Lebaron coupes look kind of cool, like blunderturds almost

K-car thread?
K-car thread.

>tfw going to look at a Daytona turbo II tomorrow

I really hope it's not a piece of shit. I want it to be good

how do you know if its good?

>look on local craigslist for Dodge Shadows and Plymouth Sundances
>0 results
FML

all these Chrysler cars are shit

truly awful shitboxes with a turbo so people think theyre worth a damn

found the cuck

cringe

but the glhs...

If it isn't spewing oil and coolant everywhere and the cv joints aren't completely fucked. If it runs and drives okay then I'm gonna buy it.

so it takes a European car worked over by Shelby to be a good Chrysler?

there are always exceptions anyway

and those arent K cars either which are complete shit

>it's an '89 LeBaron

...

Actually, the standard Omni/Horizon didn't share much of anything beyond the floorpan and overall shape with the European equivalent. Although the body panels looked identical, they weren't.
There were also numerous mechanical changes like the American cars getting different engines, different steering, and even a different front suspension setup.

And the K-car was based on the L-car, so it can be lumped in with the K-cars.
They also weren't shit. They liked to rust, yea, but so did everything else at the time. The only real problem child of the K-cars were the later cars that were powered by the Mitsubishi 6G72 V6. That engine was incredibly unreliable in the K-cars, and you can't even blame Chrysler for why.

i kinda want one of these

yeah it had worse everything compared to the European sister

and yes they were shit from the start

>everything is shit
>no proof of anything
The American cars had better suspension and steering designs
The American cars had better engines.
fuck off.

wrong REALLY FUCKING WRONG actually not even up to debate
wrong even smaller Euro engines made more power than the 2.2

the US was a cheap shit model comparatively speaking

>he doesnt proof of anything

lol you hypocritical fanboy faggot

>Tfw no manual, turbo first-gen Caravan

Largest engine in the European models was a 1.4L making a monstrous 84 HP.
The 2.2L Made 84 to 96 HP, so you're wrong there.

The 1.6L version of the European engine was only used on early American Omni's and Horzions, making 92 HP.

As to suspension, the European cars used a complex torsion beam axle in the front, while the American cars used a fully independent Macpherson strut front suspension.

The American cars all had more power, and better suspension. Get the fuck over it you fucking Europoor.

And this was before getting into the American turbo engines, rated at 150, and 175 HP. Which was around double the output of the largest engined and most powerful European version.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simca-Talbot_Horizon
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simca_Poissy_engine#1442_cc
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_Omni

Now fuck off with your "superior European model" bullshit. The US car was better.

largest was a 1.6 that made 92 lol

yes the Burgershit had cheap awful suspension we know this

nope

muh special turbo models

US car was worse you cringy fuck

The dude just unloaded knowledge on you and you went all autistic. Kek

Ur a faget

yeah

getting all my facts right and proving someone wrong means Im autistic

Veeky Forums is stupid af

also have you guys ever noticed that its always American car fans that are the dumbest fucking people on a regular basis

and theyre always obsessed with calling anyone who disagrees with them European

think they have legit problems

>getting all my facts right
Except the EU model never got the 1.6. So the American user is right.

>torsion beam better than IFS
in what universe?

wrong

Talbot Premium had the 1.6

>in what universe?

gee user weird how front torsion beam cars seem to ride much better

not that you would want comfort in your shitbox I guess

>gee user weird how front torsion beam cars seem to ride much better
>not that you would want comfort in your shitbox I guess
The Volkswagen Beetle had a front torsion beam too. weird how absolutely NO ONE fucking uses it anymore, isn't it?
>OG Beetle
>comfort
pick one.

haha now this dumb fuck is going to talk about a completely different car from a different era

irrelevant

bet the fucker would even be in denial over people praising the torsion suspension for its ride on various cars

funny how luxury cars used torsion beam up to the 80s too

MacPhearson are cheap shit literally the only reason they used in the US was to cut the cost

no one uses it now because we have double wishbone and multilink

>no one uses it now because we have double wishbone and multilink
Name a FWD car that isn't a late 80's or 1990's Honda/Acura that had front double wishbones.

I'll wait.

why cherry pick user

because you know multi link is common

besides I the Mazda6 and some other shit had them too

stay btfo

>because you know multi link is common
only in the rear. But we're not talking about rear suspension, are we? We're talking about front suspension.

wow 1 car.
must be such a popular design.
Shall we count the cars with macpherson struts to compare?
I'm not saying double wishbones are worse than struts. You're just retarded and have yet to show a lick of evidence to support your opinions as fact.

wow user do you want me to soonfeed you everything

you can use google

Citroen and Peugot have some too

multi link is common up front too

if you post a list of strut cars you just prove me right

they are CHEAP SHIT

its why Honda switched from double wishbones

stay btfo once more

>1.4L making a monstrous 84 HP
and another 800cc makes the same power.. LMAO

I have always wanted one of these. My dad bought one of these brand new with 3 miles on the odometer the week I was born so they could have a family car instead of just his truck. The first car memories I have are in this car. I've always wanted to get one and hotrod the shit out of it

never said it wasn't cheap. Show me a list of multi-link front suspension cars sold in America.

and which engine do people remember? which engine has aftermarket support?
I never said the 2.2L wasn't gimped. But it's a lot more capable than you're giving it credit for.

And the power difference isn't just tuning, but also much stricter emissions regulations. Most of Europe didn't mandate catalytic converters until the mid to late 1980's. It was a requirement to meet emissions in America though.

America isnt special

Im not spoonfeeding you

just about every luxury car uses multi link

no one remembered Chrysler shit engines either unless its in America

Poissy was used in a lot of cars for over 20 years

>luxury
Oh of course. How silly of me. The Horizon was a luxury car.

keep being retarded.

oh look damage control and back pedaling

BTFO again

One day it will be appreciated. I personally unironically love them.

I like how even Ford acts like it doesnt exist

Gran Turismo and the nice old lady in my neighborhood who would give me rides when i was a child made me appreciate them.

Maybe he had something to do with the those 3 sho gens coming with V6s and the 98 sho came with a very small displacement V8 that i think was highly unreliable or something. basically v6, v6, v8, v6 would probably look out of place.

Shadows and Sundances will always be based.

youtube.com/watch?v=t6n3bkMlTWQ