Some cars have fixed roofs; others have folding cloth roofs – and a very special few have small removable sections of the roof that let the sunshine in when they’re out, and let a tiny bit of rain in when they’re installed. Today we’re going to take a look at two such cars, and pay our respects to that most badass of all roof types: the T-top.
Yesterday we looked at two cars with big rear spoilers, and I figured the Thunderbird was going to win. Rear-wheel-drive and a manual transmission gave it the edge, I think, despite its electrical gremlins and higher price. The Iron Duke/TH125 combo in the Grand Am just couldn’t compete.
However, I’m going to play devil’s advocate and cast my vote for the Grand Am. At this point, I would rather do upkeep on a slow car than try to revive a faster one with issues. Maybe I’m just getting old, but polishing up an old Pontiac on weekends sounds relaxing.
T-tops on a production car first appeared on the 1968 Corvette, and they really gained popularity in the late 1970s in the absence of convertibles. They seem to be one of those love-it-or-hate-it car features; either you think they’re unbelievably cool, or you have had some that leaked on you and are over them. I’ve never had a car with T-tops, so I still think they’re cool. For today, I’ve found two great examples of T-top cars: one that had them as standard equipment, and another that should have. Let’s check them out.
1989 Nissan Pulsar NX XE – $4,500
Engine/drivetrain: 1.6 liter OHC inline 4, five-speed manual, FWD
Location: Seattle, WA
Odometer reading: 155,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
The Nissan Pulsar was available in a variety of bodystyles in other parts of the world, but we only got one: the two-door coupe. For the second generation, that meant standard T-tops and a removable hatchback that could be replaced with a station wagon-style cover known as the Sportbak. This one doesn’t have the Sportbak; it was a rare option then, and it’s nearly impossible to find now. But you can still remove the T-top panels and the hatch for open-air fun.
The Pulsar never was a high-performance car; you could get a turbocharged engine in the first generation and a twin-cam engine in this one, but the standard engine was a single-cam 12 valve engine shared with the Sentra. It makes the most of its 92 horsepower with a five-speed manual transmission. This one has had four owners, and comes with service records going all the way back to 1994. It’s in great mechanical shape, and has been driven daily for the past three years.
The interior positively screams ’80s, with its accordion shift boot, side pods on the instrument panel, and tape deck in the dash. The seller has installed new Pioneer speakers in the doors, so your INXS tapes should sound pretty good. It’s all in great shape, and the seller says everything works fine. The T-top seals do seep a bit in the rain, but to be fair, Seattle weather is a test of any window seals.
There are so many great little details on the outside of this car: the pop-up headlights, the diagonal lines on the taillights, the door handles set into the edges of the doors. It’s unmistakable from anything else. This one is in fine shape, though it does have a little crease in the driver’s side door, and some unevenly-faded paint. Still, the seller says it turns a lot of heads, and I believe it.
1994 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 – $5,000
Engine/drivetrain: 5.7 liter OHV V8, six-speed manual, RWD
Location: Redding, CA
Odometer reading: 96,000 miles
Operational status: Has been sitting for a while, needs a battery
Though it seems like the Chevy Camaro had T-tops all along, they didn’t actually become available until 1978, well into the car’s second generation. But after that, they became a fixture, and no well-dressed Z28 was complete without them. The fourth-generation Camaro and Firebird were to be the last cars with T-tops, but they wore them well. In fact, any time I feature a Camaro here without T-tops, someone comments on the lack of them. So here you go.
Not only does this Camaro Z28 have T-tops, it also has the T56 six-speed manual transmission. The seller says this car belongs to their grandmother, who stopped driving it three years ago. It has been sitting since then, so it will need some waking up. The battery needs replacing, and all the fluids should be changed, at the minimum. But once you get it going again, you’ll enjoy 275 horses from that LT1 V8. Go Granny go.
It only has 96,000 miles on it, and Granny obviously took care of it, so it’s in a lot better shape inside than your average fourth-gen Camaro. This is also the first time in a long time that I’ve seen a detachable-face stereo with the face actually detached. People still do that? I think the face comes off the one in my truck, but I’ve never actually removed it.
It has been parked outside all this time, which is a good test of the T-top seals, but it’s hell on the clearcoat. All the horizontal surfaces are dull. Whether or not it’s worth repainting is up to you. At least, as a California car, it should be rust-free. Redding gets its share of snow, but they don’t salt the roads.
Open-air driving can be a wonderful thing, but convertibles are kind of a pain in the ass. T-tops seem like a good compromise: snug and warm in the winter, but letting plenty of summer sun and fresh air in. Almost no one makes them anymore, and I think that’s a shame. We could use more fun and fresh air in cars these days. But at least we’ve got these two. Which one is more your style?
