Home » Gotta Give Them Points For Trying: 1983 Chrysler E-Class vs 1992 Mercury Topaz

Gotta Give Them Points For Trying: 1983 Chrysler E-Class vs 1992 Mercury Topaz

Sbsd 9 5 2024
ADVERTISEMENT

Good morning! Today we’re looking at a couple of “fancy” versions of ordinary cars, nearly a decade apart in age, but very close in ideology, and that ideology is that you can have nice things, as long as you don’t expect them to be exciting as well. Grab a cup of coffee; you’ll need it to stay awake looking at these two.

Yesterday’s high-mileage battle ended with a win for the Mazda 3, though quite a few of you expressed a desire for a “Both” option. Many of you were concerned with the possibility of rust on both of them, but cars on the West Coast just don’t have that problem.

Vidframe Min Top
Vidframe Min Bottom

Cabcorner Truck

Don’t believe me? Check it out: That’s a photo of the left rear cab mount/cab corner/rocker panel of my own ’89 Chevy truck, a thirty-five-year-old ex-government fleet truck that spent its service life in eastern Washington state before retiring to Portland, without a lick of rust. It just isn’t an issue.

Oh, and speaking of which, my vote is for the Tundra. I like the flames, and the overall scruffiness of it. It’s one of the few trucks I’ve found that would make a suitable replacement for my Chevy, should anything ever happen to it.

ADVERTISEMENT

Screenshot From 2024 09 04 16 42 24

Now then: American cars of the 1980s just weren’t very exciting, and I say that as someone who is terribly fond of them. It’s just hard to drum up enthusiasm for some ninety-horsepower sedan with an automatic. But, if equipped correctly, they can be quite nice cars – not flashy, not putting on airs like the Lincoln Versailles or the Cadillac Cimarron, just nice. Comfortable seats, good air conditioning, and a smooth, quiet ride can make up for a sixteen-second 0-60 time, with the right attitude. Not everything has to be hardcore all the time. Sometimes a little Christopher Cross is just the ticket. So instead of thinking of these cars as “lame” or “slow,” think of them as the automotive equivalent of yacht rock. Here they are.

1983 Chrysler E-Class – $3,000

458215601 1979673782466058 1342446074574423550 N

Engine/drivetrain: 2.2-liter overhead cam inline 4, three-speed automatic, FWD

Location: Everett, WA

ADVERTISEMENT

Odometer reading: 126,000 miles

Operational status: Runs and drives great

You have to hand it to Chrysler; they got a lot of mileage out of the K platform. Starting with one basic front-wheel-drive formula, the struggling automaker managed to put family sedans, station wagons, luxury coupes and sedans, and even sports coupes into showrooms, not to mention something that came to be known as a minivan. And right in the middle of the range was the Chrysler E-Class, a short-lived variant of the E platform, a K-car with a longer wheelbase.

458192028 1979677435799026 7610132231194602780 N

Unusually for an E-Class, this car is powered by Chrysler’s own 2.2 liter four-cylinder engine instead of the optional Mitsubishi-supplied 2.6 liter that ended up in many cars in the early years. Even more unusually for an upscale model, it does not appear to be equipped with air conditioning. I can’t imagine ordering a car like this and not checking that box on the form, but somebody was trying to save a few bucks, I suppose. It runs and drives beautifully, the seller says, and has a new timing belt, alternator, and voltage regulator.

ADVERTISEMENT

457665395 1979677429132360 856166370700435194 N

It may lack air conditioning, but it does have another well-known Chrysler option of the era: the Electronic Message Center. Yes, the talking thing. The ’83 Dodge 600 we had when I was young had this option, and it was amusing for the first month or two, but got a bit annoying after that. My mom got in the habit of fastening her seat belt before starting the car, so it wouldn’t tell her to do so. My ’84 Chrysler Laser had it too, but that car had a lot of weird electrical gremlins, so the Message Center would spit out random dire warnings now and again. I think there’s a reason why this gimmick never caught on.

458188257 1979677465799023 7254268787471750300 N

It’s in remarkably good shape, with shiny paint, including the four body-matching hubcaps, a blatant ripoff of Mercedes-Benz. Comparing cars to Mercedes was all the rage for a while; Ford famously designed an entire advertising campaign around comparing its Granada to a Mercedes W116 S-Class. I doubt either ruse actually persuaded any buyers.

