Good morning! I felt like we were drifting too far afield of our typical price range, so I’ve dialed it back a bit for today. Don’t worry; I’ve still found some bizarrely-modified vehicles to fit with our theme for the week. We’ve got a luxury sedan that is soaring to new heights, and a small truck that is trying to win a limbo contest.
It seems like yesterday’s Baja bugs kind of landed with a thud. I can always tell when you all aren’t terribly excited about a Showdown by the low comment vote totals. Ah well, can’t win ’em all. Thanks for being good sports about it anyway.
I wouldn’t touch these either, for what it’s worth. I love Baja bugs, but I prefer the traditional VW-based kind. And I do plan to build one soon, actually – but it will be 1/10 scale.
Altering the ride height of a car is a pretty common modification. Lots of people will raise a truck a couple of inches to fit bigger off-road tires, or lower a car just a little to make it look a little meaner. But that’s not enough for some folks; they need to take it to the extremes, setting a car body atop a truck chassis to lift it sky-high, or lowering a car to the point that it scrapes its oil pan on every pebble. Today, we’re going to look at one of each.
1991 Buick Park Avenue – $2,000
Engine/drivetrain: 350 cubic inch OHV V8, three-speed automatic, 4WD
Location: Tecumseh, MI
Odometer reading: unknown
Operational status: “Was running and driving when parked a few years ago”
I would imagine that all projects like this start in about the same way: On one side of the yard is a 4×4 truck with a rusted-out body, and on the other side of the yard is a derelict car. Nearby in a lawn chair sits an above-average shadetree mechanic, a couple of beers deep into a Saturday afternoon. He casts his eye from one vehicle to the other, and suddenly springs up from his chair and runs to the garage to find a tape measure.
What we have here is a Buick Park Avenue sedan body atop a Chevy truck chassis. It’s powered by a 350 V8 and a TH400 automatic transmission, driving “a Dodge and a Ford axle, don’t remember what they are,” according to the seller. It all seems to work together, or did at one point – it hasn’t run in a few years. The seller says it was a lot of fun, but they don’t have time for it anymore.
The inside, as you might expect, is trashed: there’s mud everywhere, and wires dangle from the dash. I mean, we’ve seen a worse Park Avenue interior, but this one is pretty bad. How much of the old Buick stuff is still functional after this transformation is anyone’s guess, but I have a feeling not much of it.
Apparently it’s called the “Beast,” which seems like a fitting name. It’s surprisingly rust-free, and apart from some clearcoat damage, the body isn’t in bad shape. I’m not sure about the legality of the cop light bar on the roof, but I have a feeling that’s the least of offenses that might get you pulled over in this thing.
1993 Ford Ranger – $2,500
Engine/drivetrain: Probably a 2.3 liter OHC inline 4, five-speed manual, RWD
Location: Middleville, MI
Odometer reading: 43,000 miles
Operational status: Your guess is as good as mine
I confess I’ve never really understood the appeal of slammed vehicles like this, especially trucks. It takes too much utility out of it, and I don’t really like the look all that much. But like anything, I can appreciate the commitment and the hard work that went into it. I just wish I could tell you more about this truck; there is literally no description whatsoever in the ad. Not one word.
If I had to guess, I’d say this was a pretty basic Ranger, with the 2.3 liter “Lima” four-cylinder engine. It has a five-speed manual transmission, though it’s listed as an automatic. I get the feeling it runs and drives, based on the fact that the photos in the ad show it in various locations. But I could be wrong.
The seller claims it has 43,000 miles on it; I’d believe 143,000. The interior isn’t bad, but it isn’t great either. That stack of pine tree air fresheners hanging off the headlight switch are a bad sign – at best it smells like crappy pine tree air fresheners, but they could be covering up something much worse. I don’t think the bucket seats are original; they’re from a Mustang, maybe?
The lowering is serious; the bed floor has been raised for clearance, essentially ruining any truck usefulness it once had. I believe those things in the bed are hydraulic cylinders, which would mean it can be raised up for driving. In the front, it has massive negative camber, which is to be expected from Ford’s Twin I-Beam suspension operating at that severe of an angle. The body has had some other customization done, but it’s banged up. I imagine this was a much nicer truck at some point, but its best days are behind it.
I know, I know: They’re both awful, and you don’t want either one of them. Well, tough. That’s not how this game is played. You must choose. Will it be the backyard 4×4, or the slammed minitruck?
I beg to differ. I’m running screaming in the other direction from these hunks of junk.
When I become Angry Old Man (almost there), I want that Buick, a shack on a mountain top, a still, and a three legged dog.
The worst vehicle I have ever owned was a 1993 Ranger, but I’ll still take the Ranger today over that mess of a Buick. Even if the Buick was a mechanical disaster, the interior is giving me hives just looking at photos of it.
Also, the seats in the Ranger appear to be seats from an early-2000s Ranger.
You’re right, I don’t want either. But I can tell just from looking at the way those car seats are installed into that single cab Ranger, I won’t be able to get behind the wheel. Regrettibly, I must chose the Buick … thing. Which I could see paying $500 for to run the Gambler 500, and then selling to some other idiot for the same $500.
Ranger for me. Those car body on a truck frame creations are always way too janky for me to ever consider buying. I’ve watched that exact Buick listing come and go from my local FB marketplace for I feel like over a year now so I suspect it’s actually as janky as it looks.
I like slammed mini trucks and have always sort of wanted one. The potential for jank is still there but that one looks reasonably well done and for the price it could be a good deal if you’re into that sort of thing.
If forced to, I would take the Ranger and try to put it somewhat back to stock.
The Buick looks moldy, are we going to talk about that?
I thought the “Buick” was an easy win until I saw the interior. That stupid light bar will come off easy, but it’s not the worst problem by far.
Then I saw the air fresheners and what’s left of the bed on the truck, and I’m back to the Buick. Really though, neither. This week is painful.
I’m not taking either if I can’t drive them home. But since I was a kid I’ve always had a weird fascination with lifted things that shouldn’t be lifted. Cars, vans, hearses, whatever. For $2k AND I could drive it home (even at low speeds), I would try the Buick.
Agree that they are both awful, but the interior of the Ranger shows several scented trees and a fuzzy throw, so that won me over.
The fluorescent thing on the passenger seat sold me too.
No sense in getting big mad when there’s no obvious “good” choice, but that’s not how the game is played…you have to choose one for your ficticious money. From a practicality (what little there is) standpoint, I was initially considering the Buick – for the only reason that it wouldn’t need hydraulic assistance to leave my driveway. That was until I saw the terrible truth under the hood and inside. In this case, the Ford is my choice. I have no interest in slammed vehicles either, but some folks dig ’em. In that spirit, perhaps this one could be flipped for an extra $500. It’s clean enough, and if it runs and can scale the crown of a road, it might be enough for that purpose.
First time I haven’t been able to make a decision on Shitbox Showdown. Both of these great.