The Shelby Lancer Was An Underrated Performance Car With The Body Of A Practical Sedan: Holy Grails

The American auto industry has been obsessed with beating the Europeans at the performance car game for a long while. You can see it with Cadillac’s modern performance cars and even with General Motors thinking you’d buy an Oldsmobile Eighty Eight with flashy wheels over a BMW. In the 1980s, Dodge also wanted to steer buyers away from European imports, specifically cars like the BMW 5-Series. Its weapon was the Shelby Lancer, a sports sedan based on the K-car platform and blessed by Carroll Shelby. The Lancer was hot but sold few copies before seemingly quickly fading away. Now, it’s time to remember it.

Several decades ago, European marques really left their marks on American buyers. Brands like Mercedes-Benz and BMW introduced American luxury buyers to a different kind of experience. In the past, automakers like Cadillac defined luxury with vehicles of ever-increasing length, a dazzling amount of chrome, and a ride so soft it was like you were riding on a cloud. The European imports went in a different direction, offering drivers svelte vehicles that traded girth and chrome for handling and a thrilling driving experience.

As these cars grew in popularity, America’s automakers didn’t want to lose potential sales and responded with their own interpretations of the same idea. Cars like the 1976 Cadillac Seville brought a revolutionary change. It was a flagship, but also the smallest car in Cadillac’s lineup at launch.

This was just one example of Detroit trying to run with Europe. Recently, I’ve written about the Chevrolet Cosworth Vega, a hopped-up economy car built in the hopes of keeping people out of Bavarian iron. Later, we’d see cars like the Oldsmobile LSS, the Oldsmobile Aurora, the Cadillac CTS, and so many more. Even cars like the Ford Focus have gone up to bat against the likes of the Volkswagen Golf GTI.

One brand I haven’t mentioned yet was Chrysler. In the 1980s, the brand lifted itself out of a slump with the help of Lee Iacocca and the K platform cars, but the giant didn’t want to stop there. Dodge was anointed as Chrysler’s performance brand the marque’s rides would be souped up with help from automotive legend Carroll Shelby. Numerous Dodge products would get the Shelby treatment from the Omni to the Dakota pickup truck. Then there was the humble Lancer, this sedan.

Like any good story involving Chrysler in the 1980s, this goes back to the wonderful foundation Chrysler used to produce a slew of different models for its brands: the legendary K platform.

Born From The Ks

In 1978, after serving the company for 32 years, Lee Iacocca was booted from Ford by Henry Ford II. This would turn out to be good news for Chrysler, which was in trouble, and brought in Iacocca to helm the floundering company. Chrysler had spent the 1960s courting the Europeans and rode through the 1970s by partnering up with Mitsubishi and importing cars over from Japan. This kept Chrysler afloat just long enough for it to fall into the dire straits from which Iacocca had to extract it.

Chrysler was sinking fast, and as The Henry Ford writes, Iacocca’s first mission was to stop the ship from floundering. That would come from securing a loan guarantee from the U.S. Congress. From there, Iacocca had to bail the water out of the ship. As the Bishop wrote last year, a major pain point and one reason why Chrysler was drowning was that the products struggled. At the time, Chrysler sold the Dodge Aspen and the Plymouth Volare, two cars that should have been cash cows, but by Iacocca’s own admission were unreliable misses.

The K platform wasn’t just Chrysler righting its previous wrongs, but a path to prosperity. Before the K platform, Chrysler built its vehicles using a handful of different platforms, each using their own set of bespoke parts. This meant that Chrysler was building completely different vehicles which often didn’t share many parts, which added complexity and cost to Chrysler’s production operations. Iacocca cited Chrysler’s massive parts inventory and complexity as reasons the company burned cash. The path forward was obvious: Chrysler needed a common platform.

This wasn’t unheard of in those days. European and Japanese automakers were already building cars off of common platforms, which allowed for savings through parts sharing. Chrysler’s K platform was designed from the ground up to be flexible and interchangeable, allowing Chrysler to make countless variations of vehicles without the complexities and costs it faced in the past. To say the K-car was a hit would be an understatement.

