I’m generally okay with getting older. I’ve come to accept that I’m going to be stiff and sore if I overdo pretty much anything, and I can put up with the music I listened to in high school now being played on “classic rock” stations. But one thing that still throws me for a loop is seeing appreciating values on what were essentially throwaway cars in decades past. Who would have thought a sixth-generation Dodge Colt would ever fetch even four figures again? Since I found not one, but two such Colts with disturbingly high price tags, I thought we’d look at both of them today, and see if either one of them is worth the asking price.
We looked at two sporty hatchback coupes yesterday, both one-owner cars in really nice condition. It sounds like many of you were disappointed in the Firebird’s specification, and I agree that a V6 with an automatic is kind of the worst of both worlds for those cars, but it’s also the most common configuration. The Ford Probe with its five-speed manual, even without the GT’s turbocharger, appealed to a lot more of you.
You already know my choice. It’s not often you have to sell a car you really like just to get something you want more, and it’s even rarer to get a second chance at the first car years later. I still want to add another small manual car to my garage eventually, and if I were able to go shopping for one today, that Probe would be high on the list. Unless, of course, I found a Geo Storm in similar condition.
Now, before we dive into these two cars, I want to clarify that there were some Dodge Colts that were genuinely cool, and worth consideration as collectible classics. The Colt Vista wagon, especially in its 4WD form, was a neat car. And the eight-speed “twin stick” models of the early ’80s were novel and fun to drive. That generation of Colt, as well as the generation that followed, were also available turbocharged, and those were even more fun. But these two? Really? For this price? Let’s take a look at them and see if there’s any way they’re worth it.
1989 Dodge Colt GT – $4,500
Engine/drivetrain: 1.5-liter OHC inline 4, three-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Odometer reading: 106,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
Previous generations of the Dodge Colt were available in a variety of body styles, but the sixth generation only came in one: a three-door hatchback. You could get a four-door sedan if you went to your friendly neighborhood Jeep/Eagle dealership and asked for a Summit, but Dodge and Plymouth only offered the hatchback. Several different trim levels were available, though, including this GT. From what I can tell, it’s just an appearance package, with red trim and some fancier seats.
The engine in this Colt is a far cry from the turbocharged engines in earlier versions. Apparently, you could get a Colt Turbo in 1989, but they only built 1,500 of them. This one has a humble 1.5-liter engine making 82 horsepower mated to a three-speed automatic. Yes, I agree; a five-speed manual would have been a better choice, but whoever ordered this car new disagreed. The seller says it runs fine, but has a bit of a rough idle from sitting. You know the cure for that: put some fresh gas in it and take it on a road trip.
The interior looks all right, but I don’t know what that pile of crap on the passenger’s seat is, or why it’s there. A bigger mystery is what a genuine Nardi steering wheel is doing in a Dodge Colt. It looks great in there, and I’m sure it feels really nice too, but why this car?
The photos in this ad are terrible. The car is clearly parked just inside an open garage door; why not pull it out into the sunshine to take a picture or two? We can tell it’s shiny, at least, by the reflections of the LED light grid on the ceiling. I’d check the date codes on those tires, though; I can’t imagine how long it has been since anyone made 155R13 whitewalls.
1992 Dodge Colt GL – $5,995
Engine/drivetrain: 1.5-liter OHC inline 4, three-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Altamonte Springs, FL
Odometer reading: 78,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
This body style of Colt only lasted for four model years, and coincidentally, we have one example of the first year, and the last. Apparently, it didn’t change much over the years. This is, I’m guessing, a GL model. There was a base model, but the presence of air conditioning on this one makes me think it’s a step up.
This Colt has the same drivetrain as the black one above, a 1.5-liter four and a three-speed automatic, but it has fewer miles, and we have a little more information about its condition. It has a new battery and a new fuel pump, and it runs and drives great.
The interior looks really nice, as you would expect with so few miles. One photo shows the back seat, and it has a popped seam, but the front seats look fine. The air conditioning works, which is a nice thing to have, but I bet it feels like you dropped an anchor when you turn it on.
