Dodge Omni GLH-S

            

    

What happens when a performance tuning legend links his name to a hot-rod version of one of the most horrific penalty box economy cars ever made? Crazy hijinks, that's what.

The Dodge Omni was actually not too bad as late 1970s American economy cars go, which means that in empirical terms, it was just awful. Slow, cheaply made, not very fuel efficient, and with all the dynamic characteristics of a lawn tractor, it's hard to envision a less likely basis for a serious performance car. Chevette SS or Pinto Boss, perhaps?

When Carroll Shelby, known for engineering and marketing such thoroughbreds as the Shelby Cobra, Shelby Cobra Daytona, and GT350 and GT500 Mustangs, agreed to tweak Dodges, he found the cupboard rather bare of quality cars. In a move that I find hugely compelling, he wasn't deterred--he simply started pumping up Dodge's cringing economy cars into giant-killers.

Shelby tweaked the econobox Omni into an Omni GLH (Goes Like Hell) and then, in 1986, into the GLH-S (Goes Like Hell - Some More). Basically, he tightened up the suspension, popped in Chrysler's ubiquitous turbo 2.2-liter four-cylinder, added an intercooler to bump the engine to 174 horsepower, and painted it black. In a hilarious move, he added a sticker to the bottom of the standard 85-mph speedometer to add the speeds up to 135 mph. New speedometer? Too expensive.

This in no way made the Omni any less of a terrible car, but it did make it (for the time) a blindingly fast terrible car. It was still cramped and uncomfortable and rode and handled like a go-kart, and the engine still suffered from the typical 2.2 turbo hand-grenade reliability.

What makes the Omni GLH-S so compelling is that it was a disposable demon--a cheap little car that could be abandoned without regret when it disintegrated around you, yet was fast enough to wallop a stock Ford Mustang GT, Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z, or Ferrari 3.2 Mondial, and quick enough to run just a half-step behind a Corvette. It could do the 0-60 sprint in 6.5 seconds and haul all the way up to 130 mph, which were serious numbers in 1986.

Whether or not you'd actually feel safe doing 130 mph in an Omni of any stripe is another question.

--Chris H.

Comments

[Deron on June 10, 2008 at 08:17 PM]

There are a few things I disagree with in this article.
1st - My 1998 Plymouth Horizon (same as the Omni) got 45-47 MPG on the highway regularly.
2nd - The front seating was ok, but the back sucked.

3rd - I shot my Horizon at 175k and it still wouldn't die

If you thought this was fast, you should have installed the Super 60 kit from Chrysler. It put 300hp under the hood - google Super 60 Omni and take a look.

[Mike on October 29, 2008 at 09:04 PM]

Chris the only thing that is terrible is your opinionated factless style of writing. Even more terrible is the fact that you have the nerve to post your thoughts. Who cares what you think? The Dodge Omni GLH is great - you are not.

[Johnny on October 29, 2008 at 09:30 PM]

I have had a GLHS since 1991, I LOVE it. Better car than my SunBeam Tiger, Mustang or 55 Chevy.

[Howard Allen on October 30, 2008 at 05:59 AM]

I really really get tired of people criticizing the Mid 80's MOPARS. The 60's Ford Mustang, based on the Ford Falcon, is highly regarded as an innovative marketing idea, but compared to the GLHS was a stick in the mud. For its time and the climate in which it came to life, the GLHS, GLH, OMNI, and a plethora of innovative K-Car derivatives, MOPAR came up with some long lived and worthy products offering Americans a good alternative to what Ford and GM was offering. Look around today and chances are you will still find the odd Omni or K-car variant driving around with its trusty 2.2 or 2.5L engine rewarding its owner with good fuel economy and reliable performance. Just ask someone like me who owns one. I LIKE 30 mpg when gas is $3.50/gallong and I like the fact that even with 175K miles on her, I still get 1000 miles per quart of oil. And when something does need replacing, it is easy to do yourself and the parts are half of what they would be for your Toyota Camry.

