Sometimes, you just want something comfortable and familiar, especially when you’re in a lousy mood. My truck is still acting up, and it’s driving me nuts. It’s almost too hot out to work on it. And within a week, not one but two huge influences from my formative years passed away: Ozzy Osbourne and Shunsaku Tamiya. I’m definitely in a bit of a funk over it all. So I hope you’ll indulge me by letting me show you two cars I just plain love.
And thank you for going along with me on that silly ride yesterday. The idea of a $5,000,000 car being listed on Craigslist was just too absurd to pass up. Of course, no mere mortal is going to be able to drop that kind of money on a car, but it is fun to think about. And you’re right; the dashboard of the Ferrari F40 does look like it belongs in a kit car. But I don’t think interior luxury is the point of it.
For me, even if I did have Ferrari money, I wouldn’t go for an F40. My true Ferrari love, ever since 1984, has been the Testarossa. I can’t afford one of those either, but I do have a 1/8 scale Pocher model kit of one that my wife bought me, that I’m very much looking forward to building someday. The Fiero would do nicely to make runs to the hobby shop for paints and supplies for it, so that would be my choice between these two.
The term “comfort food” has a vaguely apologetic feel to it, like “guilty pleasure.” It’s stuff you know isn’t good for you, but it’s yummy and it makes you happy. And what’s wrong with that? Life is too short to eat “healthy” stuff all the time. Have a damn donut once in a while, and you’ll feel better. Don’t make apologies for it.
I’m certainly not going to apologize for liking these two cars. They’re both very similar to cars I’ve owned in the past, and due to circumstances beyond my control, wasn’t able to enjoy properly. I’d love a second chance with either of them. I know neither one of them is a particularly good car, but I don’t care. So I’ll make my case for each of them, and you can decide which argument was more convincing.
1983 Volkswagen Scirocco – $5,500
Engine/drivetrain: 1.7-liter OHC inline 4, five-speed manual, FWD
Location: Hood River, OR
Odometer reading: 195,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
In 1989, I got my very first car: a ten-year-old VW Scirocco. It was owned by a family friend, and I had known it for years. It was very rusty by the time I got it, but I didn’t care; I was sixteen and it was a car. I drove the hell out of it for a year and a half, before the rust became a structural issue and I had to scrap it. I’ve low-key wanted another Scirocco ever since, but the cool Giugiaro-styled early ones are nearly impossible to find. For years, I considered this second-generation bodystyle to be a poor substitute, but I’ve come around to it now. Besides, these don’t rust nearly as badly as the first-generation did.
Until the arrival of the 16V engine in 1986, no Scirocco was what you’d call quick. My ’79 made 78 horsepower from 1.6 liters; this one displaces 1.7 liters and ekes out a paltry 74, mostly due to having more emissions controls and a really stupid exhaust manifold design. But old water-cooled Volkswagens are basically Lego sets; if you want more power, it’s not hard to get. Back in the day, Callaway made a turbo kit for it, but I imagine that’s as rare as hen’s teeth now. A 1.8 or 2.0 from a later Golf drops right in, though. As it stands, this one runs and drives just fine, and has had a bunch of work done recently.
The biggest advantage this car has over the earlier Scirocco is interior room. You lose the cool three-spoke aluminum steering wheel, but you gain a bunch of headroom, and your friends won’t hate you quite as much for making them ride in the back seat. It’s in good condition, though I expect there are some cracks in the dash under that cover. Also, be warned that for some unfathomable reason, the seller (or someone) removed the air conditioning, which likely makes those black vinyl seats unbearable in the summer.
It looks great outside, with shiny red paint that’s probably original, and bumpers that are actually still more or less black. It has the original wheels, too, which is nice to see; VW and Audi had some great alloy wheel designs during this time, and I’ve always liked these. You should probably check underneath for rust just to be sure, but considering its location, I wouldn’t expect to see any.
1984 Dodge Daytona Turbo – $6,000
Engine/drivetrain: Turbocharged 2.2-liter OHC inline 4, five-speed manual, FWD
Location: Portland, OR
Odometer reading: 120,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well, but needs minor work
In the spring of 1995, I plunked down $600 for a car almost exactly like this one: same year, same color, same engine. The differences were that mine was a Chrysler Laser XE instead of a Dodge Daytona, and it had an automatic transmission instead of the five-speed stick. I had ot for about a year, if I remember right; it was fun to drive, but the entire electrical system was one big gremlin, and I lacked the time, money, and adequate space to work on it to get it all sorted out. I replaced it with a Honda Accord, which was a lot more reliable, but also ended up getting scrapped due to rust. And about six years ago, someone in my old neighborhood in Portland was selling a nice ’85 Daytona Turbo with a rod knock for $300 – and I passed it up, since I already had an MG that demanded my full attention. I like to think someone saved it and fixed it – but I fear it ended up in the Pick-N-Pull down the road.
