Car Lust--Shelby Charger GLH-S
I was all prepared to write a suitably mournful and shamed intro to this Car Lust. After all, I'm writing to honor the Shelby Charger GLH-S and, by association, its less acclaimed Dodge Omni 024, Plymouth Horizon TC3, Dodge Rampage, and Dodge Charger brethren. These are all based on the late 1970s Chrysler subcompact Omni/Horizon series, which were average bare-bones economy cars for the time--which is to say, awful by any objective standard. The early L-body Chryslers, especially, were simply Omni/Horizons with swoopy bodywork--matching unexciting mechanicals with looks that, according to mainstream motorheads, were not particularly pleasing.
But you know what? I'm not ashamed of this guilty pleasure. Anybody who has read this blog for more than a week or so knows that I like bad cars, and the Charger isn't even in the top 10 of most embarrassing car lusts I've revealed in this space. I've already shown off the closely related Omni GLH-S and (inappropriately-named) Dodge Rampage (RAMPAGE!), so none of this should come as a particular surprise.
Yes, to today's eyes, the L-body Dodge Charger looks like a horribly offensive affront to a proud name. Even I can admit that it's a gawky, plasticky, awkward coupe that shares none of the elegant menace of the 1968 Charger--or even the brutal looks of the modern four-door version. At the time, though, in a slowly recovering performance environment dominated by small, light sports coupes, the 024/Turismo/Charger made a lot of sense.
Economical, semi-practical with its attractive fastback hatchback profile, and somewhat sporty, the L-body cars were mildly entertaining performance economy cars; something like a poor man's first-gen Volkswagen Scirocco.
This might count as yet another black mark on my car guy record, but I love the way these cars look. I see a little Scirocco in their lines, with the open, honest "face," a nice profile, some nicely creased edges, and of course that gorgeous hatchback. The Shelby Chargers, with their sensuous metallic blue/purple-and-silver color schemes and special wheels really get my palms damp.
The original L-bodies made do with a Volkswagen 1.7-liter four, then the ubiquitous Chrysler 2.2. The Shelby Charger added turbocharging, culminating in 175 horsepower in the final Shelby Charger Turbos and the limited-production GLH-S. The final 175-horsepower Charger Turbo and GLH-S were quick, with 0-60 times in the 7-second range, finally giving the svelte Charger body the testosterone it needed. As in the Omni GLH-S, the car got a sticker that expanded the stock speedometer from 85 mph to 135 mph.
The Shelby Charger wasn't a great sports car; despite upgraded shocks, it still shared the basic chassis with the penalty box Omni/Horizon economy cars. It's hard to make a world-class sports car out of those parts. Still, it was a good-looking, interesting, fairly quick sports coupe of the time; one that isn't often seen these days. If I ever win the lottery and decide to blow it on 1980s sports coupes (one of my most fervent dreams), an immaculate Shelby Charger will have proud placement in that collection.
There are two commercials below; one lauding the original 024, the second showing off the Shelby-enhanced Dodge lineup. I enjoy the actors trying to enthusiastically say, "024!" in the first ad, before the commercial eagerly shows off the unfortunately named 024 Miser. The second ad is funny mostly because it plays into Carroll Shelby's cult of personality; he stares, grim-faced, as Shelby Dodges drive pointlessly in a criss-cross pattern in the desert below him. It's always nice to see another moonscape in a car ad--but evidently this moonscape is the "Chrysler Shelby Performance Center"--odd that it doesn't seem to have a paved surface.
The brochure and ad are courtesy of Flickr user tallglassofmilk; the head-on shot is from Flickr user general.curtis. I also came across a completely hilarious set of images from user cowboy chris' bbq, featuring two (fully-clothed) models draped alluringly on and in a Shelby Charger. I'm not going to post those photos here, because Car Lust isn't about girlie photos, but the shots of the women trying to look sultry in the Charger's hatchback cargo area are pretty funny. I guess a Chevy Citation wasn't available for the shoot.
