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.
The Porsche seems suspiciously cheap to me, my Boxster is a Manual, in a better color, and the IMS bearing has been addressed but $5k normally only buys a shell or an absolute beater. This has a title and runs, so I guess I would add it to the fleet since I can already do the IMS myself.
A reasonably good Boxster for under 5K? Is that where the market is now?
I’d rather vote for your grandpa’s old ’72 Skylark.
This same skylark was on barn finds a few weeks ago. Its really cute, I had a ’93 Grand Am GT same vintage, was a great car (stick).
That said I voted for the boxter, can flog that around till it dies.
I went with the Buick, not because I’d actually rather have it than the Boxster, but because I have a red, manual Boxster, and it would hurt my feelings to snap up a monochromatic one with an automatic transmission from an “in-between” year (It has the updated as of 2001 2.7L with drive by wire and a single-row IMS, but doesn’t feature the interior facelift of 2003, with a glovebox, power frunk and double-layered convertible top assembly with a defrosted glass rear window), whether it be an addition or a replacement.
The grass, perpetually greener on the other side, is that much more verdant when you’re leaning over the fence to sniff it. I’d rather take a step back from the property line and lay down on my dried-up dandelions, unable to see over the fence.
But beyond that, it’s a mathematical matter – $5k is top dollar for a Buick, and that seems to be a top example, but the same amount is bottom dollar for a Boxster, and while that one seems alright and has the right mileage, I’d be worried about *why* it’s so cheap, other than the automatic transmission. For my imaginary dollars, I’d rather have the best N-Body in town than a sub-optimal Boxster.
I thought the Skylark would take the win because I expected there would be something glaringly wrong with the Boxster at that price. It looks like the main problem is that it’s not a particularly desirable configuration. I’ll take the car for what it is and enjoy cruising in the sun. It will still be more fun than something like a Sebring or Solara convertible. The Skylark is a cool survivor but not something I have any interest in owning.
I would Radwood the Buick.
Boxster, please!
Yes, it’s an automatic. Yes, IMS, blah, blah.
But it’s a 5-speed automatic and [when running] the car will always make flat-6 noises. It will go around corners quite well – certainly far better than the Buick will. It also does not have an unpleasantly red interior.
tl;dr – kinda-sporty beats sleepy
I do kinda like the offbeat styling of the Buick, and it appears to be turn-key ready for the next Radwood meet. But even with a slushy-box, the Porsche will be 30x more fun to drive and the enthusiast community should provide more than enough support to keep it running for the next 10-20+ years.
Alas, the Porsche is going to BEAK run away with this one even though BEAK Skylark is destined to be a modern classic BEAK someday thanks to its unconventional styling BEAK and I personally would rather drive something that bizarre BEAK than a Porsche that looks like a jellybean with eggs on BEAK its face. All I’m say BEAK is gimme the Skylark and I’ll BEAK take that thing to Cars & Coffee and hang out with the other weird car people. BEEEEEEAAAAAAAAKKKKKK.
BEAK
Am I the only one here who always loved BEAK?
The Buick is just to weird not to like. (And the Oldsmobile whosie-whatsie* from the same era has the same attributes.).
The Boxster is, well, just another Boxster with a fucking automatic. Who buys that new, anyway?
Skylard (not a typo) for me.
*Undah Achieva
All rational thought says the Buick would be infinitely easier to live with but my heart says Porsche.
A less desirable modern Porsche for less than $5,000 is still a Porsche for less than $5,000…and this one still has a mid mounted flat 6 even though it’s saddled to the less desirable transmission.
This is as close as I’ll get to owning a Porsche. Maybe I’ll get lucky and it will blow up at the end of the test drive and save me the heartache of owning it.
I’m going Buick on this one! SC 3.8 swap for some surprise fun!
That Skylark is clean, but it’s not a $5K Boxster.
Yes, the Porsche is an auto, so what? The Skylark will always be an N-Body. As novel as it is, it’s still a poor adaptation of the early ’70s A-body styling to a 20-years-newer compact platform. Yep, dramatic, but in the same way as a ransom note created by cutting letters out of magazines. And the cheap, cheap, cheap appearance of that rear wheelarch and terrible body gaps just…
Look, the Boxster is 5 grand.
And it’s a Boxster.
Why are we debating this?
I am fully with you on this. The only N-body worthy of $5k is the Oldsmobile with the Quad4 W41 attached to a Getrag 5-speed in the Cutlass Cialis (lol) or Achieva SCX.
Cutlass FTW. Achieva was also kinda poorly realized.
“Hey, let’s throw away 30 years of name equity and make the car worse…”
~time passes~
Where has our market share gone? How dare those competitors deliver higher-quality, better-designed cars for the same price!
The Boxster is deceptively cheap. I’m guessing imminent IMS bearing failure. I’ll still take it.
Exactly my opinion also!
Seems like the perfect opportunity to address and manual swap it.
Porsche. Drive it until it explodes, then strip it for parts..
Maybe I’m still in a pre-Covid mindset, but $4900 for that Buick, even in terrific shape, seems outrageous.
The Buick is overpriced IMO. Not all old cars get to become classics. It makes me think of the AMC Ambassador that Regular Car Reviews looked at a few years ago. It’s in fantastic shape for its age and has some interesting traits from a bygone era, but that doesn’t make it much more valuable than any other clean car from 1992.
Had to go with the Boxter, just to be a mate to my 2018 Cayman (that has about 100 HP+ from it’s torbo flat-four).
A few years ago, one of my best friends bought a Boxster of this generation with an automatic and more miles on it for like ten grand more than this one’s listed price. This makes me deeply suspicious.
OTOH, what could possibly go wrong with a 30-year-old Buick?
This Skylark may be one of the worst-looking cars ever to wear the badge, but we’ll take it anyway.
Definitely a both day for me, but I clicked the button for the Porsche. Having said that, I really think the automatic would annoy the hell out of me, and the Buick would be more enjoyable most of the time. I probably made the wrong call
I voted Buick because the Porsche is too good to be true. The seller wants thrice the price for the cheapest one in my country, and while it’s a manual, it’s also from 1998 and has 100k miles.
Driving a Porsche with an automatic is like having sex with 15 condoms on.
The 3.3 has most of the 3800’s virtues, and was a great motor in the Ns and As of this era. And yeah, you gotta love how different this looks from the Pontiac and Olds versions. Buick all the way.
I think PDK is valid and I won’t knock anyone who goes for it. But pre PDK Porsche autos are indeed like wrapping your willy 15 times…
Porsche but I will need another $4900 fake internet money for the first repair.
I’ve been told if you can’t afford a new Porsche, you can’t afford a used Porsche.
“The best thing to do is pay it off during the warranty period and then keep pocketing your now freed up payment money to pay for repairs.”
It’s kind of like daycare – when you start out, the rates for infants are higher than the rates for older kids, but they tell you it will be cheaper as the kid gets older. What that doesn’t account for is inflation, and the rates go up so by the time your kid ages to the next room, it costs just about as much as the original infant rate. So whatever you pay for your infant, expect to pay all the way until the kid starts school. Porches are supposedly like that, except they never get to kindergarten.
None the less, I voted for the Boxer :-). That GM abomination does nothing for me.
I feel like there has to be something deeply wrong with the Poorsche to be that cheap, so I went with the oddball Buick.
I was wondering who the 1 buick vote was from. I understand your logic. But I’m going be optmistic this time, because this is the only way I’d ever get to buy a porche.