It’s hard to believe that the convertible, at least for the US market, went away almost 45 years ago with the ’76 Eldorado. The car shown here, a 1986 Dodge 600 ES Turbo convertible, is a descendant of the line of cars that brought the droptop back to life again in the US. This one can be found here on eBay in Stuart, Florida. The seller has a $5,900 buy-it-now price listed or you can make an offer.
I have to say that I very much prefer the 1984 ES Turbo with its angular grille and wide, black bodyside moldings. We saw one here on Barn Finds a few months ago. As much as a K-Car can be edgy, that pointed nose piece was much cooler and more sporty than this flat grille is, in my opinion. And, a turbo convertible, even a K-Car variety, should be at least somewhat sporty looking. The “pizza” wheels were standard on the ES Turbo and “ES” was the company’s designation for the sport-tuned suspension so they handled better than the standard K-Car varieties did.
There’s a really strange thing about the photos in this listing. The seller provides dozens and dozens of outstanding photos, but there is literally not one glimpse of the passenger side at all, and I mean not even a peek or a partial view. That’s always a red flag for me, I don’t know how a seller, especially a dealer, could omit one entire side of a car that they’re selling online. If anyone is serious about this car, you’ll have to get in touch with them to get photos of the mystery passenger side. Is it there? Is it orange? We don’t have a clue, why?
Other than the whole passenger side being a mystery, everything else that we can see looks great. The dash pad is another mystery. They do show a few photos of the front of the dash pad without the cover on it but they don’t show a top view. I’m hoping that it’s on there to preserve and protect the dash not to cover up any cracking. It sounds like everything works and it’s in great condition, according to their listing. The seats look perfect as does the trunk area.
The engine is Chrysler’s 2.2L inline-four turbo which had 146 horsepower. This one is backed up by a three-speed TorqueFlite automatic transmission. The ES Turbo went away after the 1986 model year and so did all of the Dodge 600 convertibles. This looks like a nice example, have any of you owned one?
These can do nothing but increase in value, especially the Convertibles. I’d buy this in an instant…if my wife would let me.
You’re joking, right?
Nostalgia sells. There’s exactly nobody nostalgic about a K car.
No. We’ll see. Give it a few years.
A lot of us thought that about Pintos, Vegas and Mavericks, so we will see. But it won’t surprise me to see these catch on and start going up in value, especially since they are rarely seen any more.
John Voight’s sportier brother?
I traded my 87 5.0 mustang LX 5 speed even up for the his exact car…biggest mistake of my life….biggest piece of s$&@ I ever drove….
So why did you do it? You did, drive the car before you bought it, right? Did you really need open air driving that badly?
…my wife at the time talked me into it…marrying her was my second biggest mistake…
I have one I purchased in 1986 and just kept all these years! 78,000 miles! I love it! Can be a daily driver but still unique and gets lots of attention every time I drive it somewhere. Fun car!
Why is there a red “Power Loss” light glowing in the dash?
Nostalgia sells to regular part time car guys. A true gearhead appreciates a car for what it is and what it represents.
There are so many know-it-all automotive experts on Barnfinds it’s laughable.
Like you?
Steve R
I love your ‘I know you are, but what am I’ mentality.
Funny coming from someone that loves to dish it out, but can’t take it.
Steve R
Boys, boys, be good. Car talk please.
Watch out for that head gasket, when they go they take pistons with them. Better off with a standard 2.5 non turbo. Besides, these had a lot of body flex, the turbo wouldn’t help that at all.
Power Loss light – when engine got hot, I had this often. Still ran, but misfired if given too much throttle. Solution was/is new ECU ($120), and not a new MAP sensor as many suggested.
I know, TMI.
Aside, I loved the car (same as above) for 15 years until I got tired of old cars needing constant care and attention (broken: power windows, switches, power top hoses, many many plastic things, and how about an exterior door handle).
And I forgot about engine mounts and new CV joints. Probably other repairs I have blocked out too.
