Rabbit Vs. Omni/Horizon
Dean Gitters
http://z.simplenet.com/cc/model/horizon.html )
"Rabbit and Horizon: who copied who?
The Horizon was built as a replacement for the Simca 1100 (called the 1204
in the States, 1968 - 1972). The 1100 and its variants were made through
1985.
In the early 1970s, VW was having problems reproducing the success of the
Beetle. Squarebacks were well received, but never performed as hoped. Vans
and trucks had a limited market. All models were rear wheel drive and had
air cooled engines.
VW then created a sharply styled hatchback, without a noisy air cooled
engine. They used front wheel drive, rack and pinion steering, front disc
brakes, a four speed, and a four cylinder engine on 13 inch tires. The car
became a worldwide hit. By 1978, it and its new bretheren displaced all
Beetle production in Germany.
The Simca 1100 was front wheel drive with a four cylinder engine, rack and
pinion steering, optional front disc brakes, a four speed, a four cylinder
engine (1.2L), and a hatchback. It came in four door, five door, and wagon
versions. It spawned a mini camper, and pickup in Europe/North Africa. It
looked like a rounded box with single headlights and side strip running from
headlights to tail-lights on 13 inch tires. If you square the edges, you
get ....(suprise!) a Horizon.
As to the engine, Chrysler had a long relationship with VW in Europe, and
several
old Chrysler designs from France and the U.K. ended up as VWs in South
America. (The last Avenger was sold to VW by Peugeot in 1981 and was sold
through the 1980s in Brazil.) When the car was finally approved for North
America, they had problems legalizing the European Chrysler engines. None
had been imported to the U.S. since 1973, and the all-new engines were not
ready yet. Chrysler could have used their European 1.6, if they had not
been selling their profitable European operations to Peugeot to get cash to
cover losses in the States.
Enter VW, with an excess of legalized engines. Chrysler fit its own aluminum
head and carburetor to buy time. After Chrysler finalized the deal in
Europe, Peugeot supplyied the 1.6 to Chrysler as part of the deal. A year
later, the 2.2 was ready. The 1.8 version of the 2.2 was never built
because of the 1.6, and the 1.7 was out of the picture by 1981/82.
The public assumed Chrysler is copying VW outright. It's hard to redesign
your model when someone has copied it, and Chrysler didn't say otherwise.
Car magazines wrote that the Omni used a Peugeot engine when writing about
the 1.6 - technically true, but it was really a Chrysler design!
The comparison actually helped their sales by implying the cars purpose in
life to the right audience. To detail the lineage of the Horizon/Omni would
have highlighted the failure of the 1204 and the bungling of senior
management. Even Consumers Report insinuates it in their 1978 report. Of
course, they could have checked their own 1968 import test where the Simca
1204 GLS defeated the VW Squareback, Opel Kadett, and Toyota Corolla.
The Horizon was a success worldwide, in spite of its makers. Peugeot did
not want to evolve the model, and Chrysler saw it as a temporary entry level
car. It still ran for 7 years (1978-1985) in Europe and 12 (1978-1990) in
North America. It was roomier, bigger, and in some versions more economical
than the Rabbit. The European Horizon had flush headlights, different
interior treatments, a turbo version, a diesel version, and a GTI/GLS. The
Horizon did not change drastically over its run, and the body especially was
never revamped for the reasons stated above. So why does a 1983
Rabbit/Golf/Polo look more like a 1978 or 82 Horizon than a 1975 Rabbit? If
the Horizon had been a copy, shouldn't it be the other way around? "
I aways though the plans for the Rabbit went back to 1970?
Does any one drive an Omni?
I did, it ain't no Rabbit.
Thoughs, comments....
Dean
------
The Muller Folker Effect
art clemens
These poeple are smokin some good stuff. I've owned the Mopars and the
VW's and the Chryslers just don't compare. This is BS:
Enter VW, with an excess of legalized engines. Chrysler fit its own
aluminum
> head and carburetor to buy time
It was a VW head with Chrysler manifolds. It was actually a 1.7 engine
from Audi. It had the Audi rods. A 1.7 VW (watercooled) never existed
in Europe. How could VW copied them when VW was on the scene in 75 and
the Mopars weren't on the market till (late) 78? Chrysler recognized
that 4 cylinder FWD was the way to go and got into it when the other
guys were producing flaming Vegas and Pintos. They saw a good thing in
VW: Sedan, sport coupe and truck all on the same platform and followed
suit.
the 1.7 was out of the picture by 1981/82... The 1.7 was the base
engine through 84 even though the 2.2 was available in 81.
It was roomier, bigger, and in some versions more economical
> than the Rabbit. .... More economical than a European Golf 1 with a 1.1 or a 1.4 liter? I doubt it.
