It’s pretty easy to set a price ceiling when you’re shopping for a car. But what about a price floor? Is it worth cross-shopping a much cheaper car? That’s what we’re investigating today. We’ve got a Volvo that seems like a pretty decent deal, and a Mitsubishi that’s so cheap it might be too good to be true.
Yesterday, we looked at a couple of nice old-person cars, about a decade apart in age. The voting was pretty close, about a 55-45 split, in favor of the Buick. The Chrysler won quite a few fans by virtue of being newer and presumably safer, but the Park Avenue’s old-school charm won the day.
I’d go for the Buick as well, I think, precisely because it’s older. I already know my way around it. If you’re doing the repair and maintenance work yourself, like I do, simplicity and user-friendliness counts for a lot. I’m sure I could do whatever I needed to on that Concorde, but ’80s/90s GM products just feel like old friends to me.
If your budget for a car is, say, $3,000, chances are you’re going to walk right up to that line, and maybe even look at a few cars over it. It makes sense; spend more money, get more car. But there’s always a spot to enter a bottom end of the range, too. What do you set that to? $2,000? $1,500? Lower? Is it worth even bothering looking at cheaper cars?
Of course it is. Most cars down in that price range are going to be junk, but there are a few hidden gems. And why spend more money if you don’t have to? So let’s look at a decent three-grand car, and one for half as much, and see whether it makes sense to spend more.
1996 Volvo 850 – $2,850
Engine/drivetrain: 2.4-liter OHC inline 5, four-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Dearborn, MI
Odometer reading: 150,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
Old Volvos generally make really good used cars. They’re built like tanks, and usually have more safety stuff than their contemporaries. The old 240 series used to be a good bet, but they’ve started to climb in value, and the good ones are getting snapped up by collectors. Its replacement, the 850, doesn’t have nearly the following, and probably will stay cheap for a while yet.
Granted, the 850 is driven by what some consider the “wrong” wheels, and it doesn’t have the famous “red block” engine that is so prized by Volvo enthusiasts, but what it has is pretty good. The 850 uses a transversely-mounted five-cylinder engine, and in this case, an Aisin four-speed automatic. It’s durable stuff; I’ve seen these cars with twice as many miles as this one has. It has a bunch of new parts, and the seller says it runs and drives well.
Volvos aren’t really luxury cars, but you can option them up to be pretty fancy, and this one looks like it has quite a few boxes checked. It has power leather seats, keyless entry, and more. The seats are cracked in places, but still comfy-looking. One thing that does need some attention is the air conditioning; the condenser has a crack in it and needs replacing. Hey, at least they didn’t try to say it just needs recharging.
It looks good outside, except for a ding in the trunk lid in the back. The trunk still opens and shuts all right, so it’s purely a cosmetic issue. The black plastic strips on the bumpers are fading to gray, as they all seem to. But I don’t see any signs of rust. I mean, it is a Michigan car, so you’d be wise to look underneath, but from the top it looks damn good.
1998 Mitsubishi Galant ES – $1,400
Engine/drivetrain: 2.4-liter OHC inline 4, four-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Richland, WA
Odometer reading: 201,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
The Mitsubishi Galant is one of those “Oh, right” cars. The Toyota Camry and Honda Accord so completely overshadowed it that it’s sometimes easy to forget the Galant even exists until you see one. But from everything I’ve heard, they’re good cars. I’ve had a couple of friends who owned Galants, and had good luck with them. And there’s an upside to being completely overshadowed by Toyota and Honda: you’ll pay a whole lot less for a Galant than you will a Camry or Accord.
US-market Galants were built in the Diamond-Star Motors plant in Normal, Illinois, alongside Eclipses and Eagle Talons. Only one engine was available, a 2.4 liter four-cylinder, with either a single or a double overhead camshaft setup. This being an ES model, it has the SOHC engine. It runs and drives great, the seller says, but that’s all they say. No, really – that’s it. “Runs and drives great, reliable, good on gas.” That’s the entire ad.