The outside looks great, and there’s a reason: the previous owner had it repainted. Again, I have to ask why. Not only why did it need repainting, but why invest so much work and money in a car like this? Was it sentimental attachment? Or rust repair? Whatever the reason, it looks better than any ’92 Colt I’ve seen since about ’93.
Don’t get me wrong; these are perfectly decent little cars. But are they five or six grand cars, three and a half decades after they were built? I’m not so sure. But I’ll leave it up to you. And for those of you who have always asked for a “neither” option in the poll, today is your lucky day.
Mom had a mid-80’s Colt Vista wagon. That may have been the weirdest car I’ve ever driven, with its four-speed manual plus electric overdrive operated by a button on top of the shifter. With something like 88 HP when new and long gearing, it didn’t go up hills well when loaded with people, especially when going over the high altitude passes in Colorado. Carbureted, too, if memory serves. That doesn’t help at 7000 feet and higher. If you didn’t pay attention, the cruise control system would kick the car out of gear if you let the RPM’s drop too much on a long grade, since it was a manual transmission.
It had a great tape deck though, auto-reversing and auto-forwarding, metal tape capable, excellent Dolby noise reduction. Unfortunately, shortly after mom got the car, my kid sister spilled a can of Coke into it, thanks to a terrible cupholder location. The tape deck was never the same afterward.
Been there, drove that. This one’s a NOPE for both.
These folks might be insane. I’m struggling to get $1500 for my low mile 89 Mirage (same car).
For those that might be looking at these, these have a lot of bolt in engine swap opportunities from other Mitsubishi cars of the era.
That rough idle is likely from the caps on the PCM leaking – they all do it. $6 and a soldering iron fixes that though.
They are small, weigh nothing, and are no-frills beaters that were underwhelming when new. They are still good, cheap fun and I think everyone should drive one for a day.
A coworker and I had another coworker named Scott many years ago. After we’d get out of a meeting he’d start singing “Scotty Doesn’t know”, just the refrain. I figured it was just him goofin’. Just looked up the whole lyric and yeah.
They are way overpriced! These are $3K cars on a good day.
No. No. No! Get off my lawn!
No to both, prices too high, and not 5 manual. But I do miss honest small cars with all that greenhouse. Was following a late model Civic, took five miles to realize it was a Honda let alone a Civic. Wondered how the wonderful small Civics (so many body styles!) of the late 80’s through the 90’s morphed into what it is today.
Sorry, but no. I remember when these were new and they were crap then, which means the amount these folks are asking is absolutely nuts.
Gun to my head I’d choose the red one. You might get another 50K miles or more out of it. Hate those motorized belts though.
The black one just seems janky somehow. And what’s with people who can’t be bothered to remove their piles of crap from it before taking pictures?
Thanks for the “Be Serious” option today.
Need a no way in hell option.
Not that it matters, but these cars are both legacies of two departed grandmas (or grandpas). They are both priced and posted by estate executors trying to wring one thin net dime out of a depleted inheritance. The condos in Altamonte Springs and Vegas both sold for a loss, the collectible plates and Hummel figures just ain’t selling, so the cars bought back when the kids moved out of the house and paid off when Clinton was in office are their last hope.
The GT was thrown on FB as soon as it showed up at the sales lot (posted on consignment probably, adding to the price). Didn’t even have time to pull nana’s “car stuff” out before the pix. The Florida car (probably still a base model, down here we put AC in everything with windows) got a respray due to being parked outdoors in Florida sun and probably looking like a baked potato. And by dang Cousin Bobby is NOT going to lose money on this deal after paying for that!
If you bought both of these shiny lil washing machines on wheels and lived on a short dead end street that terminated in a flared pavement circle…
…would it then be considered a Colt-De-Sac? 😉
*struts away whistling the 2006 Ebaum’s World classic
‘This Is My Horse, My Horse is Amazing’*
Fuck your Mitsubishi, I’ve a horse outside:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ljPFZrRD3J8&list=RDljPFZrRD3J8&start_radio=1&pp=ygUbaG9yc2Ugb3V0c2lkZSBydWJiZXJiYW5kaXRzoAcB0gcJCQMLAYcqIYzv
The mildly popular at the time 2004 song “Save a Horse, Ride a Cowboy” says hi in mid-00’s emoticons.