So why does a 1983
> Rabbit/Golf/Polo look more like a 1978 or 82 Horizon than a 1975 Rabbit? Uh they were the same car 75 - 84 how could they look different?
This is a bunch of speculation by some looser that doesn't have the
facts straight on the cars he is talking about. My parents got a 79
Horizon and it would indeed blow away the Chevy Monza V6 and I only got
beat by 1/2 length by a 2.8L Pinto V6. It also wasted a 79 Chevy
stepside with a 305. I was just 15 at the time so I didn't get to run
at the strip but managed to test it several times to the dismay of many
a larger motor. Top speed about 95 (verified by KY state cop, another
story!) It was a good car. MY German 110PS 80 GTI would out run and
out handle the Horizon. It was a better car. I later had an 86 GLH
Turbo. At 2.2L with a turbo I think 146HP is a lame figure. It still
ran good and handled well. I never ran it against my 87 16V GTI but I
think it would have been very close I know the GTI would leave it at the
line even tho the GTI is heavier. In comparison the 87 GTI would out
handle the GLH hands down (Shelby suspension even) It is also a much
tighter and better built car. If it weren't for VW the Omni/Horizon
wouldn't have made it. VW was also a big help to Chrysler in the design
of the 2.2 (this was acknowledged by Chrysler in some article years
ago). The mopar camp was alway wanting to outrun the GTI. It took a
bigger motor with a turbo in a lighter car to do it. They were so proud
they could out drag a 1.8 GTI in a 2.2 Turbo. Whatever. The Chryslers
were good cars. They won a lot at Pikes Peak and an did a lot af
drags. Direct connection offered a ton of go faster parts for the 2.2.
I wouldn't trade one of my VW's for 2 of them.
foxcat
>
> I did, it ain't no Rabbit.
>
> Thoughs, comments....
>
> Dean
>
Dean,
I bought a 1984 Plymouth Horizon. Drove it for ten years. Body by
Chrysler, engine by Mitsubishi (the folks who created the Zero [remember
Pearl Harbor?]). And I thought I was buying American. [sigh]
Correct me if I'm wrong but the horizon was heavier than the Rabbit. Mine
was an automatic so I didn't have any control over gears except overdrive.
Nor was it grand on fuel economy. I sold it and still see it in town,
going strong.
I recall when I sold it the odometer only had 34k miles on it. I only
lived 1 block from work so it was a "supermarket" car. I'd drive it on the
10 freeway occasionally just to keep the battery from dying.
I bought a cellular phone just for roadside emergencies. The only
mechanical failure it had was the timing belt broke. How lucky could I
get, it broke right in the middle of the "Mechanics Row" block. Didn't get
a chance to use my cellular! I waved across the street and they all came
running and pushed it into one of the repair shops.
I kind of miss it, actually. It was definitely NOT a rabbit.
With the GTI, I find myself looking for the longest route between two
points. :^) Not so with the Horizon (Christened "Blue Sky").
GTI is currently spending most of it's life in 3rd gear. Except for the
occasional Philly to AC speed trials :^). What a trip, they warn you of a
curve a mile ahead.
GTI speed average: 26 mph/3.8k miles old, born May 5 1998.
Andy
fox...@mindspring.com
http://www.mindspring.com/~foxcat
I have a great memory, it's just short.
67 Bug
98 GTI/vr6 Tag: VW II
Kit Gerhart
<snip>
> I bought a 1984 Plymouth Horizon. Drove it for ten years. Body by
> Chrysler, engine by Mitsubishi (the folks who created the Zero [remember
> Pearl Harbor?]). And I thought I was buying American. [sigh]
>
OmniRizons never used Mitsubishi engines. All '78-'80's used VW 1.7's
with carburetors. Chrysler 2.2's (not Mitsu) went into use in 1981,
concurrently with the VW 1.7's for a year or two. There were a few
years that some Peugeot 1.6's were used with manual transaxles. The '84
mentioned with the automatic would have had a Chrysler 2.2.
Kit
greg13
original miles... it had brand new brown paint..:)
it was a good car, and actually had quite a bit of power for a shitbox..(it
was a 5 speed, in the same cfg as vw, top left reverse.)
well, thats my $.02
greg
95 GLX
foxcat wrote in message ...
>> Does any one drive an Omni?
>>
>> I did, it ain't no Rabbit.
>>
>> Thoughs, comments....
>>
>> Dean
>>
>
>
>Dean,
>
>I bought a 1984 Plymouth Horizon. Drove it for ten years. Body by
>Chrysler, engine by Mitsubishi (the folks who created the Zero [remember
>Pearl Harbor?]). And I thought I was buying American. [sigh]
>