Chrysler Laser Reviews from North America - Page 2 of 6

1985 Chrysler Laser 2.2 Single-Point Fuel Injection

Model year1985
Year of manufacture1985
First year of ownership1985
Most recent year of ownership2006
Engine and transmission 2.2 Single-Point Fuel Injection Automatic
Performance marks 6 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 5 / 10
Dealer Service marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.4 / 10
Distance when acquired12 miles
Most recent distance110000 miles
Previous carChrysler Laser

Summary:

Easy to buy... a lifetime to master!

Faults:

MAP Sensor waterlogged multiple times, a chronic problem with this model.

Throttle Position Sensor failure (s)

Transmission rebuilds after 60K miles.

General Comments:

In this modern age, where even the lowest car in the food chain sports over 150 HP, there exists a distinct void in the average driving experience. Mere decades ago, many automakers produced a class of car that pantomimed the role of a sports car, yet was substantially and woefully underpowered. The Chrysler Laser fell squarely into this category, especially when equipped with the basic, 4-cylinder 2.2 Litre engine that generated a whopping 94 horsepower.

To the eternal optimist, This lack of grunt could actually result in an enjoyable driving experience. Concepts like passing on country lanes and keeping up with your pals required many minutes of shrewd planning, and a skill set would eventually come to pass that enabled such challenges to be overcome. You actually had to pay attention to your driving techniques, especially when squaring off with a worthy foe, such as a Chevette or Aries station wagon in the lane next to you. I find that the skills that I learned in my Laser have resulted in a fantastic approach towards modern driving. Everyone should dash out and buy this K-car variant immediately!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 10th August, 2006

10th Aug 2006, 23:00

You haven't really learned how to drive unless you had to start on a car that put out 100 hp or less at the wheels.

My example: vw jetta 2.0.

15th Aug 2006, 09:07

Was the 2.0 Jetta engine the same that they used in the Porsche 924? I know that they say that the 924 engine was an Audi plant, but I thought that Porsche, Audi, and VW was one and the same during the early 1980s? If so, my thoughts are with you!

1986 Chrysler Laser Base 2.2 non turbo

Model year1986
Year of manufacture1985
First year of ownership2005
Most recent year of ownership2006
Engine and transmission 2.2 non turbo Manual
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Dealer Service marks 10 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 0 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.8 / 10
Distance when acquired92000 kilometres
Most recent distance98125 kilometres
Previous carMazda RX7

Summary:

Most reliable thing on the road

Faults:

NOTHING. All I ever had to do was replace a timing belt, which was easy, minus the removal of an engine mount.

General Comments:

OK you guys, that are sceptical about owning old cars, that you think will overheat or be too slow or not handle right. Here is your offical review to set you straight.

So my Laser is totally stock non turbo, and I just got back from the beautiful mountains of British Columbia. I took the car of course.

Put it this way, it's a 5 speed, so it's fun.

It was more comfortable than my 2002 Trailblazer, minus the fact that it doesn't have A/C. We drove it from the interior of British Columbia (Cristina Lake) to Regina Sask in one day, 15 hours total driving time. Then Number 3 Highway is very curvy and windy around Osoyose, and put it this way, I drove a 1994 Mustang with a 10000 dollar kit, amd I had my RX7 and rolled it cause I cornered too fast. So the Laser did better than the Mustang, and was comparable to the RX7, which had handling packs and a lot of other stuff. But my car has got nothing. It's just stock 4 wheel independent suspension. Man I could take the 50 and 40 km corners at 70 and 80 km on p18575r15 tires (they suck).

That car had no lack of power, except climbing high mountain passes. 1763 was the highest along the Number 3 Highway, the Kooteny pass - it's brutal. And the best part - not only did it not even get hot (the motor), but it ran the same temperature on the prairies as it did climbing in 4th gear.

I got stuck in traffic outside of Vancouver and again didn't have to worry. The electric fan is kinda touch and go, and didn't work half the time. But still, it ran at the same temperature and I know my heat gauge works because I unhooked the water pump, thinking it failed (heat gauge), it hadn't.

The car was great. It was nothing short of amazing. I went through Osoyose and it was 43 in the shade, not the greatest without AC though, but still the same temperature. I was passing 50 and 60 thousand dollar vehicles, even one overheated corvette. I personally would have to say that it is so reliable it actually scared me.

They're great little cars - nimble, easy to steer, and for only having 93 horse power, it's got a lot to give.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 24th July, 2006

4th Jun 2008, 02:06

Hi man.

Happy to see that yours is doing good.

My just broke last week, and I am tried to figure out what going on. Here is the problem; the shifter is so weak I can't put it in reverse because it slips when I pass the shifter on reverse, and I am unable to put it in any other gears.

Please help if you know something about this kind of problem.

Mine is a 1985 Chrysler Laser XT.

Average review marks: 7.5 / 10, based on 26 reviews