--Chris H.
Steaming Pile on May 22, 2008 at 01:15 PM
I had an 86 Omni SE, which was the somewhat more comfortable version of the regular hatchback. It had the 2.2L and a 3-speed automatic, and I had to run super unleaded because it would knock and ping on regular. Nothing in the manual warned me of this. Running super unleaded, I got about 32 MPG on the highway with the cruise control set at 60 MPH. That's as good as it gets.
I seriously doubt anyone ever managed to get 40 MPG in any of these cars, no matter what was under the hood. It still tickles me to think the Big Three had cars in their lineup once for which they could legally make this claim.
Now, if the Charger had the same 5-speed as the one in the 88 Omni I test-drove once, this must have been quite a frustrating sports coupe to handle. Actually finding any of the gears was a challenge, to say the least, and the throw length of the shifter was similar to that of a bakery truck. If you ever get one of these, just get the automatic; you'll be glad you did.
Mochi Mochi on May 22, 2008 at 01:19 PM
This could be the future all over again. A sleek potent fastback with a nice hatch. From Dodge of all places. Check the gas mileage 50 highway and 30 city (actual figures may vary with driving style;). The charger was a great performer during a time when performance had been horribly impeded and was completely uninspired. Now we have an abundance of power but we have horrible gas consumption and incredibly high prices.
The solution: Bring back the Charger !! 024 !!!
Cookie the Dog's Owner on May 22, 2008 at 02:05 PM
I always thought the 024/TC3 was a reasonably attractive car. My CRX could take it in the twistys, though.
Nathan of Brainfertilizer Fame on May 22, 2008 at 03:47 PM
Maybe there is no hint of either of the proud Chargers.
...but I do see more than a hint of the mid-80s Chrysler Laser and Dodge Daytona.
The '86 Laser Turbo was a nice car. Plenty fast for my early-20s car desires.
A nice site for info on it here: http://www.moparautos.com/laser84-86.htm
So I don't think this Charger has anything to be ashamed of in looks, at least.
David Colborne on May 22, 2008 at 11:26 PM
You have to give Dodge credit - back in those days, they did an absolutely amazing job of making tolerable stuff out of absolutely nothing. When you look at all the random model lines they threw together out of the K and L bodies, you just kind of have to wonder what happened to that kind of resourcefulness.
I guess it's proof that, sometimes, good enough is just good enough.
David Drucker on May 23, 2008 at 12:24 PM
My father-in-law was a parts supplier to Chrysler during the Omnirizon's early days, dating back to when it still had a VW engine. As a result, I spent way too much behind the wheel of several of them. They were, in a word, craptacular. If the Charger in question shares any of that vehicle's DNA, you couldn't pay me to own one. Not to dis Carroll Shelby, but I'd be willing to say that about all of the Chrysler vehicles with which he was involved, including the astonishingly bad Dakota pickup that bore his name. Horrifying vehicles, every one of them.
Steaming Pile on May 23, 2008 at 12:53 PM
@D.D. - That's why the later ones got the 2.2L K-car engine. It solved most of the reliability issues and made my Omnirizon a reasonably decent car for the time.
Isitacrossfromchris on May 23, 2008 at 08:46 PM
I had an '84 Laser and an '88 Daytona Shelby. As David says, they both were indeed "craptacular". I would go one further and also state that they were also extremely "shatastic". I loved the seat controls that were integrated into the side bolsters.
While I am rambling on, check out the movie "The Wraith", which features both a Daytona Turbo Z along with a cool Chrysler ghost car that first races and then runs teenagers off the road, ultimately killing them. Man, I sure would like to have one of those.
And as I continue to ramble on, check out this Craigslist ad from the Philly area. I don't know what to make fun of first, that they guy went as far to convert the AC to R134 or that he is listed a Daytona for sale and is using the "no dreamers" line. I have never heard the phrase "no trips down memory lane" in a car ad either.