You are welcome to your opinion, but many of us do not share it. Our family currently owns a 1983 Rampage, a 1984 Rampage, and a 1990 Omni. The 5 Speed Rampages return 32-38 MPG and my automatic Omni regularly gets 30MPG. They are great in the snow and fun to drive - what more do you want?

[Tim on October 30, 2008 at 06:01 AM]

"Hand-grenade reliability"? Seriously? Those engines are as complicated as a hammer and just as tough. I've owned the 80s and 90s Mopar 2.2/2.5 for many years in both turbo and NA flavors and found them to be mechanically solid little engines in the extreme.

[oldmoparguy on October 30, 2008 at 07:19 AM]

Dang Chris,

That sounds like a sad cry for attention.

1986 Omni GLHT
1987 Omni N/A
1988 Turbo Lebaron GTC-T2
1989 Turbo Caravan
1989 Turbo Spirit LE
1989 Turbo Spirit ES

[Chris Hafner on October 30, 2008 at 08:01 AM]

Sheesh, guys. I'm a little surprised by all the outrage.

I said:
- the Omni was a decent late 1970s economy car, which is to say today's drivers would think it's crap
- compared to modern cars, or performance cars of its time, the Omni wasn't a very promising base for a performance car
- nevertheless, the Omni GLH-S was hellishly fast
- the Omni could beat the heck out of other performance cars at the time, which made it a fascinating car.

For the record, I *love* the GLH-S. I love the fact that it's an Omni that could knock off Ferraris of the time. The world would be a poorer place without the GLH-S. If there was a car show with a million perfect Camaros and Mustangs and one well-used GLH-S, I'd beeline to the GLH-S. I think it's much more interesting than a Ferrari Mondial, and if I had the budget and availability to a good one, I'd buy one.

But that doesn't mean I'm going to pretend it's the perfect car or a performance thoroughbred. It's an Omni with a sport suspension and lots of power, and that's its appeal.

When I lust after a car, and I write about it here, I try to be honest - based on my perspective, in my opinion - about the car's strengths and weaknesses. I talk about the cars I love without shying away from noting the weak points. And since I have a self-deprecating tendency, I apply that to the cars I like as well.

I love other turbo Mopars of the time too - I've written love stories on this blog about the Daytona Turbo Z and the Shelby Charger, and at some point I'll get around to the Lancer and LeBaron. Heck, if you guys are GLH-S owners, well, you're my heroes.

Which brings me back to this post. Is this really so controversial? The Omni *was* a bit agricultural. It was a weird but compelling base for a world-beating performance car. The speedometer had a *sticker* to make it a 135-mph speedo. And--maybe you missed this part of the post--I sad the was insanely fast, whipping many of the performance big boys of the time, made the car a hero worthy of discussion even two decades later.

[Matt on October 30, 2008 at 04:50 PM]

Car of the Year when it came out. Please go ahead and compare it with cars of the day as a base for performance, and with todays cars. Head to your closest autcross with a GLHS and watch owners of real sports cars tremble with fear. 2300lbs and 175hp was very fast, second fastest american car in 86 in fact. A simple mechanical boost controller would get you to 14psi and 200+ hp. The parts were available off the shelf and could be applied to ANY omni or horizon, or could be swapped off a wrecked daytona.
Great mileage, cheap insurance, 5 doors/seating for 5, stupid performance potential, flies under the radar, easy/cheap to fix, cheap to buy, and much more; sounds perfect to me.