I owned an 85 Lancer with the non turbo 2.2, 5-spd. It was the worst piece of crap I ever owned. I think I must have had every engine seal replaced at least once in the 9 years I owned it. After the last major repair I told myself that when anything else went I would buy a new vehicle. I made a list of 3 vehicles to consider: a Ford Escort GT (with the Mazda engine), a Honda Civic Coupe Si, and an Acura Integra RS. I made a list of pros and cons for each. After completing the list the Honda stood out as having the most pros and the fewest cons. (Probably the Acura would have won except a big con was it had the highest price). When the Dodge AC went in the spring of 94 I went to my local Honda dealer and made the deal. They had a red one on order that was arriving from the factory in a couple of weeks. It was the best car I ever owned up to that point. Sure it did not have a lot of torque, but man could she rev. I wish I still owned her. I have never bought another Chrysler product since. (Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice…)
Being involved in the car business my entire life, this car would be a hard pass. A turbo unit on a Chrysler 2.2 would send dealers running as fast as they could into another auction lane. Head gasket companies made a fortune, with a little help from the turbo to blow them faster. The only engine worse would be a ht4100 Cadillac. Of course the early 80’s GM diesel’s are right there.
Yes, I had a few friends with 2.2 turbos, both had head gaskets blow and score pistons. Chrysler should have put more work into them to make a better product, or better yet, had a recall with tougher gaskets. Never owned one myself, but the few I drove were a load of fun. Tempted to buy a new one, but being the old fuddie duddie that I was then and am now, I always went with more practical cars. Always wondered with that bad turbo lag, was having the blast of power come on suddenly scary going around a tight corner? I have a modern turbo now as it came standard with my last car. You would never know it was a turbo, no lag at all. These are great days to own a new car.
Wow lots of crazy remarks .Its still a K car no matter how you dress it up . I had one & sold to a guy who owned a farm . They used it on the farm , never saw the road again . They also had a K car that was a 4 speed.
Fun and simple cars built with economy in construction. Body flex was often disconcerting on first drives with the convertibles, and new buyers were told “it is normal given there are no A, B, and C pillars, but the semimonocoque construction is more than adequate for structural integrity. One of this models achilles heel were its door pins, which prematurely wore, causing the doors to literally fall off. Managing the Chrysler franchise service departments at Martin Swigs San Francisco Autocenter I had a customer call me one afternoon from the financial district stating his door fell off of his recently acquired Mark Cross convertible. I thought it was a prank until he appeared an hour later with a rope around the body holding the door on. I had to hold back my laughter. It wasn’t a first for many owners. I wish I had taken a photograph in retrospect.
“It’s hard to believe that the convertible, at least for the US market, went away almost 45 years ago with the ’76 Eldorado”
What? That makes no sense.
Ford Mustang
2001-2005 Thunderbird
Sebring Convertible…
many, many more that I am too lazy to list.
and many more
You had to keep reading for that sentence to make sense. “The car shown here, a 1986 Dodge 600 ES Turbo convertible, is a descendant of the line of cars that brought the droptop back to life again in the US.”
The Chrysler Convertibles – Town & Country, 600, etc – were among the first to return to the market after a decade long absence.
From Wikipedia:
“After the last Cadillac Eldorado convertible was made in 1976, the only convertibles sold in the United States were imported, until Chrysler Corporation introduced 1982 models based on the K-Car. For Chrysler this was the LeBaron, and for Dodge, the 400.”
I’m a convertible guy! Bought my first vert as soon as I could afford one in my early 20’s and continued to buy “ drop tops” all my life. Back in 1985 I had my eye on a 1985 Buick LeSaber convertible but decided to wait for the 1986 model year to come out. Then in 1986 the stopped making convertibles!
Then in 1982 Chrysler brought back convertibles in Chrysler and Dodge lines. I immediately ran out and bought a 1982 Dodge 600 convertible! Read up on them they have an interesting history in their design. I traded my 1982 Dodge convertible for a 1986 Dodge convertible in 1986 and I still have it 38 years later! It has 78,000 miles and is a fun little car!
Never had a Dodge K-car, but did have an ’86 Plymouth Caravelle with that same Turbo 4. Higher HP rating than the 318 V8, BUT the turbo went out at 40,000 miles and would have cost over $1500 to replace! The extended warranty I had wouldn’t pay for replacement. Maybe that’s the reason for the “power loss” light. What you CAN see looks good, but I’d be leery of the turbo!
I’m reminded of a summer vacation in
Michigan’s U. P. driving a relatively new
’84 Dodge 400… Fabulous views when
the top was down; and zero issues.
Similar vehicles, similar options. Fun!
I have a 1986 Dodge 600 convertible that I purchased in 1986. It is in great shape and I can’t drive it down the street without people stopping me to ask about it! Is it a Mercedes?
How old is it? The K car was a throw away when they got old. The survivors are few and those that are have increased in value. It will never be a high value collectible but it is a great reasonably priced fun convert that can be a fun daily driver.