In 1984, the New York Times described the impact of the K-car:

The K cars, Plymouth Reliant and Dodge Aries, succeeded admirably. Not only did they almost single handedly save Chrysler from certain death, they also provided the company with a vehicle that could be stretched, smoothed, poked, chopped and trimmed to create almost a dozed different models with prices from $7,235 to $22,475.

”Chrysler’s been brilliant in marketing the K car in a situation where Chrysler could not have afforded to strike out,” said Michael A. Driggs, formerly staff director for the Government’s Chrysler Loan Guarantee Board and currently deputy assistant secretary of commerce for automotive industry affairs. ”They’ve been very successful in finding niches in the market, adapting the K car and bringing out new products.”

Since the front wheel drive Reliant and Aries debuted, Chrysler has sold almost 1.2 million K car models, nearly half the 2.6 million passenger cars the company has delivered overall in the three years.

The Ks were such a home run that Iacocca credited them as the reason why Chrysler was able to pay off its loans early. One of the variations of the K platform was the H body, which was nominally the K platform stretched out to create mid-size cars. Birthed on this variation was the 1985 Chrysler LeBaron GTS, a more upmarket performance-oriented take on the K-car LeBaron.

Whereas a regular LeBaron was a soft and perhaps a little sloppy ride with a 100-inch wheelbase, the LeBaron GTS was pitched as a sort of “affordable sports car” and stretched out on a 103-inch wheelbase.

Same Car, Different Name

The LeBaron GTS was morphed into the subject of today’s Holy Grail, the Lancer. The Dodge Lancer was really just a LeBaron GTS with a new face, but the marketing went in slightly different directions. Chrysler marketed the LeBaron GTS as a premium car bargain compared to something like an Audi 5000 while the folks of Dodge leaned hard on the performance qualities of the sedan. Marketing copy made such claims as “We Hid A Sports Car Inside” and told buyers to “forget everything you’ve previously believed about sedans.” The Lancer was said to be designed with a “new regard for the fun of the road” and that you’d have that fun without “never ending stops at the pump.”

Despite the marketing, the LeBaron GTS and the Lancer were mostly the same. Car and Driver noted that the biggest difference outside was the grille, and inside the only logo you’d find was of the corporate Pentastar logo. No mention Chrysler or Dodge anywhere. The only indicator that you’re driving a Lancer, aside from the grille, was a small badge on the trunk lid.

Suspension was handled by a semi-independent iso-strut design up front and a trailing arm beam axle setup bringing up the rear. Other components included thick front and rear sway bars plus fast-ratio power steering. The standard cars had a choice of a softer touring suspension or a more taut sport suspension with higher spring rates and the option to add jounce bumpers.

At launch, the hottest engine available to the Lancer and the LeBaron GTS was the 2.2-liter Turbo I four-cylinder, good for 146 HP and 168 lb-ft of torque. In Car and Driver‘s hands, a LeBaron GTS got to 60 mph in 8.3 seconds and the magazine found that the car was a mixed bag:

Conceptually, the Lancer/LeBaron GTS may be the most intriguing four-door built in America these days. In the flesh, some aspects of it are second to none. Other as­pects are, well, second to some, maybe even third, but by no means out of the ballpark. It’s a car that, if it were a little more refined, could be the answer.

The famous David E. Davis, Jr. added his own bit:

Chrysler does it again! Yet another new car based on the same bits and pieces that the New Chrysler Corporation inherited from the Old Chrysler Corporation. But the LeBaron GTS promises much more than that. Seen rolling by on the highway, it looks almost as fresh and exciting as the Chrysler minivans did a couple of years ago. It is a neat looking car, no question, and it has a number of endearing practical virtues. But why does it have to be so noisy in the lower gears? Why are the front seats so skimpy and lacking in support, lateral or otherwise? Why did I have a backache every mile that I drove it? Why is the shift linkage so vague and rubbery? Why isn’t it as nice to drive or to sit in as an Omni GLH?

