1983 Chrysler Fifth Avenue from North America - Comments

-Water Pump

-Needed a regular tune-up (filters, fluids, cap plugs wires, etc.)

-Brakes.

Not an overly bad car, but it really does not compare to the big Ford or GM 80's cars (crown vic, caprice, town car, marquis, parisenne, etc.) It guzzles just as much gas as one of these (more actually) but it does not have the size, interior room, or power to justify it. The 318 in my car is far inferior to the 302 or 305 v8's both in power and gas mileage. My car is not a worn out beater either, it was senior owned, there is no rust on it, and the mileage is low. Perhaps there are some things hindering the power and causing it to use more gas, but even so, there is not reason to even consider one of these cars when there are far superior models out there. I highly reccomend big 80's cars for their power, luxury, space, and superior ride. But do not make the same mistake I did. The big dodge and chrsler cars are sorry excuses compared to the other american makes.

True, the 1980's Chrysler V-8's were pretty doggy compared to the 1970's, since they were loaded down with smog equipment and restrictive exhaust, electronics, spark controllers, and EGR passages. Still, the 318 was the same block and was still the same dependable, long lasting engine it always was. During the 1980's, all the US car companies were still struggling with how to cope with emission standards, and their only idea was to strangle the V-8's from the 1970's, and it wasn't until the 1990's that the technology started making the 4- and 6-cylinders the viable replacement. While the 1983 318 is doggy compared to a 1971 318, I would disagree that a 1983 LTD with a 302 is really much better than your 5th Avenue. The other cars you describe, the Ford Crown Victoria, Lincoln Town Car, and Mercury Marquis were even at that time considered luxury cars, a couple of classes above the Chrysler 5th Avenue/Dodge Diplomat. The 5th Avenue/Diplomat was never meant to be a performance car, as noted by the overabundance of smog equipment. It was meant to be an old person's luxury cruiser, and it sounds like it would still fulfill that role. The mileage should be about 14-20 mpg. If it is substantially worse than that, then something is wrong and is making it run worse than it should. The spark control computers on these, part of the smog equipment, were notorious. If you rip that stuff out of there, you'll find that the 318 is the same great engine it was in the 1970's. You also have to keep your comparisons restricted to the 1980's. The 1970's and 1960's are a whole different story when comparing old cars, when Chrysler and Dodge ruled. Maybe that's why Chrysler was the most ill-equipped to deal with the new emission realities in the 1980's.

Hmm, perhaps you are right. I will try rippin all that electronic crap out of there. This car is getting about 8-10 miles per gallon now so I guess there is definately something goin on. Thanks for the advice, I hate to part with this car without givin it a fair chance.

The 318 is good on gas for a V-8!

Chrysler's 318 was far better made than Chevy's 305 or Ford's 302.

I live in the UK and have an 86 318 5th avenue with 110k on the clock. When I bought it it ran like a dog, but since taking off all the smog stuff, replacing the leanburn carb, fitting the mopar performance ignotion it runs like a dream. and gets around 18mpg (imperial gallons, slightly bigger than US gallons). havinf said that we don't have the same smog restrictions as some of the US states,