[Michael D'Antonio on October 31, 2008 at 11:41 PM]

You wrote: "But that doesn't mean I'm going to pretend it's the perfect car." What's a perfect car?
A $250,000 Bentley? For a quarter of a million dollars it should be damn close to perfect - right?
Or maybe the most overrated piece of fiberglass of all time - the "Vette" - is "perfect"?
Then you said, "the Omni wasn't a very promising base for a performance car." OK but wasn't a Plymouth 'Cuda just a Barracuda with (your Omni words) "with a sport suspension and lots of power, and that's its appeal".
The 'Cuda cost about $4000 new (in 1970). Sales were lousy and Chrysler cancelled it's pony cars in 1974. NOW the 'Cuda gets about $250,000 at Barrett Jackson. Even with inflation that's a hellava percent increase. So a perfect car is in the eyes of the beholder, right Chris?
Fact: The Omni Horizon was "Car of the Year" on both sides of the Atlantic. Sure, it was an ecomony car but the cost per mile made it a bargain. The HO, turbo I and turbo II versions of the 2.2 made it legendary. In fact, Car Craft wrote in 1984 that the Mopar 2.2 was in a class by itself as 4 cylinders go.

Finally, you wrote: "...which is to say today's drivers would think it's (Omni Horizon) crap - compared to modern cars". Who are these drivers and why should we care what they think? This statement is conjecture - not fact.

Hyperboles, Similes and "self-deprecating tendenc[ies]" are great for English papers but to "car guys", the facts matter! And yes we are passionate about our L bodied Mopars. I own a HO 2.2 carbed GLH (I'm not lucky enough to own a GLHS) and I still love it.

[Chris Hafner on November 01, 2008 at 02:55 PM]

Michael, that's a great, well-thought-out comment, and it deserves a good answer.

If you think this is a typical car enthusiast blog where we bash cars like the Omni and worship Bentleys, well, I think that's where this misunderstanding is coming from. The blog is all about cars like the GLH-S--interesting, imperfect cars that wouldn't get a second glance from the general populace. At Car Lust we talk about the Ford Couriers and Renault Fuegos of the world much more than we do Ferraris and Lamborghinis. And when we talk about the exotic and expensive cars, we point out their weaknesses too.

That's where I'm coming from on the Omni GLH-S. I like it. I like it a lot. Yeah, it's a late 1970s econobox with a lot of power. I think that makes it *more* interesting, not less. The base Omni was a contemporary of the Pinto and Chevette--better than both, for the record--and yet it forms the base for one of the most legendary giant-killers in the performance world. When I point out the weaknesses of the base Omni, I think you're reading that I hate the Omni and/or GLH-S, and I don't. Not at all. Recognizing the car's weaknesses doesn't mean I don't love the thing. For two decades now I've been the guy who loved the GLH-S when everybody around me looked at it and saw a piece of junk. I feel like I did a pretty good job in the story of conveying my awe at the car's performance. It was able to knock off the big boys of the time.

Calling the Omni agricultural is pretty fair, I think - while the Omni outclassed the Chevette and Pinto in the late 1970s, it lagged behind the Rabbit. And by the time the GLH-S came out in 1986, the base Omni was pretty obsolete compared to its subcompact competition. That's not just me saying this in 2008 - I can dig out the 1986 comparison tests saying the same thing.

The fact that the GLH-S sprung from the Omni is what makes the whole thing such a great story. Start with a functional but obsolescent econobox and wind up with a giant-killer. How cool is that?

A few specific responses, mostly nitpicking on my part:
"Fact: The Omni Horizon was "Car of the Year" on both sides of the Atlantic."

Sure, but by the time the GLH-S was born, the Omni was well behind the times. Beside, the domestic Car of the Year award doesn't really have that much oomph. Other MT Cars of the Year include the Ford Mustang II, the 1997 rental car Chevy Malibu, the Chevy Vega, the Chevy Citation, the Renault Alliance, the Chrysler Cirrus, and the Aspen/Volare. I like several of those cars, just because I'm quirky like that, but I think you'll agree that MT Car of the Year status does not necessarily indicate a good car.

You: "Finally, you wrote: "...which is to say today's drivers would think it's (Omni Horizon) crap - compared to modern cars". Who are these drivers and why should we care what they think?"

Well, I'm one of them. I've driven a base Omni, and it's crap compared to modern cars. Of *course* it is. So is virtually any car of the late 1970s.