The Pulsar is interesting and would likely result in interesting conversations. The Camaro is the opposite. Plus, the Camaro’s interior is about as bad a place to spend time as you can find in any modern-ish car.
I really want both. And while the Pulsar is the more practical of the two, and likelier to be the one more easily maintained, I ended up voting for the Camaro.
ROW YOUR OWN UNTIL YOUR MULLET GROWS IN!
I’m at an age and hairline where it would nothing in the front and party in the back.
Think Riff-Raff from Rocky Horror – not a good look.
Ah, yes, the “skullet.”
Actually, curly as my (remaining) hair is I’d likely look more like Larry Fine.
No Sportbak, no care, although that Pulsar is super clean. Gimme the Z28 and a hatch full of spare Optisparks.
Side Note: the squinty 1993-97 Z28 looks WAY better than the Catfish Face 1998-2002.
I had a first gen Pulsar through 1995. Two friends each had second generation Pulsars. I’m voting for a time when Nissan was cool and reliable.
I voted the other way, but you certainly aren’t wrong about that last part.
I had a 94 camaro, fun car until the head gasket went
Damn, I was all ready to vote for that ridiculously clean Pulsar, but a 350 Camaro with 6-spd and t-tops in original condition? Sorry Nissan.
I voted for the car I can actually change the spark plugs on.
Definitely need a “both” option today.
My knucklehead cousin had a Pulsar of that era . . . spent more on the stereo system than the car was worth.
I was in high school in the 80’s. Spending more for your stereo was de rigueur.
Yup, I had a bunch of Pioneers and an Alpine or two that were probably boosted at one point. And the speaker boxes for cruise night. And a badly wired amp that would probably short out the headlights. Man, we were idiots but we had fun.
I was a Blaupunkt man back in the day . . . also second hand.
I had an 81 Toyota p/u that came with an AM radio and one speaker in the dash. I paid a shop to install a Kenwood head unit, Sony speakers in the doors, some amp/equalizer from Crutchfield (probably added more distortion than volume), and a subwoofer w/ separate amp. Kids today don’t know how lucky they got it with modern OEM stereos that blow away all the crap I paid good money for.
The Nissan is really cool, but today I will choose the V8 rwd manual car. I like the way the LT-1 cars look, and this will be better than the rusty piles of shit around here.
Never liked the look of that generation Camaro. Love the Pulsar, so it’s Nissan for me.
Fully expected this to be a manual Pulsar with the V6 auto for the Camaro, but with the V8 and manual?? I have to go Camaro. I had a Trans Am of this generation for a while and it was a blast. Handling isn’t the best, and the Pulsar would make a hell of a daily though so really both choices are great.
I would make the seller get a battery though. That’s seriously the worst way to sell a car. Get it running before asking real money for it!
I voted for the Nissan because somewhere in the back of my rolltop desk I have an old Pulsar wristwatch and I bet people will be amused when I roll up in the Nissan Pulsar with the T-Tops removed, my left arm lying along the driver’s window sill, clearly showing off the Pulsar watch on my wrist. It’ll be so cool!
Normally I’m fairly anti-FWD, but those Camaros have just NEVER done anything for me. I’ll take the quirky 80s Nissan and drive it to oblivion next year.
If it were a ’90 or so Camaro may have changed my vote.
Wow, if that Pulsar was nearby I’d have to chain myself to the wall to keep myself away from it. What a ton of fun I would have owning that car.
I’m not a Camero sort of guy, and dealt with a friend’s Firebird equivalent back in my youth that was tremendous garbage. I get that it’s a V8 and all, but I don’t recall driving that pigly Firebird to be that much fun to drive (when it worked). I’m not going to bother beating down the interior quality as everyone here knows it sucks.
Well, I guess you are going to beat down the interior quality.
Haha, yeah. I guess I should have said “I’m not going to elaborate on all the ways the interior quality sucks”.
Easy one today, the Nissan. My buddy had one, quality and fun car. Hard no on a ran when parked Camaro. My favorite joke from the 1980s. “Why are Camaros like hemorrhoids, because eventually every a$$hole has one.”
I never like the Pulsar’s tail lights, and that’s a big reason I bought a Mitsubishi built Dodge Colt instead.
To me, the diagonal lined tail lights are a goofy accent that makes the whole car look goofy, and ruins the look from rear angles.
Yeah, it’s irrational. Car buying is often irrational.
Also, when I was buying that car, it was only meant to be a holdover until I bought a Miata.
I still don’t want a Pulsar with those goofy tail lights, so I’ll be “stuck” with a manual RWD V8.
See I’m the opposite, I freaking love the Pulsar tails and think it would be awesome.