Since he explicity called out "no scams" I'm sure that will deter any potential criminals. Overall he sounds like a real fun guy (or girl). I mean, really. If you were going to take the time to go around pretending you were interested in buying a car just to go on a joyride would you pick an '88 Daytona?
http://philadelphia.craigslist.org/car/690579584.html
Anthony Cagle on May 24, 2008 at 10:35 AM
I have little to say about this car, but I like the front end. The rest of it just kind of peters out.
Bill T. on May 24, 2008 at 11:07 AM
I bought a new Turismo hatchback in '85 (the last new car I have purchased), and it was a very good runner. the 2.2 with the 5 speed was a good combination and it would always get 32 or 33 mpg, combination of city and highway driving. On the highway, I would set the cruise at 70 or 75 and it would keep up with most everything else with no trouble. It went to 144,000 miles.
Some time later I bought a used one that had the smaller tires (I believe 13 inch) and the three speed automatic. It was a poor performer. A lot of noise from the tires and higher revving due to the limitation of the three speed trans.
JRES on June 01, 2008 at 10:13 AM
I had an 85 Shelby Charger, while it lasted it was a great car. the 2.2 turbo had a very respectable punch in a fairly lightweight package. It was also one of the most affordable cars around to come with 50 series Goodyear "Gatorback" tires. It felt like you could climb walls with those tires, it was very difficult to find a corner it couldn't handle. I highly doubt a CRX would have kept up. I got rid of it because it had a really bad suspension/frame noise I couldn't pin down.
mmhurst on June 02, 2008 at 06:15 PM
My first new car was a Red 1984 Dodge Charger 2.2 five speed with big decals on the hood. I thought that car, with its red vinyl interior, was the coolest thing ever. Got really decent mileage when compared to today's cars and was the most unreliable piece of rust I ever owned. So poorly put together by the circa 1984 NEW Chrysler Corporation nothing on the exterior or interior ever lined up correctly. Pieces just randomly warped and feel off. Always in the shop. Electronic problems, cooling problems, smog pump, engine, suspension, transmission, heating/AC all caused major problems from the moment it rolled out of the showroom. During the first year it was at the dealer at least once a month trying to get everything fixed on it before the bumper-to-bumper 12K warranty ran out. Tranny FELL OUT of the car at 40K; engine seized and died around 75K. Leaked oil & coolant, blew exhaust everywhere, rattled, rolled, squeaked, rusted, cracked, melted and it was ALWAYS out of alignment and it ate tires as a result. I'm talking every two months I would get it aligned. Good I loved that car!
jJoel on July 06, 2008 at 07:20 AM
a product of a struggling auto industry spurred on by environmentalist and beaurocrats to give the public a cheap little "peoples car" that is fuel efficient. Sound familiar? Those who fail to learn from history....
damon on August 16, 2008 at 04:50 PM
Don't knock the car unless you've owned one. Today I went into the bush and fired up/drove the old 83 Shelby Charger I've had sitting back there. The good old 2.2HO in it fired up like a charm and that thing runs like a champ, considering it hadn't been started in two years and was sitting in tall grass and has survived several winters out there. Frame/floors are totally shot, but it runs/drives so well I had to find another car to dump the drivetrain into. I find the car to be an absoloute blast to drive. Engine runs great and smooth, trans shifts beautifully and handles great for what it is. Can do a nice little peel out with the tires from a stop and I find it a lot of fun to drive. The blue/silver interior and exterior just works on these cars. Some day I will get another one that's in good shape. My other two drivers are a 07 civic and a 440 powered roadrunner so I do know where I'm comming from here. The shift feel cannot compare to my civic and the hp cannot compare to my RR, but I still have to give the car a ton of credit for what it is. I can't even remember the last time I saw a running 1983 import brand driving around, yet that charger just keeps on going.