Turbocharging was all the rage in the 80s, with nearly every manufacturer offering an engine with forced induction. It was a clever way to boost power on the smaller engines that dominated the market after the malaise era, and Chrysler’s version worked better than some others. This engine made 32 horsepower more than the “High Output” 2.2 engine in the Shelby Charger, and almost sixty more than the standard 2.2 in the Aries. I remember turbo lag being an issue; my Laser was a dog off the line, but passing gear on the highway was great. I imagine the five-speed would help acceleration. This one runs and drives, and has had a bunch of work done, but it needs a little more; it idles high, which is probably a vacuum leak, and the electric cooling fan just recently quit. Both are easy fixes, but important to do as soon as possible.
This Daytona has leather seats, which my Laser did not have, but lacks a digital dash, which mine had. The seats in these are great; they have good support and lots of adjustments, including air-pump lumbar supports, operated by a little squeeze bulb on the seat. It’s all in good shape, but the seller says some of the gauges don’t work. I’m not surprised; electrical faults are kind of a trademark of these cars. My Laser had the talking Electronic Message Center, but it developed a sort of automotive Tourette’s syndrome – it would randomly tell me the rear hatch was open or the oil pressure was low, for no reason at all.
The photos in this ad are terrible, but the seller is a young kid, so I guess I can forgive them for not knowing they should have taken it to an empty parking lot for photos. From what I can see, it looks like it’s in good condition, but the paint is a bit faded and chalky. I still love this bodystyle, though, and I always will. And I know I’m not alone; the Mechanical Wizard of Wilmington, our own Stephen Walter Gossin, is a big Daytona fan as well.
I can already tell that one of you, probably more than one, will say these are both overpriced. And they’re both a lot more expensive than they once were, it’s true. But when you look at some of the ridiculous selling prices for 80s cars on the auction sites, they start to look more reasonable. They do both say “open to offers,” and both sellers sound like enthusiasts who really love cars, rather than speculators out to make a quick buck. They’ll both need a little care and feeding, but so do all older cars. Which one would you welcome into your garage?
The Scirocco has a 1.8 in it already. You can tell by the water outlet on the cylinder head. The leather seats means it’s also could be a Wolfsburg edition which means it would have had a close ratio gearbox (like a Rabbit GTI) from the factory as well. But a lot can happen in the 42 years since it was built too.
I am a big fan of both. Manual hatchbacks were a bit of an obsession for some time. I shopped a lot of Sciroccos and Daytonas/Lasers. Clean Sciroccos have demanded a premium around me for long enough that I never considered them a good value, but that Daytona, I saw many for <$1k usually with a catastrophic amount of rust but I always wondered if it was cheap enough to roll the dice. The Daytona wins for me, I think the styling is better than the Scirroco even though its probably the worse car.
I owned a Scirocco in the early 90s and loved it. Slow, sure, but it was fun to drive, and with the snowflake wheels, they look especially lovely. My roommate at the time had a Dodge Daytona Turbo, and it was faster but a much less appealing overall package. The Scirocco was a GTI wearing a tracksuit, and the Daytona was a K-car in a Halloween costume. But neither is worth the asking price here.
Tough Call today. I never really wanted either car. both were kind of slow and ugly, but I think in this case the red make the Red VAG perhaps a little less Fugly. I suppose I would go that route, though I don’t know that I would spend that kind of real money on either.
I’m all over that Scirocco.
That’s a lotta red!!
I want to go Daytona, but if I were to take the chance at one of those I’d rather risk some of the extra doodads like the digital dash, and/or a later one with pop-ups. The VW seems more fun anyway.
I also just appreciate both listings. Detailed, not uppity about anything.
Scirocco. Fun to drive, even if the 16V was more fun to drive. In those days — if not so much now — VW knew how to make cars handle, and these did. And, IIRC, quality control and materials were a quantum — sorry — leap ahead of Dodge/Chrysler.
I’d have to find and install an a/c system, which would put the price up near the Daytona, which would also be more expensive when the necessary fixes are made.
In either case, it would be necessary to cheap the seller down a few bucks.
