Welcome back to Shitbox Showdown! Today’s choices take us to South Florida, where I’ve lined up a couple of inexpensive and economical rides that are just far enough out of the ordinary to make them interesting. Desirable? Well, maybe not. But I’ll leave that up to you.
Our Weber-equipped coupes yesterday had some of you torn, admiring the Capri’s style but acknowledging that the Celica is a better buy. The bright yellow Toyota took a comfortable win, despite having to be towed home. I still figure it’s an easy fix; power to the ignition coil or to the distributor is my first thought. It might even be one of those things you can fix on the spot, and then drive it home, leaving the seller flummoxed and irritated, but $2,500 richer.
This is a tough call for me to make because they’re both similar to the MGB GT that I already have. I don’t really need another car with Rostyle wheels, nor another yellow car. I prefer the Capri’s style by a country mile, but the rust worries me. I have lost cars to rust before, and it’s a really annoying reason to have to junk something. Wow, I really did stick you guys with a hard choice.
Now then: There are times when finding cars for this column gets a little bit, dare I say, tiresome. You have no idea how many Chevy Malibus and Nissan Rogues I scroll right past on any given day, because I don’t care about them, and I can’t imagine you do either. And when I do find something interesting, I need to think back: Have I done one of those ever? If so, how recently? I try to spread things out geographically as well, but some parts of the country are just used-car dead zones, so I spend a lot of time in the same stomping grounds. Today, I turned to Miami, hoping to find something really stupid to make fun of, but instead I found a couple of pretty decent little cars that we haven’t talked about in a while. Here they are.
1997 Saturn SC1 – $2,700
Engine/drivetrain: 1.9-liter overhead cam inline 4, four-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Pompano Beach, FL
Odometer reading: 157,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives great
This is another car I have personal experience with. I owned an SC1 a couple years newer than this, with a five-speed stick and the extra door on the driver’s side. It’s one of those cars I really wanted to like, but just never quite connected with. Maybe part of the reason is that it was a replacement for a wrecked Plymouth Neon that I really liked. It had big shoes to fill.
This one has neither three doors nor three pedals, unfortunately. And since it’s an SC1, it has the basic single-overhead-cam version of Saturn’s “Power Module” (why they couldn’t just call it an engine, I’ll never know) delivering only 100 horses to the front wheels. It also has taller gearing than the twin-cam version; great for gas mileage, but not for acceleration. It runs great, the seller says, and it should have quite a lot of life left in it.
Apart from the automatic, it doesn’t look like this car has a lot of options. It has crank windows, manual locks, and no cruise control. I would assume it has air conditioning, being a Florida car, but it was optional, and with no underhood shots or clear views of the center console, I can’t confirm that. It is in pretty good shape inside, but the cloth appears to be delaminating from the plastic door panels – mine did the same thing. I imagine they all do eventually. I bet the headliner is sagging as well.
It’s got a bit of clearcoat failure, but it is twenty-seven years old; I’d be amazed if it didn’t have some blemishes. Saturn’s plastic body panels keep these cars looking sharp, but they can hide rust on the steel structure underneath. I don’t think it’s as big of an issue in Florida than it would be in the Midwest, but it is something to be aware of.
2007 Chrysler PT Cruiser convertible – $2,400
Engine/drivetrain: 2.4-liter dual overhead cam inline 4, four-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Pompano Beach, FL
Odometer reading: 93,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives great
The convertible version of Chrysler’s PT Cruiser always confused me. The standard PT is a practical little four-door hatchback, with lots of room inside for people or stuff, and that practicality offsets its weird looks and lukewarm performance (at least from the non-turbo version). But what happens when you take away the roof, and with it all that cargo space, and give it a small and awkward-to-reach trunk? All that’s left is the style, and despite all the accolades heaped on it in the first year, the PT Cruiser’s style has not aged well. It’s at best kitschy, at worst hopelessly outdated.
But if you can ignore the looks, and don’t need all the hatchback room, a convertible PT Cruiser is still a pretty compelling choice for a cheap used car, especially in this condition. It’s a bit under 100,000 miles, so it’s probably due for a timing belt change if it hasn’t already been done, but as long as everything else has been kept up, it should be good for a while. I have a friend back in Oregon who has had a PT Cruiser convertible for years; I don’t know how many miles are on it, but it has to be a couple hundred thousand by now. I have high hopes for this one.
The seller says the convertible top is new, and the ad includes both top-up and top-down photos, so obviously it works fine. Like most convertibles, it looks better with the top down than up, even with the basket-handle roll bar. The interior could maybe use a cleaning, but it has held up well.
It’s clean and shiny outside. The ad says this car has been garage-kept; it does make a difference. I suppose you could make the case for this car as a future classic; there weren’t a whole lot of convertibles to begin with, and I doubt there are too many left in this condition. But right now, it’s just a really nice, low-mileage, inexpensive used car.
These two aren’t going to set the world on fire, obviously. They’re sub-$3,000 used cars, perfect for young drivers or as cheap daily drivers, and if you’ve been paying attention, you know we’re awfully fond of cheap cars around here, pretty much no matter what they are. But our opinion isn’t what counts here. Which one of these are you more fond of?
(Image credits: sellers)
This looks like an SC2 (which would instantly get my vote, even as an auto), but has crank windows which I thought only the 1s got? Perhaps a seat/cluster swap occurred in it’s life?
My first car was a 1995 SL2 (5 speed) and I still think that was one of the greatest cars ever. A college GF had a 2001 SC2 (auto) and that was pretty good. I drove some friends SL1 and SC1, those were dogs.
I may be missing something, but why do we think that’s an SC1? My recollection is that body-color side mirrors and a rear ‘spoiler’ meant SC2.