Junkyard Find: 1991 Dodge Shadow ES Turbo Convertible

Murilee Martin
by Murilee Martin

The Dodge Shadow was one of many, many versions of the Chrysler-saving K Platform, and it sold in fairly large quantities before being replaced by the Neon. As recently as five years ago, Shadows and their Plymouth Sundance siblings were among the most numerous Chryslers in American wrecking yards, but massive numbers of Sebrings have replaced them nowadays. I ignore most of these cars when I see them, but I can’t resist photographing examples with excessively 1990s tape stripes and decals or super-stripper no-option packages.

Today we’ll be looking at a car that puts turbocharging, overwrought 1990s tape graphics, a convertible top, and fire damage all in one K-car package.

Yes, the factory applied these decals, not Manny, Moe, and/or Jack.

This car has an automatic transmission, but at least it has the 150 horsepower 2.5 Turbo I engine under the hood.

TURBO was still something of a magical word in 1991.

It appears that this car was parked with its trunk facing something that burned, or perhaps the last owner installed 3,000-watt taillight bulbs.

Up north, French-speaking Canadians had Celine Dion pitching Shadows.











Murilee Martin
Murilee Martin

Murilee Martin is the pen name of Phil Greden, a writer who has lived in Minnesota, California, Georgia and (now) Colorado. He has toiled at copywriting, technical writing, junkmail writing, fiction writing and now automotive writing. He has owned many terrible vehicles and some good ones. He spends a great deal of time in self-service junkyards. These days, he writes for publications including Autoweek, Autoblog, Hagerty, The Truth About Cars and Capital One.

More by Murilee Martin

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 18 comments
  • Beken Beken on Jan 12, 2016

    I drove one. The turbo lag was crazy, especially in wet weather conditions. Eventually, I bought one with the 2.5ltr 4 instead. You got a lot of stuff for not a lot of money. The car handled better and had better torque than a Toyota Corolla, but build quality was atrocious. My car came with the feature of a leaking cam bearing. To fix that, the dealer squirted gunk sealant all over the side of the engine head. Body panel gap lines were never even anywhere on the car. The car was also very easy to break into and steal. Our car was stolen twice and broken into 3 times. Once was by a 13 year old kid at 3am when the car was parked right in front of our house. But that's another story.

  • Dolorean Dolorean on Jan 14, 2016

    I had an '87.5 ES turbo, first model year they came out. Sweet little motor that Chrysler, to be honest in it's brilliance that came only from the mind of a mad genius, lumped to an amazingly terrible 3 spd automatic which at 70mph sounded like a coffee grinder getting it on with the Kerby vacuum. The car was pretty nice and speedy!, once you got used to the 2 second turbo lag upon stomping on the accelerator. It had the quiet charm of an '70s MG once you engaged the Cruise Control at any speed over 55mph as the electrical system would immediately bypass the $2 fuse and would fry itself with ILM smoke effect eminating from the dash. And the cherry on top was it's marvelous ability to blow up it's turbo every 50k miles or so, leading me to take it back to the dealership and begin the what can only be described as a hard-slog footbal game to get them to adhere to the warranty. This car was always my favorite mistake.

  • ToolGuy First picture: I realize that opinions vary on the height of modern trucks, but that entry door on the building is 80 inches tall and hits just below the headlights. Does anyone really believe this is reasonable?Second picture: I do not believe that is a good parking spot to be able to access the bed storage. More specifically, how do you plan to unload topsoil with the truck parked like that? Maybe you kids are taller than me.
  • ToolGuy The other day I attempted to check the engine oil in one of my old embarrassing vehicles and I guess the red shop towel I used wasn't genuine Snap-on (lots of counterfeits floating around) plus my driveway isn't completely level and long story short, the engine seized 3 minutes later.No more used cars for me, and nothing but dealer service from here on in (the journalists were right).
  • Doughboy Wow, Merc knocks it out of the park with their naming convention… again. /s
  • Doughboy I’ve seen car bras before, but never car beards. ZZ Top would be proud.
  • Bkojote Allright, actual person who knows trucks here, the article gets it a bit wrong.First off, the Maverick is not at all comparable to a Tacoma just because they're both Hybrids. Or lemme be blunt, the butch-est non-hybrid Maverick Tremor is suitable for 2/10 difficulty trails, a Trailhunter is for about 5/10 or maybe 6/10, just about the upper end of any stock vehicle you're buying from the factory. Aside from a Sasquatch Bronco or Rubicon Jeep Wrangler you're looking at something you're towing back if you want more capability (or perhaps something you /wish/ you were towing back.)Now, where the real world difference should play out is on the trail, where a lot of low speed crawling usually saps efficiency, especially when loaded to the gills. Real world MPG from a 4Runner is about 12-13mpg, So if this loaded-with-overlander-catalog Trailhunter is still pulling in the 20's - or even 18-19, that's a massive improvement.
Next