There are a lot of things that get cooler with age. Sadly, I don’t think I’m one of them, but fortunately, I don’t really care whether I’m cool or not. Which I’m told actually makes me cooler? I’m not sure how that works. The two cars we’re going to look at today were nobody’s idea of cool when they were new, but now that they’re old enough to have a midlife crisis, and there are so few examples of them left, they stand out.
On Friday, we looked at two cars that are inherently cool, no matter what age they are. I mean, come on: a Jet-Age Chrysler with a stick, and a mid-engine Toyota sports car? You couldn’t go wrong, in my book. The MR2 won, but quite a few of you yearned for a “both” option in the poll.
I get it. I think both of those cars could be a lot of fun. And while I think I’d have more fun driving the Chrysler – and it would look great parked next to my modern 300 – I’d rather own the more reliable MR2. So I’ll choose it as well, but by the narrowest of margins.
One of the things that I love about the Radwood phenomenon and the attention that 80s/90s cars are getting these days is that it’s a rising tide that lifts all boats. It’s not like the typical “classic car” scene where you get Corvettes, Mustangs, ’55-57 Chevys, ’32 Fords, maybe a Dodge Charger if you’re lucky, and precious little else. People aren’t just fawning over Countaches and 911s and Supras; Berettas and Cutlass Cieras are feeling the love as well. (Or is it “Cutlasses Ciera,” like “Attorneys General”?) The two cars we’re going to look at today were just simple family sedans back in the 80s, but they’d be absolute stars at a car gathering today. Let’s see which one you’d rather be seen in.
1984 Mazda 626 – $3,300
Engine/drivetrain: 2.0-liter OHC inline 4, three-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Odometer reading: 77,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives great
Mazda was slow in making the jump to front-wheel drive. Its compact GLC stayed rear-wheel-drive until 1981, and this FWD version of the 626 didn’t hit showrooms until 1983. It had staying power, though; the FWD 626 lasted nearly twenty years, through four generations, spawning turbocharged variants, hatchbacks equipped with four-wheel-steering, and even a sporty coupe that nearly became the next Ford Mustang.
This humble base-model 626 isn’t quite so exotic; it’s powered by a carbureted 2.0-liter four delivering all of 83 horsepower to the front wheels through a three-speed automatic. The automatic is unfortunate, because Mazda’s FWD manual shifters are excellent. On the plus side, it has only 77,000 miles on it, and the seller says it runs and drives great. Just don’t expect to get anywhere in a hurry. But if you’re important enough, they’ll wait, right?
Open the door of a modern car, and you’ll find black. Or maybe gray. But back in the 80s, if a car was blue on the outside, odds were good that it was blue on the inside as well. This old 626’s interior is simple, no-nonsense, and very, very blue. It has comfy-looking velour seats that are in good shape, and not much else. The windows and locks, and everything else, are manual, and I don’t think it has air conditioning. You forget just how basic a base-model car, even a mid-sized family car like this, used to be.
All the early 626s in the eastern two-thirds of the country rusted away years ago, so I bet quite a few of you haven’t seen one in ages. This one is particularly clean, even for California. It’s had two owners, and obviously they both had garages. I see a little scuff on the front bumper, and some of the black trim has faded to gray, but otherwise it looks really good.
1987 Nissan Maxima – $3,000
Engine/drivetrain: 3.0-liter OHC V6, four-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Salem, OR
Odometer reading: 297,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well, but could use some front-end work
This car was late in switching to front-wheel drive also, actually. Its predecessor rode out the name change from Datsun to Nissan with its rear wheels being driven by a straight six before this generation came along in 1985. It’s completely different from the old RWD Maxima, but it looks quite a lot like it; I have to take a second look every time I see an old Maxima to verify which version it is. It’s a problem that almost never happens anymore, of course; there aren’t a whole lot of these left.
Nissan is known now for stuffing big V6s in the front of its sedans, but this is where it all started. The VG30E V6 just barely fits in this engine bay, and doing repairs or maintenance on it, even a simple oil filter change, will make you utter words your grandmother wouldn’t like. However, it is reliable and durable: this one has nearly 300,000 miles on it and is still going strong. It’s showing its age in the front suspension, though; the seller says it could use some new bushings, and probably ball joints and tie-rod ends, too.
Inside, it’s so 80s that it could set the high score on Zaxxon. Nissan toned down the high-tech gadgets a bit in this generation; it doesn’t talk, and I don’t think I’ve ever seen one of these with a digital dash. This might also be the only car ever built with both button-tufted seats and automatic seat belts. The seller says everything works, but the HVAC system is stuck on defrost due to a broken control cable. Otherwise, it looks like it has held up very well over the years and miles.