1992 Mercury Topaz GS – $1,800

457321356 2253539771663517 21557997907777661 N

ADVERTISEMENT

Engine/drivetrain: 2.3-liter overhead valve inline 4, three-speed automatic, FWD

Location: Colorado Springs, CO

Odometer reading: 55,000 miles

Operational status: Runs and drives well, but needs exercise

Ford was the last of the Big Three to embrace front-wheel-drive; the imported Fiesta subcompact had been available since 1976, but it wasn’t until 1981 that a home-grown FWD Ford appeared in the form of the Escort, which replaced the RWD Pinto. In 1984, Ford enlarged the Escort’s basic design to create the Tempo and Mercury Topaz, a replacement for the Fox-based Fairmont. And as had become its custom, Mercury produced its own version of the same basic car with different trim: the Topaz, in this case.

ADVERTISEMENT

457137056 2253539711663523 4732890833826555111 N

I’ll never quite understand Ford’s thinking when it came to the engine in the Tempo and Topaz. It’s a 2.3-liter four, but not the one you’re thinking of. It would have made sense for Ford to use the Lima overhead-cam engine, or even an enlarged version of the Escort’s CVH four, but instead it developed a whole different engine, based on the ancient Falcon-style inline-six. I guess reusing the old tooling made it worth it? Anyway, this one runs fine, but it hasn’t been driven much, so it probably has some cobwebs that need to be blasted out. It also has a leaky valve cover, but a new gasket is included.

456943889 2253539678330193 3209548838342174416 N

Inside, it’s as clean as you would expect for having so few miles on it. The Tempo and Topaz never got airbags; they staggered along through their last four or five years of production meeting the passive-restraint mandate using motorized shoulder belts. The build quality of these is a little hit-or-miss; the seller says this one has a little trouble with the driver’s side power window, and some of the door lock/unlock buttons don’t work.

457144057 2253539754996852 6665705856414780118 N

ADVERTISEMENT

Outside, it’s reasonably clean and shiny, but it does have a little bit of hail damage. On a car this age, and for this price, there are worse problems to have. Being a Mercury, it also has that bar of lights across the grille opening, and I’m willing to bet that it has one bulb burned out. They all seem to, and it always ends up looking like a missing tooth.

It should come as no surprise to hear that I have actually owned cars very similar to both of these. I had a 1985 Plymouth Caravelle for a winter beater one year, and a 1992 Ford Tempo coupe was actually the first car I ever made payments on. I honestly have no preference between them; they were both just fine, plenty comfortable, and more or less reliable. Exciting? No, of course not. But they were nice. Don’t take my word for it, though; go take one of these for a nice leisurely spin.

(Image credits: Facebook Marketplace sellers)

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on whatsapp
WhatsApp
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on reddit
Reddit
Subscribe
Notify of
95 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Musicman27
Musicman27
1 month ago

Gimme that green Toyota in the background.

Rob Schneider
Rob Schneider
1 month ago
Reply to  Musicman27

Heck, I’d settle for the Toyota minivan in the other background.

Squirrelmaster
Squirrelmaster
1 month ago

Topaz, though that’s not really much praise, as I’d have taken a broken roller skate over the Chrysler.

James Carson
James Carson
1 month ago

Under duress I would pick the 600. A friend had a Topaz and it was a infected, festering wart of a car. Never ran right, uncomfortable, awful ride, no brakes, pathetic ac and heater. The Chrysler is a Bentley by comparison.

MEK
MEK
1 month ago

My wife had a Chrysler E-Class back when we first started dating in school. It was baby blue with the matching blue hubcaps. It had about the same mileage at the time that this one does now and it was already mostly done in. The car was the worst kind of crap-can even by the much lower standards of crap-cans thirty years ago. I can’t imagine anyone buying one of these out of any kind of nostalgia unless it’s some kind of S&M thing and they really like the abuse.

I’ll take the Topaz for it’s lower miles, lower price, just being a better car in every conceivable way and also not having that idiotic talking message center.

Max Headbolts
Max Headbolts
1 month ago
Reply to  MEK

Have you lived with a Topaz? They absolutely aren’t better in any way, which is kind of amazing.

MEK
MEK
1 month ago
Reply to  Max Headbolts

My cousin had a Topaz (which she wrecked), and a Tempo prior to that, (which she also wrecked) so yes, I’ve driven one quite a bit and in the same general time period. And yes, it’s a crap-can too but a slightly better crap-can. Not a lot, but still better.