Seriously, these are both worthless and need to be shredded. Both are asking fantasy money and are way, way overpriced. Not classics, not collectible, nor desirable, not in very good condition and not salvageable. Don’t throw your money away.
I had this same year Scirocco in black. I liked the looks of the OG Scirocco much better but this had a lot of nice things about it. The seats were really good, it was fun to drive albeit not super quick. The US spec bumpers were embarrassingly huge though. Kinda awkward looking. Eventually I ended up with a Corrado which was more of an aesthetic successor to the original Scirocco… I still miss that car.
I find the Daytona styling to be even uglier than that of a Renault Fuego, a decidedly low bar (no offense for you, Mark, and Steven).
Those seats, though, look fantastic. Took me longer to decide than what I would have thought possible.
Hmmm, engine swap and a/c install or electrical work and a repaint?
I’ve always like Sciroccos and have never given a rat’s ass about the Daytona, so I’ll put the VW Lego theory to a virtual test.
The Daytona would be more fun, but more suffering. Crank up the boost after fixing it, and you’ll have modern-ish car acceleration in a retro ’80s package. Things will break…repeatedly…because it’s an ’80s Chrysler product.
I prefer the pop-up headlight version (1987-1991) to this version.
I have zero ’80s nostalgia so I am not the target market for these vehicles. That being said, I actually like them both. The Scirocco is plain in a good way. I am also a huge air-cooled VW fan, and while this is past the air-cooled era, ’80s VWs (particularly the Rabbit and Scirocco) seem to be worthy successors to the VWs I love. To me, they still have “old VW” appeal even with a modern-ish powertrain. As for the Daytona, I think it is distinct looking in a good way. I also really like the interior of the Daytona, particularly the bucket-ish rear seats.
For voting purposes I went with the Scirocco because of condition (this would have been a tougher choice if the Daytona had better paint or was cheaper). Three of my five vehicles don’t have AC, so while it would be nice if this car did, it isn’t a deal breaker. I wouldn’t use it as a daily driver, so it can sit in the garage or used for short trips on hot days.
Went VW, but not for the usual reasons. I’m usually K Car is never the answer, the opposite of a Miata, but this is different. I don’t hate the Daytona, it isn’t for me, and the text reminded me that cars are not always logical decisions. Ok, usually not, as I’ve had 4 Saabs, so if you love a Daytona then love that car.
I have mentioned my unreasonable love for the Daytona before, and once again it’s forcing me to vote for this overpriced example that leads you in with two minor problems that will undoubtable be your first trip down an endless road to more problems. It just looks good. I’ve driven one. It doesn’t drive good. It drives bad. It shifts bad. I falls apart for weird reasons. I still want one.
Also, I need to do my homework here, but I thought all Daytonas came with wrap-around spoilers and Lasers came with the spoiler shown on this car. It’s always possible it has a Laser’s hatch, as the Daytona I drove (my college roommate’s) had plenty of Laser bits covering up broken Daytona pieces.
It’s noteworthy how much more reliable the Scirocco looks when put up against a Daytona. Still. Gimme Daytona. Especially these quad headlight ones.
Both are overpriced, but I voted for the red car
VW. I agree the first gen Siricco is better looking, but this one still looks pretty good and is in great shape. I knew a guy with one a few years newer with a built 1.9L TDI swapped in and it was pretty amazing.
Always thought Sciroccos were neat but somehow didn’t actually realize there were two different generations.
I too prefer the first generation Scirocco, but this one looks like it will do nicely. No desire for the dodge. Never understood the love for those.
I could potentially go with a “both” button today, but I prefer the ‘roc. I’ve secretly lusted after a Corrado since high school, which I think was a better looking car.
Loved the Corrado as well, at this point it’s one of those “when was the last time you saw one?” cars.
Both for sure!
This was a tougher one. I needed a car in ’93 when my Camaro died, I test drove a Beretta and a Daytona. I ended up with the Beretta mostly because that’s where the Camaro limped to with a rod knock. I wish I had gone with the Daytona.
But as a kid in the 70s I remember liking VW products and building model cars of them. That Scirocco’s front bumped is screaming for a row of Hella 500s to live out my rally dreams.
I voted VW. I’d like to replace the AC, but I might just install a big sliding canvas sunroof instead.
The Scirocco will be perfect for my Jason Torchinsky cosplay.
I actually want them both, but when pressed I’d go Daytona, for the second time in what, a month? I’m not scared of electrical gremlins, I’d just swap in a whole new harness from painless, just wish it was the maroon color…