Tony Eimen on August 27, 2008 at 08:30 AM
I'm the original owner of a 1986 Shelby Charger. 6 months after I bought it, Dodge came out with the GLHS (Shelby Charger bodied) which was intercooled, and man was I jealous. But since Direct-Connection sold intercooled computers, and everything else you needed, I intercooled it and basically had my GLHS.
That car had a "craptacular" 5 speed transmission that must have broke more than a dozen times, and finally ended up grounding the car. The engine, however, had an honest 220,000 miles on it, on the second turbocharger of course. It went on to power my son's high school Daytona for another couple of years and 20-something thousand miles before finally losing compression. I can't say enough about that sturdy little engine, and I miss it to this day.
I still have the Shelby Charger, engine-less but rust-free and awaiting a much-deserved restoration, probably with a Turbo III engine this time and A555 Getrag 5-speed. What irks me is when magazines compare this car to modern cars. It is probably a poor comparison. It was a top-performer for its day, and could easily take down any of the V8 pony cars of the mid-80's. And now with these gas prices, where are all the turbocars? We really need a descendant of this Shelby Charger to come back on the scene. I will agree that it could have treacherous handling at the edge of the envelope due to its extreme nose-heaviness, but it was a decent handler and more than adequate in the straights.
The best quarter mile ET was at Denver's mile high altitude and was an uncorrected 14.73 second at 97.5 mph. That displays an obscenely hard time launching, but a very respectable trap speed.
That's in "GLHS" form, basically.
omniNate on October 14, 2008 at 07:33 PM
I own a 1985 Shelby Charger 2.2L Turbo. Unfortunately it has seen it's fair share of problems (threw a rod, blew the transmission, fried the turbo), and now the frame rot has relegated it to junk status in the back of a field. But wow(!) what a fun car it was. I think one of the greatest things about it was the hugely gaudy, kindergarten-styled racing stripe that stretched from nose to tail that was perforated by the massive black plastic window slats on the rear hatch. What a great vehicle!
alan on October 21, 2008 at 09:38 AM
I've had over 20 cars, from america, germany, sweden & japan. Two of those were Shelby Chargers. My first was an '87 model. twelve years later I'm still kicking myself for letting it go. It needed the engine rebuilt & some bodywork(thanks to Canadian winters), but it was a good looking, fun to drive car that most people just don't understand. I plan on getting a third one eventually & restore it.
Mario Crociata on November 06, 2008 at 10:42 AM
I own an all original 1983 Dodge Shelby Charger. It has under 2000 miles on it(about 1960 or so). It has the original wheels and even the original Goodyear "60" series wide ovals. I believe it was vehicle number "119" of the run on these cars for 1983. It needs some TLC and probably a ground-up restoration but it has been garaged and never in the rain so the "rot" should be minimal. I drove it occaisionally on Sundays and for special events but never on a regular basis. The car still gives me goose bumps when I sit in it. I have all the paperwoork and even the newsletters and dash plaques from the Shelby Charger Club I belonged to. I drag raced in the late 60's and early 70's with a small block V8 (Chevy) and this car was as quick and handled so smoothly. The 5-speed was fairly accurate and the throws were not too long so you could go thru the gears and run a winding road stretch at a good pace. The front wheel drive limited the drift (on street surfaces) but the car went where it was pointed and with a strong downshift, pulled tough out of the corners. For her time she was a sweet little rocket that answered whatever I threw her way. Happy 25th to my Shelby Charger!!!
zach petersen on December 10, 2008 at 08:37 AM
I had a white 1985 2.2 dodge charger that was outstanding. It had a 5 speed, 60's for tires and 35 plus mpg on the highway. Oh, yeah, and 120 mph plus top end and the speedometer only went to 85
fran on January 16, 2009 at 08:26 PM
or you could always SHOEHORN a 2.6 hemi in it . same block different heads
fran on January 16, 2009 at 08:39 PM
wow i just read this blog . my "best"first car was a 1981 ply. horizon with 75,000 mi on it2.2 engine it got b40 mpg. . in the owners manual it said if you need more power you can rev it to 25 in first and 45 in second i might of reved mine to 65 - 70 in second and i don't know what to say i smoked a camaro going to 85 , stoplight racing
cheap body and door handles "always leave your window OPEN"
Charles Martin on March 05, 2009 at 05:09 PM
I owned an '84 Shelby Charger. The thing handled like it was on rails - it would corner with anything on the road. Oh, AND it got 40+mpg on the highway - honest! Really was one of my favorite care ever! (I've owned 6 Mustangs) Hope I can find one again!!!
