I’m always amazed by the sheer variety of cars you can find when looking at the cheap end of the market. Depreciation is the great equalizer, hitting higher-priced cars harder than cheaper ones as it tends to do, so you can find some wildly different vehicles for the same price. This week, I’m going to find cars that don’t have anything in common except the asking price.
Last week, we looked at old and new examples of cars from the same manufacturer, and we finished up on Friday with a pair from Lotus. Neither car was perfect, but they were both presentable, and in good mechanical shape. You couldn’t really go wrong with either of them, if a simple, visceral sports car experience is what you’re after. The old Elan won a very close race, making the score 3-2 in favor of the old cars for the week.


I’m not sure which way I’d go on these, to be honest. I love the Elan’s styling, but I think I have enough cantankerous old British cars in my life. And I’ve never owned a mid-engined car before. But the Elise is really hard to get in and out of. I guess I’d choose the Elise, and plan to send it on its way when my bad hip finally says enough.
Huh, weird – I just noticed that the vote totals are the same numbers as the bore and stroke of a Chevy 350 V8: 4.00 by 3.48 inches. Does anybody else’s brain immediately pick up on car-related numbers like that when you see them out of context? I sure hope I’m not the only one.
Anyway, let’s move on. Pricing a used car is a tricky business. I have never been much good at it; I set a price for something I think is fair, and the car languishes for sale for ages. I ask a price that seems high to me, and I’m inundated with messages, and someone snaps it up immediately. Whatever price you set, someone will always say it’s way too high, and someone else will think it’s the deal of the century. What’s fun is that for any given price, you can find a massive variety of vehicles, and some will seem too expensive, and some too cheap. These two weren’t the only cars I found for $4,900, not by a long shot, but they’re the two that went together the least. So they’re what we’re going to look at.
1992 Buick Skylark Gran Sport – $4,900

Engine/drivetrain: 3.3 liter OHV V6, three-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Anderson, IN
Odometer reading: 62,000 miles
Operational status: I assume it runs and drives just fine
Here’s a car my grandfather would have loved. He would only drive one make and model of car: the Buick Skylark. He had a blue ’72 coupe when I was little, which was replaced by a brown ’78 coupe, and then a white ’82 sedan that was his last. But he told me once that the ’72 was his favorite, because of the style. I wouldn’t have guessed he cared about style at all, gruff retired firefighter that he was, but I think he would have liked this second-generation N-body Skylark. It doesn’t look much like the ’72 model, but it has a similar attitude.

This is the Gran Sport model of the Skylark, with less chrome, bigger wheels, and more power. It’s powered by a 3.3 liter version of Buick’s 90 degree V6, basically a smaller-displacement cousin to the beloved 3800. The only transmission available on the Skylark in 1992 was GM’s three-speed TH-125C automatic, which isn’t very grand, or sporting, but at least it’s reliable. I can’t tell you how well this one runs, because there is absolutely no description in the ad, not a single word. It’s running in the photo above; I can tell by the blur of the alternator fan, but that’s all I know. I assume that for this price, it runs and drives flawlessly.

GM took to heart the complaints about the X and J-body cars all looking alike except for the badges, and made sure that the N-bodies had distinct characters. The Skylark, Pontiac Grand Am, and Oldsmobile Achieva all share a platform, but they have different sheetmetal, and unique interiors. The Skylark is uncharacteristically swoopy for a Buick. Too swoopy for traditional Buick buyers, as it turns out; a refreshed design in 1996 toned things down considerably. This one looks like it’s in decent shape inside, with just a little wear and tear.

Not everyone likes the styling of this car, but I do. It’s dramatic and unique. But it only works as a two-door; the four-door sedan version looks like ass. And the Gran Sport looks better than the standard model, with its two-tone paint and red accents. It’s in lovely shape, and I bet it would be a hit at car gatherings. You almost certainly won’t see another one like it.
2002 Porsche Boxster – $4,900

Engine/drivetrain: 2.7 liter DOHC flat 6, five-speed automatic, RWD
Location: San Francisco, CA
Odometer reading: 65,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
The 911 has been Porsche’s flagship model for six decades now, and it has only gotten fancier and more expensive over the years. Periodically, Porsche has introduced a lower-priced model to lure buyers into the showroom: first was the 912, then the 914, then the 924, which evolved into the 944. All noble efforts, but none stuck around for the long term. In the mid-1990s, Porsche finally got its entry-level model right, with the mid-engined Boxster.

