My parents had an 87 Turbo....I was 10, and when it talked to us...My 80s Knight Rider mind was blown and thought the next step was flying cars! And then..well you know...My Dad would always make the joke when the car said "Your door is ajar", he would say, "No, it's a door." Really miss that guy! My Dad and the car!
Memory lane on this video. Thanks for taking me back to a car I really liked. Great on icy roads by the way. Kept going when everyone else would be stuck.
My old man had an '86 from new when I was like 2 years old. Think him and my mom got rid of it maybe around '94 it ended up with a cracked head. He loved that thing!
The 2.5L was prone to blowing the head gasket. Happened on my Mom's 1992 Plymouth Acclaim. It's even more prone to blow on the 2.5L Turbo. I actually love the wheels. I think they suit the car, but I tend to be a fan of thin spoked and turbine style alloy wheels.
Love these Dodge Lancer's and Chrysler LeBaron GTS's from the 80's....Ive had a few myself, my first was a brand new 1987 Lancer ES turbo. They are really fun to drive, run and handle great for their years. This one here was nice when new, but sadly now is but a TERD...... just have fun with it and beat it like the beater that it is, dont keep talking about it as if you're going to have a complete show car restoration done on it. IT IS WHAT IT IS.
My first car was an 85 LeBaron GTS Turbo. Loved the car, hated the constant repairs. Something went wrong with almost every month. Head gasket, fuel pump, sensors, starter, electric windows, anything and everything. Constantly breaking down.
I had an '85 GTS Turbo similar to your car, except mine was the auto. It was a very comfy car, seats were phenomenal, perhaps better than any car I have ever owned. My later Volvo 850 had extremely supportive front seats but they were not as good as the GTS' seats! Unfortunately the rest of the car was a bit of a letdown for me...lots of reliability issues. I did put about 100K miles on it over 6 years, but in that time I had to replace the turbo unit - not cheap!, fuel pump twice (including one time when a Chrysler dealer in Florida put it on incorrectly, warping the fuel tank and causing a leak every time the car was filled thereafter,) several power window motors (and numerous plastic tracks,) at least two engine control computer units, several MAP and O2 sensors, the wiper motor unit and arm, the digital instrument package (it ceased working one day when the temp reached 103*F,) and the stock radio, which died when the car was five years old. Half the instrument panel went dark another time, the switches to the driver's seat fell off, and the air conditioning stopped working before 75,000 miles were on the car. It was not the best car and cost me a ton of money in servicing and repairs, but I have fond memories of driving it. When it worked properly, it was a fantastic car and although the turbo lag was epic, the thrust stuck you into the seat at full throttle! I also hit a black bear with this car while on vacation in North Carolina - car was damaged but kept on going! Good luck, hopefully your LeBaron is less problematic than mine was!
Own one since 88. Seriously. Any questions ask away. I've replaced just about everything at some point Even if the timing belt slips, or breaks in a 22 or 25 - non-interference, Valves will be ok. Head gasket - you'll know. Temp guage will peg hot, and you'll be adding antifreeze every day. GTS: Sterling Heights finest, since 85-89.
Remember being embarrassed riding shotgun with my mom in her '85 from MA to GA in '91 for college. My dad in his new CRX asked why we couldn't keep up.
I owned a 1985 Chrysler Lebaron GTS. While I loved the car it had so many problems. The disks in the center of the wheels warped and would not go on the wheels, the car when warm made a loud scary hissing noise, the windows would jump off the tracks, the fuses blew all the time, an interior plastic piece under the wind shield warped, the water pump blew at 18,000 miles, the center arm rest latched constantly broke, and only one tech at the Chrysler Dealer new how to tune the turbo so the car would scoot.
Looks nice... I think you can just wet sand and buff it and it will look much better (except roof.. that will need some work) For that pirce it is very good buy
By the looks of the whole car and most of all by the look of the engine/engine compartment.....the car does not have 41,000 km...... probably has 141,000.... you even said it already needed a head gasket. No engine with only 41,000 looks that terrible like it has 200,000 like this one looks. Sellers do lie you know, if that odometer does not show miles into the hundred thousands (most older cars like this do not).....after it hit 99,999.....it wouldve just gone back to 0 and started over.
used this power plant a turbo also van. it was way cool a t the time 225hp. see ye car at the time. had issues with turbo manufactures at the time. but the car was a sleaper. spanking , vettes .. and all that was a player. fun times
i got the upper gasket set (everything from the head up) for 80 bucks so it is going to be back on the road tomorrow. timing belt was done 10xxxkms ago so there is no point in changing it now.
I am so curious to know if this guy still has this car. My mom had a brand new LeBaron GTS back in 1988 with the talking Texas Instruments speak and spell demon voice. I was just a little kid but I remember what an electrical nightmare that car was. We traded it in for a Camry nine months later and that's all my mother has bought since. LOL last American car ever!
Just found your video. Always been a fan of K variants--had a 1980 Aries coupe and an 84 Shelby Charger. Should have held on to that one. Based on your experience, can a Lancer ES or GTS like yours be found in decent shape. Hope to hear from you.
I wish not to be the bearer of bad news, but rather a message of technical clarification. If you freeze the video at 1:51 draw your attention to the "41421 km" odometer reading. Notice the illuminated 'star' after the 'km' ? As a prior owner of the same model of this car, the star icon indicates this is a replacement instrument cluster. In the rush to produce such a technilogical marvel at the time, no investment was made in creating a memory for distance traveled. Dealers were expected to rely on their own records as well vehicle owner's honesty to provide accurate mileage. Suffice to say your car has a lot more history yet to be certified.
Agreed. That engine bay is also a lot grimier than a 41,000 km car would be as well. Not just dust, but it has the typical oily engine buildup that any car with higher mileage would have. Also, all the parts listed as being newly installed is a little suspicious as well. Particularly the new starter, head gasket and thermostat. I know the 2.2 litre engine had head gasket issues, but in conjunction with the gasket, the new thermostat points to a car that's seen more use than just 41,000 kms. The new A/C compressor is a bit suspicious as well. Again, that seems to point to a car that's been used more than just 41k. The seats also looked like they had more wear than 41,000 kms. However, with that said, I don't mean to disrespect his purchase at all. That's still a nice car. The condition of the body alone makes it well worth the $500 (particularly in Canada where rust is a huge issue, especially for 80's survivor cars). For what he paid for it, even if it has 241,000 kms, that's still a nice ride. Five hundred bucks well-spent IMHO.
I understand. I didn't mean to sound insulting, it's just a rather plain looking car with no attractive features is all. Do you know anything about the Mitsubishi engines Chrysler put in these cars? I mean, have you worked on them?