Joe on March 19, 2009 at 11:26 AM
Bought a new '86 Shelby Chager (black and silver) just before graduating from college in '86. I honestly compared it with a the other "hot" coupes of the day and picked it over them (Mustang, Camaro, turbo'ed Pontiac Sunfire/Buick Skyhawk). It was lighter and more nimble than the Mustang or Camaro (almost certainly because of the abundance of plastic and cheaper metal in the Charger). It was faster and had better performance parts than the even-more-slapped together GM turbos. Price $10,200.
The car was an absolute blast. For its day, it handled the twisties well, and when the turbo lag dispated you'd grin from ear to ear as the thing pulled (forward and sideways) like you had lit a rocket motor under it. It was always kick to make the 85 mph speedo wrap all the way around almost back to zero. It had power steering and power brakes - that's it. Cable clutch, no ABS - you really had to "drive" it. It was a 146 HP go-kart, and for its day, looked obnoxiously cool. The wide stripe and turbo bump screamed "I'm going to drive the hell out of this thing while you watch!" It also screamed "Yes Officer, I know I was speeding."
All the go parts were great except the additional electric fuel pump they mounted externally to the gas tank to supply the extra fuel the turbo needed. The elements (rain, sand, salt) just tore the s%$@ out of it. Replaced it under warranty 3 times before they finally put one inside the tank.
Sold it in perfectly good condition to buy an Eclipse GSX because I thought I wanted power windows, locks and mirrors. That car was fun too, but it was more of a speedy touring coupe. It lacked the go-kart, seat-of-the-pants fun of the Charger. I regret selling it to this day and would buy a pristine restore or original today if I could find one. I "matured" and now have a 3-series BMW, but still miss the Charger.
As an earlier post said, don't knock if if you didn't drive it. Also, in 1986 we were just begining to figure out how to make cars that had some zip and polution controls at the same time. They don't compare to what's out now, but a few were as fun as anything today because of what else was around. Today you have a Civic hybrid and a Civic Si, back then you had an Omni and the Shelby Charger. Each pair has the same guts, but they're night and day driving experiences.
Great thread. Thanks for the memories.
BRETT LECLERE on March 31, 2009 at 12:50 PM
What a blast reading these comments. Truly a trip down memory lane. In 1987 I sold my built 74 camaro with 4:11 gears wanting something I could do road trips in and bought a 84 Shelby Charger. Lots of power with the 2.2 mated to the five speed gearbox and man could it handle! loved to watch it wrap the speedometer nearly all the way back around to zero as well. Terrific gas milage, awesome handling, sporty looks and 120+ m.p.h. Sold it in 1989 to pay bills after my divorce. Never missed my ex but man do I still miss my Shelby!
Kevin on June 16, 2009 at 04:38 PM
I have a 1985 Shelby Charger and a 1987 Charger GLHS. I beat and beat and beat on the Shelby Charger with no problems. I was hit at an intersection and when I fixed the car, I didn't realize that most of the tranny oil leaked out due to the impact breaking the axle seal. The transaxle finally gave up after driving it with very little oil for 500 miles. That and a bad logic module are the only problems I ever had with the car.
Yeah, the transaxle linkage can be a pain, you have to tighten all the interior screws every 25,000 miles, and the paint was terrible, but all in all, they were great cars. L bodies were never meant to be luxury cars. If you like bare bones cars that are quick and fun to drive, then turbo L body Chryslers are it.