If I could justify the price for either of those, I could also justify spending a little more for this one that would actually be fun to drive – albeit in worse cosmetic shape. The Other Other Colt.
Marketplace – 1989 Plymouth colt gt turbo | Facebook
That upholstery!
Looks sick!
Subtract $3k from the prices and maybe I’d take the red one. We had a Dodge or Mitsubishi colt in the family, but it was the earlier angular one. Probably a late 80s version. It was a base as base could get. No AC, no power steering, 2-door hatchback.
I like the new option of “are you kidding”
Glad to see a pass option. For half the price maybe. For what they want haahahaahahahahha, wait you’re serious? Let me laugh harder AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
But one’s in your color!
He’d be arrested for driving too slowly in the left lane while completing a 29 second long passing maneuver as the coked out hamsters under the hood fight for their lives.
Man, those hamsters ran out of coke before these things left the factory…
The seller of the red one leads off the description with “Sporty rare vehicle.” Yeah, no. We’re off to a bad start.
I was going to write a lengthy comment about why neither of these are worth it, but that seems unnecessary. I neither love nor hate either car, but the prices are non-starters.
Jeez, no all the way. Granted, at least the second one looks like it’s in great shape (can’t tell with the first one due to the crappy pics) but it’s not hard to find plenty of other very slow, very plain, very meh cars in reasonably good shape for less money.
I forced by gunpoint, I would rather drive the red one…
I get that some interesting versions of older crapboxes are worth something (Corolla FX16, Civic Si, etc…) because they were fun in their way and appreciate in value as they are desirable to people who wanted them back in the day and didn’t, for whatever reason, get them or had them and want the memories back or just people who appreciate cars that were more elemental then than are now. I had a CRX Si years ago and would love to have another on in my driveway now.
But this car (either version) is not interesting in any sense of the word. It’s an appliance, a generic econobox designed to get you form point A to point B cheaply. They may be worth a bit to someone who had one years ago for the nostalgia factor, but not the absurd prices these people want, especially for the red one. $6000 for an old econobox with a 3 speed slushbox and walmart hubcaps? Are you kidding? This is a serious case of ‘Just because its old, doesn’t mean its desirable’. Hard no for both. I can get something way more interesting for $6000.
I don’t know if this qualifies as ‘interesting’ but I just bought a 2011 WK2 Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited 4×4 with 65k miles, fully loaded sans the crappy air suspension and adaptive cruise control, with modest front fender and door damage but a clean title, for $6,800. Now granted this is literally the deal of the decade as the vehicle books for $12k and was reduced in price to account for said body damage… but my god, the fact that this seller wants 92% of what I paid for a genuinely good, low mile and still relatively modern vehicle is, uh…
I can’t fathom spending $600 on this shiny turd, let alone 6k!
true. And if we wanted a more apples to apples comparison my 2017 econobox with a 6 spd manual and 115K miles was $6K
both are crackhead priced lol
I love these, one of my favorite hatchback designs – presumably because it premiered when I was 11, a very impressionable age. I have only ever driven a Colt Turbo, and it had been beaten on so I imagine these drive like a typical Japanese hatchback of the era. Slidy, tinny, a little loose. Like the seats. But I couldn’t care less, my inner 11-year-old is worth more to me than all of you.
Finally we have a neither or both option.
Today (like most days) it is neither. Time doesn’t make cars that were boring commuters when new suddenly desirable. In my part of the word $5,000 will buy a good condition car at least a decade newer.
Everyone with an old low-mileage economy car suddenly “knows what they got”.
I like everyday nostalgia cars but this is really pushing it.
I voted both because I’m late for my scheduled drug test.
lol
Mark I wanted a showdown of all the pontiacs! please do this sometime be a real sofis choice lol
These sellers can GTFAC!