It has over 200,000 miles on it, and it shows in the interior condition. It’s not torn up or anything, but there’s a lot of wear. Being an ES, it has power windows and locks, and probably cruise control and stuff like that. But of course, there’s no telling how much of it still works until you try.
Outside, it’s missing some clearcoat, but it’s straight, and it should be rust-free, being a Washington car. Good color, too. We didn’t know how good we had it in the ’90s with all the teal cars, not to mention all the other color choices.
So what do you think? Is the Volvo twice as much car as the Galant? Is the lack of information in the Galant ad enough of a red flag to make it a no-go? Or is it the bargain of the year?
That seems like an almost suspiciously low price for the Volvo. It looks a lot nicer inside and out. And I’m a sucker for headlight washer/wipers!
I rented a couple of Galants ~five years newer than this one and it just didn’t drive that well.
So, I’d probably price out what a new a/c condenser costs to source and install and go that route. I had a used Saab 9000 Turbo for a couple of years and it didn’t hurt me. I wouldn’t be afraid to go Swedish again.
Galant all the way. It’s over the 180k hump. Where the oil pump likes to go out. 99+ had a better look. But for what I’m sure is $1k maybe less I’ve seen worse.
They drive so well and are easy to work on with dirt cheap parts. Just strange electrical issues but that’s 90s Volvo middle name.
Volv-no today. Even with the vaunted Volvo rust resistance, 30 years is a lot of time for the tin worm to have tunneled underneath the great-looking skin. I traded in a car that looked great from 10 feet but couldn’t be put onto a lift due to the unibody frame rails being rusted away.
My wife had an ’01 Galant when we met. Milquetoast car, but was reliable and had the world’s best HVAC system in a vehicle. It could be -20F or 100F outside, didn’t matter, you’d be comfortable in 10 seconds.
It was also phenomenal in the snow. It had some skinny winter tires, no ABS, and decent ground clearance, plus that heater. I was tempted to keep it just as a winter beater when we bought her a ’14 Mazda3, but we sold it to a friend whose daughter totaled it a month later.
Mark I can’t believe you don’t inform us the Galant is at a BHPH lot but trying to pretend he’s not a dealer. You check out his profile he has posted 11 other vehicles for sale
Did you see how well the Volvo owner keeps up their house and yard? Volvo definitely gets my money.
It was close but Volvo due to the lack of words in the Galant ad. Fun fact the Galant plays a significant role in a few episodes of Mike and Molly.
I always use $1235 for minimum price to eliminate all the $1 and low down or low payment dealer ads
Galant for me. It’s cheaper to buy, likely cheaper to fix and it’s a better colour.
The way the upper door panels are turning to chalk suggests that the Swedes aren’t sure what to do with ultraviolet exposure. I want the Volvo more, but the saved $1400 would buy a few repairs on the Galant and God knows how much the Volvo may need in the future anyway. New floor mats and some shampooing would probably make the interior nicer than the Volvo, though you might just have to live with the warped airbag cover.
I like green anyway.
This is one time when being a northern car is a plus, the interior is much nicer than similar age Volvos in the south where sunlight and uv exposure has turned the interior to dust. I bought a 95 850 Wagon for my son when he was in college but that car stuck around our driveway for almost 10 years and practically became a member of the family. It was a very sad day when it was towed out of our driveway for good.
I could swear all those DSM cars from the 90s had a warped passenger airbag cover after age 5.
At first, I was thinking the Volvo is the better car to put any effort or money into. Then I thought, if you’re going to buy an 850, you might shop around for one in slightly better condition (I’m assuming some rust underneath, plus the AC repairs). The Mitsubishi is a decent used car these days.
Having suffered through owning a FWD Volvo, I’ll take a chance on Normal’s finest product.
I’m not so sure that these Galants were only available with the four – pretty darned certain I had this vintage Galant with a V6 as a rental for a particularly memorable high speed run from Denver to Northeastern Wyoming back in my Pacsoft days.
I think the usdm 7th gen cars only got the 4. But you could have had a 8th gen 99 built in 98 with a v6. It took Mitsubishi 3 model years to get the 8th gen to normal. They also look similar enough just the 8th gen less goofy.