I always forget how much chrome these had on them. Most Japanese and European cars at the time were shifting to black trim, but the Maxima has chrome for the window trim, grille, and door handles, like it’s a Buick or something. I do like the subtle two-tone paint, and it’s in good shape. The bumpers have been used a bit, but the rest of it looks all right.
The nice thing about these is that they’re both very reliable cars, and parts aren’t hard to find, so they’re not relegated to careful weekend jaunts like some old cars. You could use these every day. And they’re not even terribly expensive. One is plain, but simple and easy to work on, and the other has more bells and whistles, but needs a little work. Which one could find a home in your garage?
I don’t get the Radwood phenomenon. Sure, there are cool ’80s cars, but the cool:crap ratio is skewed compared to other decades. The rest of the ’80s wasn’t great either. The music was crap. The hair was too big. The clothes were bizarre. In general, aside from some great 8-bit video games (the NES is and will always be the best game system), there is little to like about that decade.
Given my lack of interest in anything ’80s, this is a neither day. For voting purposes, I went with the 626 as it has some appeal as a preserved ordinary car. It is interesting, if ugly. The Maxima has very little appeal. It looks good at first glance, but on closer inspection it is rough – I’m not even sure it qualifies as “preserved” in its present condition.
Both are preserved considering they are up and running and really have little right to still be doing so. nobody really keeps these old 4 doors unless maybe they were the last car a grandparent purchased and kept until they passed. And then some sentimental thing meant their kid kept them around to maybe give to a kid for college and then was told no. The rest of the time these tend to get crushed or drug tot he border to get a new lease on life in the the Maquiladora towns.
How old are you?
That was my question as well. I’m old enough to remember getting cable and when MTV came out, so I have a feeling our frame of reference is different.
And I will keep listening to REM, the Cure, New Order, Siouxsie, etc.
And the Cult, Echo, Soup Dragons, Depeche…
exactly; I’m trying to guess whether Boomer or Millennial cuz sure ain’t GenX!
Elder millennial. I’m in my early 40s. I lived through most of the ’80s, but I was young. I suspect I would have a greater appreciation for the ’80s if I was 10 years older. From what I have heard from Gen Xers, it sounds like the ’80s was fun.
What I’m confused about is the age of the Radwood crowd. I was briefly at a Radwood event and I saw a lot of people my age and younger. I can see why Gen Xers would appreciate the ’80s, but I genuinely have no idea why people my age or younger would.
Calling you out on diss’n 80 music. Here are a few notables that stand the test of time.
The Clash- London Calling
Rolling Stones – Tattoo You
Metallica – Kill Em All
Talking Heads – Remain in Light and Little Creatures
Paul Simon – Graceland
Pretenders – Pretenders
MJ – Thriller (Hate the artist…love the art)
REM – Murmur
Public Enemy – It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold Us Back
Replacements – Let it Be
The Police – Synchronicity
Lou Reed – New York
Guns and Roses – Appetite for Destruction
Roxy Music – Avalon
And…on November 15, 1986
BEASTIE BOYS – LICENCE TO ILL !!!!
Probably another 20 or so could be added.
You can pretend the music was good by calling out a few exceptions, but don’t forget that schlock like this ruled the airwaves:
“Up Where We Belong” by Joe Cocker & Jennifer Warnes
“Red Red Wine” by UB40
“Roll With It” by Steve Winwood
“Lady in Red” by Chris de Burgh
“Never Been to Me” by Charlene (and wow is that one BAD)
“Kokomo” by The Beach Boys
“Girl You Know It’s True” by Milli Vanilli
“We Built This City” by Starship
Don’t forget that the 80s put a knife into Chicago, Neil Young, Heart, Fleetwood Mac, Moody Blues, AND Paul Simon who puked up commercial nonsense in the 80s (call me Al my ass).
You can find total crap placed on vinyl during any decade. And regarding the knife…you could have the same fun with 60s trashing 50s beloved artists and 70s trashing 60s beloved artists…
Music in the 80s was a response to social malaise and corporate takeover of radio/record labels. Toss in an exposition of digital technology and you have a recipe for a totally different sound.
The punk movement started in the 70s as the first undercurrent of distain for corporate commercial music and social malaise. Elvis Costello’s “Radio Radio” was a perfect example of youth lashing out at the stats quo. All of the 80s crap you pointed out was exactly what the punk/new wave movement was railing at.
You have a point with some of those (The Clash, Metallica, Public Enemy, and Guns and Roses). I stand corrected.