Also, the Topaz doesn’t tell me “Driver’s door is ajar… driver’s door is ajar…” in that horrible ’80’s electronic Speak & Spell voice.

Max Headbolts
Max Headbolts
1 month ago
Reply to  MEK

I’ve lived with multiples of both, but I didn’t even have to listen to the Speak and Spell… I found the K’s less terrible, even the one I bought for $400 and left abandoned after the third ECU ate itself on my morning commute.

Baja_Engineer
Baja_Engineer
1 month ago
Reply to  Max Headbolts

from what I recall back in the early 90s my parents had an 86 Tempo GLS 2dr with the 5spd and my Grandma owned an 85 Caravelle with a carbureted 2.2 and 3 spd auto.
Yes it wasn’t an E-Class but very close in wheelbase and overall length, just decontended. That car was super comfy, of course it was Brown with a beige interior but the Tempo was peppier and handled much better than the torsion bar in the K-Car.

It all depends on what you’re looking for, but I’d take the better driving car with MPFI and A/C

AustinAmbassadorYreg
AustinAmbassadorYreg
1 month ago

Yesterday was both, today is neither. For $1200 less I’ll go with the topaz. I imagine the only E-Class with a Mondale/Ferraro sticker rusted out somewhere in Minnesota before the 80’s were through.

Colin Smith
Colin Smith
1 month ago

My first car was a 91 Topaz that was given to me with the caveat that I had to “get it off the yard” of a family friend. I resurrected it with my dad (we did brakes, new fluids, filters, plugs and wires) and drove home after about a day’s worth of work. I’m not sure how long it sat parked but it was only 8 years old at the time and the floorboards in the back seat were made exclusively of burgundy carpet thanks to rust. I drove it for about 6 months before my dad ended up killing it when he tried to pass a tractor on a two lane road. He felt badly enough to pay 800$ for an 89 Lesabre as a replacement. Even with all those fond memories, I’d pick the Chrysler for the vintage aesthetic of the interior.

Jack Trade
Jack Trade
1 month ago

Topaz, if only b/c I miss Ford’s ’80s two-tone paint jobs, esp. on the Foxbody Mustangs of the era. Ford did a good job bringing that classic design cue into the modern era I thought – it provides a pleasing contrast with the contemporary wheel patterns and body curves.

Taargus Taargus
Taargus Taargus
1 month ago

Ugh. Just ugh. I weep at the thought of owning either.

But I guess the E at least has comfy looking seats and a little more of a novelty factor? I know it’s still a POS, but I’ve had far too much Tempo experience to ever willingly take ownership of one, or it’s cousin.

Jonathan Green
Jonathan Green
1 month ago

The topaz is some guy at Ford deciding that “you know what this carbuncle of car needs to make it a Mercury? A pustule on top. Yeah, a pustule. That’ll make it special!”

This car makes me angry…

Michael Beranek
Michael Beranek
1 month ago

My sister lives in Everett. You don’t need A/C most of the time due to the cool breezes that come in off the Salish Sea. Of course, the Seattle area didn’t see as many A/C days back then than it does today.
The Topaz is just too clean, and maybe the A/C works?

Geoff Buchholz
Geoff Buchholz
1 month ago

I probably should vote for the Topaz (Mom had one as a company car when I was a teenager, and I thought it was perfectly cromulent), but dang if those Chrysler seats don’t look super-comfy. It also looks much cleaner … clearly this was Grampa’s car, right down to the Reagan-Bush bumper sticker.

Despite the lack of aircon, which I am shockingly willing to overlook, we’d like to buy an E.

Angry Bob
Angry Bob
1 month ago

The Chrysler 2.2L will forever remind me of the misery of working at Pep Boys, where I changed timing belts on countless numbers of them. The only time I’ve ever voted for one was when it went up against that hideous Miata a few weeks back, and it hurt to do it.

I love the period correct bumper sticker on the Chrysler. That would have to stay.

10001010
10001010
1 month ago

I’ve always liked the lightbar going all the way across the front of these Mercuries.

Dirk from metro Atlanta
Dirk from metro Atlanta
1 month ago
Reply to  10001010

Yep. I always thought a hybrid longroof Sable front with a Taurus rear would be a pretty perfect 90s cruiser, actually.

I had a ’97 Taurus sedan that fell into my lap and was my DD for half a decade. Gutless but with a decent sound system and leather appointments, it was comfy, at least.