You cannot ever beat a car with a V8 and a stick. Well,expect maybe a V10 and a stick..
Could not have said this better myself.
I know, it’s hard to beat a 3/4 ton Dodge or Ford with a burly V10 Magnum or Triton, paired with a stick. Proper workhorses!
That’s what you’re thinking of, right?
I mean, he did say “car”, but there are definitely worse things to spend your money on than those trucks.
He said “Car with a V8”, not “car with a V10”
He also said “expect” instead of “except” so I think we can read between the lines.
Fudge me. Auto-correct wins again.
I went with the Pulsar. I think I would enjoy driving the Camaro more, but the Nissan is a far better deal. I can’t see paying $5000 for a dirty, faded Camaro in “ran when parked” condition.
Those LT1s are hard to kill. I bet it fires up first try. Take a jump pack with you before handing over money.
Right up until the Optispark packs it in…
IDK. There are aftermarket options to handle that and based on forum posts Optispark isn’t the boogie man that people like to make it out to be. Every car has its unique issues you just have to go in with eyes open to them.
Maybe, but 5 years ago, when the Optispark on my Trans-Am died, finding a reliable replacement that wasnt half the value of the car was a serious issue.
Add in the fact that the clutch fork is exclusive to that transmission, and there’s only ONE GUY (Hawk Performance) who occasionally makes a batch of them, and I’m pretty leery of them.
Yeah, it will probably run. That won’t make it any cleaner, though (look at the photos in the original ad). There appears to be an entire Chihuahua worth of dog hair on the back seat. I need a Benadryl just to look at pictures of it. The three year old dirt on the driver’s floor mat and what appears to be a used Kleenex on the center console also aren’t great.
This is another situation where 20 minutes of cleaning might make this car far more appealing. As it sits I’m not interested in it for that price.
It’s not that bad IMO but I also have a toddler so perhaps my standards are lower. As it sits that thing looks brand new compared to my daily.
$5k for a dirty, faded Camaro is reasonably cheap when your local market only offers dirty, faded and rusty Camaros at the $5k price point.
weve got a 94 z28 bought new still in the fam with 63k on the clock. its been a hoot to drive. 275hp feels like mediocre power these days but to an 18yr old in 2000 it was a rocket. this one has the bonus stick ours doesnt. no thoughts needed. pro tip for those with one of these, if your battery keeps going dead and you dont know why, check the center console. gm used soft rubbery vinyl for the material and super hard plastic rod for the switch that turns off the light in the console. after about 15 years or so the plastic rod had pushed against it hard enough that the light stayed on. it wasnt until we used a voltmeter and my dad rested his arm on the console cover that we figured out the battery killer.
They’re still not a slouch. 0-60 should be in the 5 second range. I know that’s not what it used to be but it’s fast enough for me
no doubt. it was more than enough to get me in trouble back in the day. i took it to 145mph in my youthpidity and it still had plenty left to go before i lost my nerve to test it more. not to mention they sound amazing just idling in the garage. i just feel like we’re horsepower spoiled these days because people turn their noses up at a less than 400hp sports car when back in the 90’s 400+hp was exotics territory.
That Pulsar is a cool quirky car. However that Camaro is a whole lotta car for very little money.
Say what you will about 4th gen, Camaros but they were fast and reliable. I personally prefer the ‘98 facelifts with the LS1 better but for $5k I’ll take that LT1 all day. The inside is a rattle trap and the plastics are so brittle they’ll crack if you look at them wrong but this thing will lay skids for mile after mile after mile.
Another great both day. Camaro for fun, pulsar for daily.
I can’t believe I just voted against the Camaro. A V8 6-speed car with 96K miles? Someone should totally snatch that up. But not me. The LT-1 is still a dealbreaker for me and, this is personal taste, but that Camaro had a nose that was really hard to look at and the 1998 facelift was a huge improvement.
It must be a full moon or something because I’m voting for the front wheel drive car here, but long live the Pulsar with those specific taillights!
I agree that the 98 facelift was a huge improvement but $5k for a 350 with infinite aftermarket support is hard to vote against, especially for a $500 delta.
I think opposite. I like the early ones, the catfish nose on the LS-1 cars is kinda ugly. Granted, the LS-1 is the superior engine, but I’ll still take an early LT-1 car.
There was a time when the Z28 would have been an easy answer. That time was in the mid-late 90s.
Then I discovered how much fun imports were. This one looks to be in really good shape. I’m in.
Five grand for a Z28 with t-tops and a stick? Famn right I’m picking it.
So what if it needs a battery and hasn’t run for a while? To quote Jay Leno “It’s a Chevy. You can fix it with a hammer.”