It's not a fair comparison, of course. Any car should be judged against its peers, not against cars with designs advanced by three decades. That's why the GLH-S is such a star.

The reason I pointed that out is that a random person off the street pointed to a GLH-S and told it's a world-class performer would be in a state of disbelief. That doesn't mean it *isn't* a world-class performer, it just makes the car more interesting. And frankly, most of my readers aren't L-body Mopar enthusiasts steeped in Shelby lore. They're likely to come at the story thinking, "hey, my older sister wrecked one of those in high school" - I try to lead them from that starting point to what the GLH-S really is.

Congrats on owning a GLH, Michael - you own a special car, I hope you take care of it. If you'd like, I'd love for you to stick around and read a few posts on other cars - based on your comment, I think you're one of us, people who say damn the torpedoes, I love non-mainstream cars and I don't care who knows it. I'll definitely understand if you don't want to, but I appreciate the thoughtful comment.

[Carl on November 01, 2008 at 05:49 PM]

What!?!? Someone let their sister drive a GLHS Horror!!

I got a GLH, slightly modded, and it hangs with M3s and other cars costing 30 or 40k. I paid 600. There is purity and irony in this car, making it one of the most interesting of all, in my eyes.

I like you posts, and we have similar tastes in the obscure auto world (except for ones like the Fairmont, that's about as interesting as my grandparents "doing it" i.e. I have no desire to be anywhere involved) but I totally disagree on the Shelby issue. Even he stepped out of his realm of v8 simplicity and tooled with intercoolers, turbos, and ECUs. I think he should be praised for that, not denegrated for selling his name. And without him and Dodge taking a risk, the car world would be way sadder, stuck with crap like 130 hp TransAms in the most pathetic era in autodom.

[Pete Swarr on November 01, 2008 at 07:10 PM]

I have one of the Horizon TC-3's. It was boring, didn't go too good. The VW engine blew up. I got mine with a V8. I have had it to 150 mph, straight as an arrow, no float. Took it to the track, 14 sec at 100 mph, rear tires spinning all the way (old hard tires don't belong at the track) By the way, I have $2500 in it and it gets 26 miles per gallon. Why does my Neon only get 28?

[Chris Hafner on November 01, 2008 at 10:32 PM]

Carl: "I like you posts, and we have similar tastes in the obscure auto world"

Thanks! It's always nice to find somebody with the same sort of disorder. :-)

Carl: "... but I totally disagree on the Shelby issue. Even he stepped out of his realm of v8 simplicity and tooled with intercoolers, turbos, and ECUs. I think he should be praised for that, not denegrated for selling his name. And without him and Dodge taking a risk, the car world would be way sadder, stuck with crap like 130 hp TransAms in the most pathetic era in autodom."

Well, yeah. I feel like we're in violent agreement. I said pumping up Dodge's economy cars was totally compelling. I never denigrated him for selling his name. I'm completely on board with the fact that the world would be a sadder place without cars like the GLH-S.

Maybe you guys are fed up with people saying your GLHs or GLH-S' aren't real Shelbys, or not real performance cars, or dogs, or whatever. *I'm* not saying any of those things. I said the Omni was an agricultural little econobox in 1986, and that Shelby turned into a world-class performer - and that's a great story.

I think we're on the same side here. I mean, for what it's worth, I find the GLH-S much more interesting than the Cobra. Park a Cobra and a GLH-S side by side, and I'm walking up to the GLH-S because it makes me smile and I could actually imagine owning one. That's why I wrote about it.

[Vince Mclaughlin on November 10, 2008 at 07:09 PM]

As a former owner of an 85 GLH (owned in 85 new, silver with red interior) and an 86 GLH Turbo (bought in 88 used with 10k miles Red with Red) i can tell you these cars rule. Totaly stock these things handled unbelievably!! and were certainly fast. As the current owner of an 06 M5, I can say I still long for those GLH's. I used to AMAZE freinds in those cars, and people/friends of mine STILL are talking about some of the sick rides i gave them on twisty back roads. And blowing off i-rock z and mustangs, priceless. Best car for the money EVER! the 85 cost $8500 NEW. WOW. And I NEVER had a problem with engine trany etc. Did burn up a clutch on the turbo at about 70k but hey, that was my fault!
Let the legend live on here!!

