestic ones would regularly have bearing failure early on, most likely due to coking from the conventional oils at the time and no water cooling. The Japanese ones seemed to last longer but would also eventually fail the same fate. Not sure why they lasted longer. Maybe better bearing machining or oil circulation who knows... The lag on the Turbo's wasn't 1/2 bad. The factory Boost/Vacuum gage was neat to see.

Also the non-turbo models sometimes had the fuel economy pacer LED that would tell you when to shift for optimal economy like in the Caravans that had the 2.2L 4 Cylinder. (Yes it was gutless)



I actually owned an Omni GLH, Shelby Lancer #24, Two 1988 Dodge Daytona Pacificas, 1 88 Daytona Shelby, 1 85 Lebaron Turbo, 1 86 Lancer Turbo and 1 88 Horizon.
The Omni ran 12.90's after a bunch of modifications. To include an Ed Peters built Garrett turbo, Mopar Big valve race head, 5th injector controlled by the manifold pressure in order to run more than 15lbs of boost
and a bunch of other stuff I am forgetting.
I was real big into them from 1992 until I got into the GM LS powered cars.

2.2 block block had nothing to do with the VW block. The original US Omnis actually used a 1.7 VW engine. The 2.2 was an all new design in 1981.
Willem Weertman was the chief engineer.

The heads unusually like to crack between the intake and exhaust valves.

The original 2.2s all used the 10mm head bolts which did cause head gasket failures. In 1986 all of them received 11mm head bolts until the end of the production run.
This helped reduce the warping commonly seen on the early engines.

The Garrett Turbos used on the original T1 car and later on the T2 cars was far superior to the small Mitsubishi turbo. It was the upgrade when you destroyed the pile supplied by Mitsubishi. All the turbos 85 and up had water cooling. The line came out of the thermostat house and ran to the turbo. The Mitsubishi pile went on the T1 cars in 1988 when they switched to the new style intake. Every Mitsubishi turbo I had failed before 100,000 miles, well both of them and was replaced with the T2 style Garrett. The T1 Garret and T2 Garrett had different compressor housings.
The wastegate on the 1984 was mechanically controlled, 85 and up were computer controlled.

This is an 85 to 87 style T1 with the Garrett you can see the coolant line(boxed in in red) coming out of the thermostat housing of the head.

In 1988 they all went to a roller cam VS the flat tappet. It was a nice upgrade.

The Omni, Charger, Turismo, Rampage, Scamp were all L bodies.
Daytona/Lasers were G-Body
Lebarons/Lancers were H-body in the large 4 door or 2 door coupe as there were K Lebarons

There was also a Turbo III which use a Lotus DOHC head. The heads were problematic. It was used in the Spirit R/T and Daytona Iroc
There was also a Turbo IV which had no wasted gate and used a Variable nozzle turbo or VNT. Some Lebaron GTCs and Daytona's used it

The tooling for the 2.2 and 2.5 was sold to China, were for a long time they still made new versions of the engine.

Every 2.2/2.5 turbo car I owned was a fun little car and easy to modify. They certainly had their problems but were easy to fix and to be honest they cost me less to maintain and never left me stranded like my 02 TDI
Ok I will crawl back into my hole with this useless information now.

 

[ls1mike]

Originally Posted by CrAlt
Was the a604 the trans that made that very distinct fluttering sound when coming to a stop? It seems just about every FWD Chrysler from the 90s made that sound.

It was the sednoids that made that sound.

 

[ls1mike]

Originally Posted by StevieC
Originally Posted by Miller88
The neighbor across the street had an Omnirizon. It would stall no less than 10 times backing out of the driveway. People seem to love them, though. There's a few of them (somhow) still running around and they are a cult classic.

The K platform definitely saved Chrysler. I can still hear the horrific piston slap as an Aries or Caravan drives by in my memories.

That wasn't piston slap that you would hear. That's the chain for the oil pump that was always loose on them and would knock back and forth on these 2.2/2.5's.



Chain? The pump had a gear on top of it that ran off the lower shaft of the timing system. The distributor and oil pump ran off this shaft. The distributor had two pins that slid into the top of the pump.

It was in fact piston slap. All of these engines are known for it.

The balance shafts on the 2.5 had chains

Oil pump for 81 to 1995 2.2/2.5

The slot in the top was where the distributor slid down into. It was a really simple design easy to maintain.

The Cam sprocket and oil/pump distributor sprocket are the same size all driven by the crank pulley.

I could do a timing belt swap in 30 to 45 minutes. The beauty of it is the engine is non interference. The car will run with the timing REALLY far out but there will be no low end torque.

 

[JTK]

Originally Posted by StevieC

The problem with those transmissions was they weren't cooled properly. All the ones we rebuilt and put coolers on lasted just fine thereafter. It had to be a thermostatically controlled cooler though or else it would just go into partial lock-up instead of full lock-up and screw up the torque converter over time.


When did they start putting a torque converter lock on the 3spds?

I would imagine ATF temps would get scorching hot if the trans was kept under a lot of load for too long w/out TC lockup.

 

[ls1mike]

Originally Posted by JTK
Originally Posted by StevieC

The problem with those transmissions was they weren't cooled properly. All the ones we rebuilt and put coolers on lasted just fine thereafter. It had to be a thermostatically controlled cooler though or else it would just go into partial lock-up instead of full lock-up and screw up the torque converter over time.


When did they start putting a torque converter lock on the 3spds?

I would imagine ATF temps would get scorching hot if the trans was kept under a lot of load for too long w/out TC lockup.


1987 for the non-turbo cars, 1990 for the turbo cars.

I always added a cooler. Only problem I had was in older units the governor valve would get stuck and when you stopped you had to start out in third because it would not go back into first. The solution was to pull the valve body and lightly sand the piece that got stuck so it would slide in and out properly no issues after that. It wouldn't allow the fluid to flow normally to the needed ports as it valve didn't move.

 

[StevieC]

Originally Posted by JTK
Originally Posted by StevieC

The problem with those transmissions was they weren't cooled properly. All the ones we rebuilt and put coolers on lasted just fine thereafter. It had to be a thermostatically controlled cooler though or else it would just go into partial lock-up instead of full lock-up and screw up the torque converter over time.


When did they start putting a torque converter lock on the 3spds?

I would imagine ATF temps would get scorching hot if the trans was kept under a lot of load for too long w/out TC lockup.

It was a 4 speed. I might have the wrong transmission in mind. Thought the one mentioned was the 4 speed.