The Boxster has its engine just behind the seats, a 2.7 liter flat six making a little over 200 horsepower. Obviously, considering it’s a Porsche, you’d really want a manual gearbox, but an automatic was available, and unfortunately that’s what this one has. You can slap the gearshift lever side-to-side to activate the “Tiptronic” manual shifting capability, but it’s just not the same. On the upside, the seller says it runs and drives very well, and just passed a smog test. There is no word, however, on whether the Boxster’s Achilles heel – the dreaded failure-prone intermediate shaft bearing – has been taken care of yet. It’s a question you should probably ask.

This Boxster has only 65,000 miles on it, which is probably why it’s so clean inside. There’s a little wear in the leather on the driver’s seat, but that’s all. I’ve driven a Boxster (a proper manual one, though) and I can tell you that this interior is quite a nice place to be. The seats are comfy, and the driving position is just about perfect.

It looks great outside, too, with nice shiny paint, but why does it have to be silver? I know, silver is the traditional German racing color, and it has been used on some very famous Porsche racing cars, but it’s overdone at this point. And we all know that the Boxster is available in some way better colors.
So, you’ve got just a little under five thousand dollars of fake internet money burning a hole in your pocket. There are lots of choices out there, but today I’m limiting you to these two: a flashier-than-average GM coupe, and a German roadster with the wrong transmission. Your reasons for choosing one over the other are your own, but choose you must.
That Buick is very nice for what it is and could win many SBSs, but I just can’t justify it over a real darn mid engined Porsche that actually runs and looks clean.
I haven’t looked yet, but I can’t imagine that there is anything that would make me pick a buick over a porche.
A Buick GNX vs a base model Porsche 914?
The Porsche is about 5 grand under the going rate from what I can find, even in a undesirable color/trans combination. I’m betting it’s almost certainly some kind of scam. Title-washed salvage, engine filled with 50-weight oil to quiet the bearing knock, or maybe the ever popular, “We’ll meet behind the abandoned warehouse, make sure to bring cash and come alone” kind of scam.
I can’t believe I’m saying this but I’ll take the ugly pointy nose Buick because I’m less likely to die during or after the transaction.
I see rough boxsters for 5k all the time.
I feel like every time you turn the key to start that Porsche and move the shifter into drive, a little bit of your soul would die. Whereas, climbing into that deep red interior, the Buick would feel like you were in a special survivor.
There’s something terribly wrong with that porsche….. (other than a tragic transmission), but I think I’d still take it over the Buick. This is a close one, though.
Today is the day I pick a Buick over a Porsche and I would never have guessed this day would come.
I know there are no “cheap Porsches”, the auto is a bummer, so is the silver color. I’ve never been a big Porsche fan anyway, short of 80s 911’s and 944’s.
At least the Buick should make a decent appliance.
They both have the wrong transmission, but I think you’d feel more disappointment in the Boxster having the wrong transmission than you would the Buick. And I like the way those Skylark coupes looked. I think that while the Boxster is certainly a “better” car to drive, the Buick is going to be less of a disappointment, as well as a nice casual cruiser that’s hell a cheap to keep running. Also, and I never thought I’d be saying this about a transverse V6, the spark plugs are going to be the easier of the two to change in the driveway.
There’s nothing more expensive than a cheap expensive car, I’ve seen what some people have to deal with on those Porsches and simple things become engine-out jobs at a specialty shop or dealer. Plus, driving a Porsche with a slushbox would just make me sad.
I’m leaning into the slush with the Buick. Comfortable, cheap parts, easy to work on at home, and no illusions about performance.
I don’t care as much about the fact that the Boxter is automatic as I do about the front end of the Skylark. I haven’t liked it since the first day I saw it, and that opinion hasn’t mellowed over the years. The Boxter is in great shape, and shaft-bearing-be-damned, it would be a hell of a lot more fun than the Buick in every way possible.
Only one of these lets me put the ‘My other car is a Porsche’ sticker on my daily driver.
Sure, an automatic makes it as fun as having sex with 15 condoms on, but you’re still having sex. The Buick and the concept of having sex are in different counties….or decades, depending on the audience you attract.
A handful of N-body enthusiasts might get excited, but is that the kind of excitement you want?
To say nothing of taillight enthusiasts…