29K Miles: 1993 Chrysler New Yorker Fifth Avenue

It’s hard to classify a car like this 1993 Chrysler New Yorker Fifth Avenue. It’s modern but it has a classic name. It’s in almost perfect condition but does that really matter if the car doesn’t live up to the heritage and the hype. This ultra-low-mile time machine can be found here on craigslist in Rogers, Minnesota with an asking price of $3,995.

I personally really like these cars. I know that they aren’t the classic rear-wheel-drive big iron monster luxury cars of yore, the New Yorkers that we all know and love. But, for those of us who grew up in the 1980s and 1990s, this was it for luxury cars and it’s still a nice car today. Is it the same as a classic New Yorker? Of course not but it’s hard to argue that this was not a nice car for its time.

There aren’t a lot of photos but there are enough to show that this 29,771-mile car looks almost new, which is incredible after 26 years. The velour seats are nice but the leather may be nicer. But, like pretty much everything on this car, the interior looks like new. The longer Y-body New Yorker was based on the K-car, unarguably one of the most important and popular lines of vehicles of all time.

The engine is a bit of a step backward from what most of us remember being in big New Yorkers, it’s Chrysler’s 3.3L V6 with 147 hp and 183 ft-lb of torque. This is a two-owner car that hasn’t been driven in the winter which is great. Are there are any fans of the last of the New Yorker Fifth Avenues out there?


  1. stanley kwiecinski

    crickets? just joking

    Like 3
    • Scotty Gilbertson Staff

      Ha, I was waiting for the “junk then, junk now” comments to trickle in..

      Like 5
  2. Had Two

    Odometer numbers don’t line up too well……..Just sayin’

    The Christmas Tree hanging deodorant may be masking
    heavy tobacco?

    The red velour diamond tuck interior? PRICELESS!!!

    Like 2
  3. Bob_in_TN Bob_in_TN Member

    I never gave these cars a look when new, and I wouldn’t say I am a fan of them today. But perhaps I now look at them with a different perspective. They were an attempt at luxury using a variation on the ubiquitous K car. In today’s context of luxury vehicles, they are far off from what we expect (whether you consider luxury to be a Mercedes or BMW, or a King Ranch F-Series). It is almost like they could be viewed as a malaise-era-ish car after the malaise era had ended. For their day, maybe that was not an unreasonable thing for Chrysler to try.

    The philosophical discussion aside, this car is very clean and in great condition. I’m always pleased to see cars which have been loved and cared for over not just years, but decades.

    Like 12
  4. Doug B

    honestly what were these designers thinking? This is truly one of the ugliest cars ever. I’m feeling nauseous.

    Like 2
  5. Stevieg Member

    This is what happens when a Plymouth Reliant mates with a pumped out “superfly” Cadillac lol.
    Actually, I like it & for the price, I would buy it if I had a need for a daily driver. The 3.3 is a great engine. Unfortunately it is hooked up to Chryslers less than reliable 4 speed automatic transmission. Oddly enough, if it were equipped with the Mitsubishi 3.0 (which tends to develop bad valve seals at around 100,000 miles & blow the blues) it would be attached to a far more reliable 3 speed automatic. Too bad Chrysler never mated the 3 speed automatic transmission from the era to the 3.3. That would be a durable combo.

    Like 2
    • Jay

      I would be right on it if it was not for that dreaded 604 transmission that is very unreliable and costly to repair often

      Like 1
  6. Frank

    I owned the blue collar version, a 90 Dynasty as my sole transportation for 8 years and kept it as a winter driver for two more. Purchased from an 83 year old who gave up driving when he backed it into his garage post. $2k inspected with only 43k miles back in ’03. The only damage was the rear bumper support and a few small dings which were fixed with a couple of hours with a dent hammer and $35 at the pull a part for a new support. I had the 3.0L with the 4sp auto. For what it was, a decent combination. Had a top end of 118 and a somewhat surprising take off that caught a few off guard. The car road like I was in a lazy boy and bested 32MPG if all highway was traveled. Only change I made was a low restriction air filter and opened the exhaust to 2.5″ instead of the 2.5 to 2.25 to 2″ the factory provided. The exhaust made some spring rubbing noise on rough roads but was worth the MPG. Only issues I had were to weld the rear axle spring plates as they were rotting and squatting, replace the valve seals and change the transmission solenoids. All said and done, I had $3000 in a car (including tires!) that lasted for me alone 10 years and 160k miles. They weren’t pretty, that’s for sure, but they were reliable. Sadly it’s fate was due to corrosion. It rotted so bad at the K the windshield posts would twist during a hard turn and it leaked when it rain. Last time I was under it a piece of the quarter panel came off when I pulled myself up with it. I drove it to the junkyard when scrap was high; the yard owner was looking for the trailer I brought it with. He was shocked it was under it’s own power. A collector’s item or desired vehicle, definitely not but once in a great while I’ll see an elderly person drive one and remember all the miles I traveled with it. Also remember a few dates with girlfriends and that comfortable plush velour interior but we’ll leave it at that.

    Like 1
  7. Rich

    I used to drive these in the late 80’s and early 90’s. Rental cars. Loved them!!

    Like 2
  8. Greg Stegall

    My dad bought one new in ‘91. My mother bought a new Le Baron in ‘92. The neighbors mostly drove big Buicks and Cadillacs. To me the trimmed down Chryslers we’re really cool and almost looked sporty compared to the boats everyone else seemed to be driving!

    Like 3
  9. Richard j Martin Member

    This car is a fancy version of the Dodge Dynasty, of which I had 2. A 1991 & a 1993. Both had the 3.3 Liter engine, and both were great cars.

    Like 1
  10. Tyler

    I owned one of these cars, mine was a 91 new Yorker fifth avenue. Great on gas, reliable, super easy to drive, and ultra plush from the seats to that ride. If I had the money it would be in my driveway.

    Like 1
  11. Bill Owens carnut1978 Staff

    My father-in-law bought a new 1992 Fifth Avenue. My mother-in-law died in late 1995, and a few months after that, he just went off and traded the Fifth Avenue, with only about 30,000 miles, for a 1996 Chrysler Cirrus. My mother-in-law would have never let him do it I’m sure. If I had known, I would have bought the Fifth Avenue from him. It was sold the same day he traded it.

    Like 1
  12. Bill Parker

    I can’t say I’m a fan, but I did briefly deliver one to my brother and enjoyed driving it to him after he bought it over the phone from a seller in my town. I was pleasantly surprised by the solid feeling ride and handling.

    Like 1
  13. LunarDog LunarDog

    Scotty, 29,000 miles is NOT “ultra-low mileage”, that’s like driving around the earth’s equator and then across the US twice. Not ultra-low.

    • Scotty Gilbertson Staff

      LunarDog, in my world of driving 40,000-50,000 miles a year, a car that has averaged 1,145 miles a year has ultra-low miles.

      Like 2
  14. kathryn

    is this still avaliable and is the price, or best offer?


      is it possibale to get pictures of the under carriage,if the car is still avaliable,thanks

Leave A Comment

RULES: No profanity, politics, or personal attacks.

Become a member to add images to your comments.


Keep me in the conversation via email. Or subscribe without commenting.