Chrysler has spent enormous amounts of time, talent, and treasure to produce a car that’s a great leap forward in concept but a retrograde step in exe­cution. It’s clear that their hearts were in the right places on this one, but we all know that the road to hell is paved with . . .

The Grail

So, how do you make a car like this better? If you’re Chrysler, you ring up your old pal Carroll Shelby. Back in the 1980s, Dodge was centered as Chrysler’s performance brand even though, as I pointed out above, it was often just selling the same cars as the other brands, just with more spicy marketing.

As FCA’s Dodge Garage writes, there were essentially two types of Dodge Shelby specials. Some models would get some Shelby styling and tuning, but would otherwise be manufactured by Dodge. Other vehicles would get the Shelby treatment and be built in Shelby’s facilities in California. Some cars, like the Dodge Spirit, got Shelby parts but not Shelby labeling.

In this case, Shelby did some tuning to the 1987 Dodge Lancer ES, creating the Shelby Lancer.

The biggest change was perhaps under the hood. The team at Shelby took the Turbo I and converted it to Turbo II specifications adding a new top end and intercooler, which meant a 175 HP and 175 lb-ft of torque output just like a regular Turbo II. That engine was paired with either an A520 five-speed manual or a three-speed automatic. You really wanted the manual here as this was very much during the era when going with an auto choked-out speed.

The upgrades didn’t stop there. The Shelby Lancer got wider Goodyear Gatorback tires, Monroe Formula GP struts, and upgraded sway bars. Shelby also gave the Lancer four-wheel disc brakes, which was a pretty novel thing in an American sedan back then.

Also novel was some of the Shelby-specific additions like a Pioneer 120-watt CD player connected to 10 speakers. The Shelby Lancers came standard with the full complement of Lancer features, which included power locks, power mirrors, power driver seat, power windows, warning chimes replacing warning buzzers, a full console, bucket seats, a leather-wrapped wheel, and more. Of course, like other Shelby products, it has a body kit, wing, and wheels. Shelby’s official numbers claimed a 7.7-second sprint to 60 mph, though magazine tests show times both faster and slower.

The Shelby Lancer was built at the Shelby Automobiles facility in California before getting into Dodge’s hands for 1988 and 1989. Shelby’s marketing didn’t even beat around the bush. Shelby saw this car challenging the Mercedes-Benz 190 2.3, the Audi Turbo Quattro, and the BMW 535i. The coolest part is that, according to this MotorWeek review below, Shelby wasn’t just blowing smoke:

In reality, the Europeans had nothing to worry about. In 1987, the launch year of the Shelby Lancer, Shelby constructed 800 examples, of which half were automatics. It’s believed Chrysler built 487 more between 1988 and 1989. The Chrysler-built version, called the Lancer Shelby, also lost some content.

The Shelby graphics package was eliminated and Shelby-branded parts, like the shocks and wheels, were replaced with Chrysler equivalents. Even the Pioneer stereo was tossed for the in-house Infinity system. On the plus side, at least the Chrysler-built Dodge Lancer Shelby models had a real Turbo II.

It’s unclear why the Shelby Lancer was a dud. Sure, the $16,995 price tag ($48,188 today) was up to $20,000 cheaper (up to $56,708 today) than what Shelby thought was the European competition, but it was pricy for a car of its type in America. A regular Lancer ES was $11,246 ($31,887 today), so that was a decent chunk of cash to get a body kit, tighter handling, and 29 HP more.

Also, keep in mind that this was still an ’80s K-car-derived car, so we’re talking torque steer, front-wheel-drive, and turbo lag. It’s definitely ’80s-tastic.

Either way, not many of these were sold new and who knows how many have survived abuse and rust to make it into the modern day. Should you find one, it would seem that even clean examples are cheaper than $10,000. That’s how forgotten and seemingly unwanted these cars are.

But I think these are worth taking a look at again. If you’re into those weird Chrysler Ks, the Shelby Lancer sounds like a fun car that has spent the past decades largely ignored. It tried to beat the Europeans and didn’t really do the job, but that doesn’t really matter today. To some, this is the best kind of Holy Grail. It’s the best version of a sort of crappy car nobody cared about, and even these cars need some love.