[Ryan on March 24, 2009 at 07:22 AM]

i was wondering what would be the track time on a GLH-S omni.because im about to get #313 of 500

[r.l.hall on June 20, 2009 at 09:38 PM]

My 1989 omni was good for 34 mpg and wasn't a bad running little bomb .
My 1987 Turbo Sundance was a blast . Learned early on that you wanted to have it pointed in the direction that you wanted to go when you touched it off . That turbo lit up at 2300 . It went 200,000 miles before the turbo went bad .
!982 aries 225,000 miles . 1990 Shadow 250,000 miles and someone is still driving it .
1984 caravan with stick shift 250,000 miles . Hit to many deer .
These 2.2 , and 2.5 motors and platforms were bullet proof and very easy on the pocket book to maintain .

[EDWAZ on July 12, 2009 at 08:58 PM]

chris I had one glhs back in the day!! I LIVE IN MICHIGAN I WAS WONDERING IF YOU WANTED TO SELL THE CAR! IF YOU DUE E-MAIL ME BACK

[Dean Marshall on November 14, 2009 at 07:35 AM]

Many people with lots of respect honoring the old L-bodies. Interesting. I worked for chrysler from 1998 to 2008. I met many of the engineers who brought you these vehicles and always enjoyed the stories about dial-a-boost, twin chipped controllers, and blowing off Corvettes/Mustangs/Camaros and the like in M-plates. These engineers all owned these cars and modified the heck out of them and beat them to death. They all loved them, too, and were very proud of the vehicles they helped design/produce. I owned an 87 GLHS #835 from 1990 to 2005. I purchased it for $6500 with 10K miles, drove it as my daily driver (stored winters) for 6 years, then as a nice-day car the rest. I went over 130 mph with my future wife sleeping in the back seat and created many befuddled Mustang owners. I sold it with 90K miles for $5000. I rarely did anything beyond maintenance on the car. I put front brakes on it at 70K, as well as an 02 sensor. I think I replaced the head cover gskt at around 30K, as well as a Hall pick up around that time. When I sold it the AC had never been charged and worked great. Not bad for $100 a year. It was uncomfortable to drive, and ergonomically inept, but my wife loved the car, and always says I should have sold the big block Nova and kept the GLHS.
Anyway, nice article and I loved the responses.
Dean

[Pete Swarr on December 01, 2009 at 09:42 AM]

I HAVE a TC-3. The VW engine went at a few miles after I got it used in 84 for $100. I put in a V8, 4 speed, 8 3/4 rear and it ran like it looked. I have had it to 150 mph running across FL, and it turned 100 mph in 14.0 sec in the 1/4 mile. It still gets 26 mpg.

[Brent on September 06, 2010 at 02:43 PM]

I myself had a 1988 Dodge Omni for around 5 years (I got it in 1991 as a hand-me-down from my Father. My little brother drove it in H.S. for 7 months before I got my hands on it while I was in Basic Training and Tech School) and LOVED IT!!

I did enjoy the odd drive now and then I got to use it when I was in High School, but it was still my father's primary car at that time. I even managed to plow a brick mailbox with it and turns out it all it needed was body work...no damage anywhere else. My Brother told me of his exploits with his friends in it, before it was eventually given to me once I was at my Permanent Duty station, and needless to say he certainly didn't treat it well, but it sure hummed fine when I got it.

I know of my exploits in my '88 Omni and it to me was like a mini-tank! I packed myself and 13 friends into the lil clown car like sardines just because we were bored and crazy one afternoon...held up like a champ, but ofcourse we didn't go more than maybe 20mph. Jumping railroad tracks (think tracks raised almost ramp-like) with myself and 2 friends at full speed, catching air and moving so fast that we end up in the cornfield on the other side by about 60 yards (there was only about 40 yards of road on the other side of the tracks before a "T crossing"....no real damage except for scratching of the paint and a few miniscule dings on the underside of the front bumper.

