Hope You’re Feeling Brave: 1986 VW Cabriolet vs 1987 Jaguar XJ-S

You didn’t really think I was going to let a whole week go by without subjecting you to some really sketchy old crap, did you? Today we’re looking at two cars that technically function as cars, move under their own power and all that jazz, but you’d better be ready to turn some wrenches as needed.

Yesterday’s cars both ran and drove just fine, they just had a ton of miles and were kind of boring. The “I Hate PT Cruisers Club” was out in force, but so were plenty of apologists for Chrysler’s funky little wagon. The Focus won, partly I think just because it wasn’t a PT Cruiser, but nobody seemed all that enthusiastic about picking it.

I’ve never had either of these, but I’ve owned both of their predecessors – a ’99 Neon and an ’05 Focus – and I can’t say I really have a preference in terms of driving them. I guess I’d take the PT Cruiser here, for the practicality of the wagon bodystyle, but either would be fine.

I think we all have, at some point, found a cheap and cool car with a bunch of red flags, and fallen victim to that fateful five-word question: “How had could it be?” I know I have. Whether you actually go through with the purchase or not, you start doing the calculations: How much will the parts cost? Do I have the necessary tools? Do I like it enough to put in the work? Some of us, including most of the writers here, buy first and ask those questions later, much to your amusement, I hope. Today, we’re going to take a good close look at these two seeming bargains, and determine which one would be less of a disaster if you just went for it.

1986 Volkswagen Cabriolet – $1,500

Engine/drivetrain: 2.0-liter overhead cam inline 4, five-speed manual, FWD

Location: Forest Grove, OR

Odometer reading: unknown

Operational status: I’m pretty sure it runs and drives

Twice in its life, the Volkswagen Golf offered a convertible version. And both times, the earlier body style carried on in convertible form for years after the hatchback version had been replaced. The Mk2 Golf arrived in the US in 1985, but the old Rabbit Convertible continued, now simply called the Cabriolet. I’m fully aware that, due to its integrated roll bar that resembles a basket handle, and its popularity with young women, this car acquired another name that I’m sure someone will use in the comments. I won’t repeat it here.

Like a lot of early water-cooled Volkswagens these days, this Cabrio has bits and pieces of later cars. These cars are a bit like Lego sets; everything fits everything else, so mixing and matching of parts is common. This one has a 2.0 liter engine out of a later Golf in place of its original 1.8 liter, which probably gives it a marginal bump in power. The seller doesn’t actually say how well, or even if, it runs, but it has been photographed in more than one locale, which indicates that it at least moves under its own power. We are told it got a new clutch recently, as well.

It’s a little rough inside; there’s a hole in the driver’s seat and someone has made wooden panels for speakers in the doors, as well as a janky-looking cupholder in the center console. I’d pull that out, at least; a 20-ounce soda bottle fits just fine in between the seat bolster and the handbrake handle. But overall, it’s fine for a cheap convertible. The seller says the odometer is broken, which is very common for VWs of this era.

It’s clean and rust-free outside, but again, it has some bits and pieces it didn’t originally come with. The wheels are from a Mk3 Golf or Jetta, possibly the same car that donated its engine. It also has a quad-headlight grille with a GTI logo on it, which I don’t remember any US-market Golf or Cabriolet ever wearing. But these days, it’s not hard to get parts from other parts of the world to customize a car like this.

1987 Jaguar XJ-S – $1,750

Engine/drivetrain: 5.3-liter overhead cam V12, three-speed automatic, RWD

Location: Portland, OR

Odometer reading: 46,000 miles

Operational status: Technically runs and drives, but needs some help

This is as close as I come to a hot take: This car, the Jaguar XJ-S, is a personal luxury coupe. It’s a British Chrysler Cordoba. It has a big engine, soft suspension, and flashy styling meant to impress and possibly intimidate onlookers. Furthermore, I submit that the only difference between what most people call a grand tourer and a personal luxury coupe is country of origin. I don’t hold with such snobbery. If you want to call your boat-tail Riviera a grand tourer, go right ahead, as far as I’m concerned.

You won’t be doing much grand touring in this one right away; its 5.3 liter “High Efficiency” V12 starts and runs, and the car is drivable, but the battery light is on, and all the belts and hoses have yet to be replaced. It could use a tune-up as well. The seller says that “you could probably drive it across town.” Looking at the map, it’s about fifteen miles from this car’s approximate location to my old house in Portland. Would I chance it? Well, when I bought my MGB, it was an eighteen-mile journey, and it made it six before breaking down. But sure, what the hell, sounds like an adventure.

As for the personal luxury part, yeah, it’s got that. A lot of cheap Jaguars have absolutely appalling interiors, but this one looks pretty good. The leather is a little cracked and worn, but it’s intact, and it’s got a nice Nardi steering wheel that’s a lot more attractive than the stock unit. Neither the air conditioning nor the stereo works, so you’ve got some work to do, but it’s certainly not a lost cause.

It was repainted by the previous owner in its original classic British Racing Green. It really suits the XJ-S well. The paint still looks nice and shiny, but the seller does note some rust in the floors, so watch out for bubbles elsewhere. Overall, though, this is a car you could show off proudly, and yet not be afraid of enjoying it.

In my younger days, I probably would have considered either of these as a daily driver. I mean, if you can drive it home, you can hop in it the next morning and drive to work, right? Yeah. I was late to work more often than I’d like to admit back then. I hadn’t yet grasped the idea that if you’re going to have a cool but unreliable car, you have to have a less-cool car that starts every time to balance it out. So, assuming you’ve already got something more reliable, which one of these would you drive home to tinker with?