Cloud Shouter
Cloud Shouter
1 month ago

I’ll take the K Car. At least this one won’t be banned.

StillNotATony
StillNotATony
1 month ago

Three Gs for a K-car with no AC?!? Not a chance!!

Gimme that sweet, sweet, AC equipped Topaz with the luggage rack that I’ll never use!

James Thomas
James Thomas
1 month ago

Give me the Topaz.. why? It’s cheaper. Plus, old Fords never die, they just need parts.. lol

UnseenCat
UnseenCat
1 month ago

The Chrysler gets bonus Malaise points for the minty Reagan-Bush ’84 campaign sticker…

Honestly, it’s perfect for a film-production fleet.

GoesLikeHell
GoesLikeHell
1 month ago
Reply to  UnseenCat

period correct

Last edited 1 month ago by GoesLikeHell
IRegertNothing, Esq.
IRegertNothing, Esq.
1 month ago

I’ll take the Topaz since it costs less. Both of these cars are like a bowl of watery oatmeal without any brown sugar or butter. Yeah you had breakfast, but did you really?

GoesLikeHell
GoesLikeHell
1 month ago

You just described my breakfast, it costs me 16 cents a day and leaves me budget for all the k-cars I want.

Today I voted for the Topaz, better price and some nostalgia from doing drivers ed in Tempos and Corsica’s of the era, all with blue interiors.

Last edited 1 month ago by GoesLikeHell
Trust Doesn't Rust
Trust Doesn't Rust
1 month ago

As much as I want to vote for the K-car because of how clean and complete it is, I just can’t click vote. I really, really dislike the K-car as a whole.

Here’s the thing about the Tempo/Topaz. Yes, it’s pretty miserable to drive but it’s light-years better than the Ford Fairmont it replaced. I think people tend to forget that.

Frank Wrench
Frank Wrench
1 month ago

I never thought I’d mutter these words, but “Damn, that white Topaz actually looks pretty good.” I especially like the rear view with the luggage rack.

I still have a nervous tick from the motorized seat belts in my 93 Escort wagon…

The Mark
The Mark
1 month ago

Assuming you are buying one of these to be ironic, the Chrysler is the way to go, with the Mercedes wheels, the talking computer, and the Reagan/Bush ’84 sticker.

Nycbjr
Nycbjr
1 month ago

Mark you almost got me to choose a K car! but it’s nearly 2x the price of the topaz. I really hate both lol. I drove a buddies tempo, it was crap crap crap (the escorts were nicer)

Greg Winson
Greg Winson
1 month ago

I think the light bar on the Topaz was a fake.

Luxx
Luxx
1 month ago

“The Tempo and Topaz never got airbags; they staggered along through their last four or five years of production meeting the passive-restraint mandate using motorized shoulder belts”

Not strictly true. For 1994, their last year, a driver’s side airbag was an option.

GreatFallsGreen
GreatFallsGreen
1 month ago
Reply to  Luxx

It was actually an option for the better part of the production run too, first as a fleet option in 1985 and one of the first production airbags of the time, becoming a retail option a couple years later. It was pretty limited in how you could spec it, brochures usually said sedans only, and I think you had to forego cruise and maybe even the tilt wheel with it. Looking for a good pic, but the Tempaz airbag wheel was a generic design and never switched to the square-centered one so ubiquitous in early 90s Ford products with integrated cruise or horn buttons. Like they specced the original in the 80s and that’s how little they wanted to invest, sticking with the original part. They were also an earlier adopter of the motorized belts, having them a couple years before 1990.

Spikedlemon
Spikedlemon
1 month ago

The Chrysler is nice enough from those pictures to gracefully waltz into a Mopar show and catch the eye of many a classic Chrysler owner.
But it’s also malaise enough that the modern LC/LX owners would never accept you as part of the show, and consider you just there for the laughs.

GoesLikeHell
GoesLikeHell
1 month ago
Reply to  Spikedlemon

Having been to many Mopar shows in 80’s cars, the process is explain at length that you are there to enter the show while the volunteers all try to direct you to spectator parking. Once inside find the lone fwd class with that guy that still brings his PT cruiser and hope that you are far away from the LC/LX classes so you don’t have to listen to the looney tunes on repeat from all their cosplay show setups. They are too busy setting up their darth vader or shrek dolls to even care about anything else at the show.

1 2 3
95
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x