There were countless other incidents of youthful stupidity in that beloved car. The last year I had it chaneged it to being a car I wish I had till the end of days. On a rather bad night a bunch of idiots rolled my car over onto it's roof. Thankfully 2 roomates and a few friends did Auto as a major and used it as a project car. They did something akin to Shelby and used an old Porsche 944 engine and supposedly part of the tranny as they rebuilt it. (I know little of mechanics so I can't verify the tranny stuff.) But I tell you, after that it ran like smoother than sharpened blades on fresh cut ice. I shot past a cop once at 115mph, he pulled up to me at a light down the road, looked at me, shook his head and turned left as if nothing happened!

Sadly a few months later I was on my way home from seeing a friend on his parents' farm and was traveling down a dirt road when I swerved to avoid an obviously deaf & blind dog since it didn't care to move. I lost control from the fishtailing (the road itself was fairly narrow so overcompensation was a major problem) and ended up plowing dead on into a decent sized tree. The front end looked like it was wrapped around it. Once the wrecker service came out the guy said it was pretty much scrap now. I sold it to a junk yard 2 days later. When I went back a week later, they called me to inform me I had left stuff, my beloved Omni was sitting there all nice and fixed! they found that all they had to replace was the hood, bumper, radiator, and a few other minor pieces. I asked about it and they guy hopped in and drove it around smiling.

Worst part is, I sold it to him for scrap for $200. He fixed it for roughly $1000. The absolute worst bit was he refused to sell it back to me even after I offered $6000!

Those Omni's, as ugly, crappy and SO not a chick magnet of a vehicle....are Tanks that keep on going. Personally I think they are a PERFECT first car for any kid to get. Hell I wish I had one to drive around today.

[Mariah Becraft on November 09, 2010 at 07:02 PM]

I have a dodge omni mint condition for sale, anybody intrested?

[Stephanie on November 25, 2010 at 03:07 PM]

If you still have the car, Mariah, please send more details.

[Stephanie on November 25, 2010 at 03:09 PM]

Probably should list the details desired:
What is the Year, Mileage, Price, Condition, and Location of the Omni?

Thanks.

[Kibbey on December 05, 2011 at 06:30 PM]

My first car was a used (and probably wrecked and repaired) '85 GLH Turbo. I got it in the fall of '86 just before starting college and I had it for all of the first semester before its reliability became too poor to justify keeping. The previous owner/fool had replaced the 50 series tires with 60 series tires which would strike the wheel wells and fenders on the big bumps. The car had the alternator fail on me, once the 5th gear just disappeared (major tranny fix), and the car eventually just stalled as you slowed to a stop unless you kept the revs up. Mileage was only about 22 MPG.

But when it worked, I loved that car. It was bright metallic blue with Bosch foglamps, for goodness sake! It was just fabulously fast and was a huge thrill to drive the twisty country back roads of eastern Kentucky. The steering was very heavy and the clutch on mine must have taken 40lbs of force to move (every time I drove another car I would nearly smash its the clutch pedal to the floor the first time expecting the GLH's resistance!). Noise, turbo lag and torque steer it had plenty of, but I didn't care.

Dad and I replaced it with a brand new '87 Ford Tempo 2-door with a 5-speed manual. Hugely more reliable car, better mileage, and basically just more civilized. Not even remotely as fun as the GLH Turbo, though. Ten years later (college + grad school) and I was able to correct that with a shiny new '98 Contour SVT, but I digress.

If I had the space for it, I would love to own another GLH-Turbo (or a similar vintage Charger Turbo). I think I have seen all of one in the twenty years I have lived in Los Angeles, though. I made sure to give the kid driving it a big thumbs up and he responded with a knowing grin. If I ever move back to the land of affordable housing and open roads, I'm going to have to look for one.