Could be. That thing was a ripper too. Wikipedia says they both got the V6, but not which countries.
I’ve had a few of the gen 8. Both with the 4 and 6 they really will get up and go and have great dynamics especially for what they are. Feel really well planted to road.
And if you wanted to Voltron these two cars together, you could just get a Volvo first generation Volvo S40. It was a nice-ening up of the Mitsubishi Carisma.
Lots of Mitsubishi left for you to appreciate from the orthopedic seats.
They had actually a pretty innovative digital marketing campaign in 1999/2000 when sending that thing over here
The Volvo for three reasons. I’ve actually driven one with a rare manual swap in it, out of spite for the later generation Galants I had to practice on while working on my ASE’s, and because it looks better.
Galant is the better deal, but my sentimental heart yearns for the car I spent most of my formative years in. Volvo for me today
Just because the Galant seller doesn’t list any problems doesn’t mean there aren’t any.
I voted Volvo, although admittedly out of personal bias. My dad drove a mid ’90s 850 for about a decade and it was a nice car. It was a step above a typical sedan, but not too fancy. It was also very reliable – the only problem his car had in 150k+ miles was an annoying squeak from the dashboard. My dad is not known for treating cars well, is not diligent about maintenance, and is unfamiliar with the concept of a carwash. A car that can survive a decade of his ownership is a car I respect.
The Mitsubishi seems like a solid deal for the price, though. This is a car I am admittedly very biased against – I knew two people that owned similar vehicles, both of which went to the crusher with five digits on the odometer. Two bad Galants (both of which, I should add, were owned by certified cheap-asses who skimped on maintenance) does not mean all Galants are bad. Plus, my expectations are low for $1400, so this car only needs a few semi-reliable months to exceed expectations.
Was inclined toward the Ovlov because it’s a comfortable car, but the Mitsu is closer and not so rusty. Since it’s in Richland I’m bringing my Geiger counter though.
Holy Hanford, Batman!
I’ll spend a little more on the Volvo as long as a peek underneath doesn’t show severe rust. It looks like it has been better cared for and probably is much nicer to drive. For someone who needs the cheapest beater they can find though the Gallant is a good deal. You’ll come out ahead if it lasts even a year.
I’ll go with the Mitsu today for half the price. It is nice enough for $1400 and being a WA car, probably no rust. Hopefully everything works. But $1450 will cover the maintenance for a little while.
I generally like Volvos and if maintained, 150k is not too many miles. But the location concerns me as does the lack of working A/C, which of course would add to the overall cost to repair.
The Mitsu looks like a pretty good deal, and if the 2x difference were something more along the lines of 5K and 10K, then it would win. But it’s just a $1400 difference, and I’d pay that for the Volvo.
I still want a Volvo 850 but not that one. They’re getting hard to find in the Northeast without a ton of miles or all rusted out. Gotta assume that one is crusty underneath unless it came from somewhere else.
The Galant seems like a ridiculous deal.
Never buy a car from Michigan
My mom got a brand new 850 (in red) around the time I was born, and we kept it until 2003. I remember being allowed to ride up front when I was a kid, so I could watch the odometer tick over to 100k. Definitely going with the Volvo, even though I’d prefer red.
The last time I drove a Galant was when a friend in college wanted to buy a car for around $1k. It was riding on a temporary spare, every body panel was dented and it had bullet holes in it. You had to hold the steering wheel sideways to go straight, and it had a whole Christmas tree of warning lights on the dashboard. The brakes technically worked, and the exhaust was quite loud. And you could see where the core support was badly damaged and poorly repaired. Galants seem durable as hell but I’ve never wanted to own one.
Pre-Altima
I will mix it up a bit today and vote for the Mitsubishi. Don’t ask why.
Volvo, provided it’s not too crusty underneath. That boxy aesthetic holds up even after 30 years. The drooping lower dash trim on the driver’s side is a little concerning — what were they doing up in there when they broke off the tabs?
The Mitsu might be a solid car, but given the air freshener and the way some of the trim bits are yellowed, I’m getting smoker’s car vibes.
Mitsubishi due to the location today.