I was mostly referring to the annoying ’80s pop crap I remember hearing on the radio.
Agreed….there was some total crap as well.
20? Maybe 2000
I’m glad I’m not the only one who did not care for the 80s. Grew up right through it and there’s not I look back on with happy memories. It felt like it was a time when things that a kid would see all got worse.
Cars got slower and uglier (with rare exception), homes, furniture, buildings, clothes, shoes all got worse. Everything was brown and beige, what was round turned square. The music felt really empty with a few bright spots; cheap synth took over, even The Commodores were done in and lost their horns.
The 90s felt refreshing by comparison. Things got colorful again, more playful, less ugly and less serious.
Have to disagree with you there, Mark. I was in college when this gen came out, and I really liked these. Nissan was advertising them as 4-door sports car from the get-go, emphasizing the use of the 300ZX engine.
WE drove the wheels off an 89 Maxima for a parts runner in the 90’s it was boxy but good. And this one is pretty clean considering the miles. but that is really why this one is a no-go for me. Besides the FWD, it is going to need stuff to keep going and I would not want to spend money on that thing.
Though to be honest a super low mile 80’s car likely also needs everything rubber replaced and the fuel system gone through. Good luck finding someone willing to do carb work on an 84 Mazda.
I had an aunt that had a 1st gen Maxima with the digital dash and the voice warnings (“your door is open”) that was the same two tone combo as the car above. She later traded it in for an Alfa Romeo Milano with the 3L V6 which she let me drive when I got my license. She kind of looked (and sounded) like Fran Dresher and had excellent taste in music.
Anyhow, I voted for the Mazda
Wanted to vote for the Nissan but not with maximum miles.
My thoughts exactly! I assumed I would pick the Nissan based on its V6 performance, but it’s a hard no with those miles. The 626 is cool, but slow.
Mazda. Only if I have to adjust the mirrors manually too. If we are diving into the past, let’s go all the way.
Going with the Mazda almost entirely on the mileage, with those seats helping a bunch. Something about the blue interiors in Japanese cars in the 80s/90s was just a little different.
I don’t hate the Nissan, but that’s a loooot of wear and tear to deal with.
My first ever new car was an ’84 626 2-dr coupe, with the 5-speed manual. At the time, coming out of a ’75 Chevy Monza, this car was sweet! The over-cam four was so smooth, shifter was quick and it had the adjustable shocks. Yeah, it only had 89 hp but was so fun to drive. Interestingly, the interior of my 84 was somewhat different that shown here. Mine had the buttons for headlights and some other controls located on the sides of the Tach/Speedo binnacle. Loved that car!
Yes! My first car was an ’83 manual coupe. The switches on the binnacle were so cool.
I had an 84 2-dr as well! Burgundy. Such a good car.
My dad used to have a 626 from the following generation, 1990 if I recall correctly. It looked a lot like this car but with more modern headlights. Nostalgia and condition put it over the Maxima for me. It’s slow, but you’re not buying it to go street racing.
The Mazda is the right choice, but I had to throw a nostalgia vote to the Maxima because my best friend’s parents got an ’85 when they first came out (from a 70’s Ford LTD wagon) and I thought it was the coolest upgrade ever.
My buddy’s dad had an 80’s Maxima with all the bells/whistles and manual transmission. I thought it was the coolest dad car imaginable.
The cassette player could skip tracks!
mindblown.gif
Fun 626 fact. These have unequal length lower control arms in the front suspension.
Tough choice here. My grandma had the wagon version of the Nissan for a while, and it has more power and gears … but blue interior and way less miles for the Mazda.
I picked the Mazda for the blue interior.
I’m young, and wasn’t around for the switch from RWD to FWD. Back in the day, how was this switch received? Did purists complain? Was it seen as inconsequential? There are many advantages to FWD, so I would assume the general population was on board, but I guess I don’t know. This was a pretty sizable shift in the auto-market, and yet it seems to have faded into history more-so than something like manual vs automatic transmissions.
I was a kid growing up through the transition. In the north east the switch was seen as a net positive, FWD was great in the winters. I do remember lots of folks complaining that GM made everything FWD, but I personally didn’t care, I drove old GM B bodies with RWD and thought anything FWD just felt modern!
I was a kid then so I didn’t have an informed opinion. But from the commercials it seemed like front wheel drive was considered a technological advancement in the same vein as fuel injection, steel belted radial tires and rack and pinion steering.
You also need to think that the FWD cars were clean sheet designs with all the latest technology. It wasnt just the FWD part, the new models were a substantial paradigm shift.
Compare a 1985 Buick LeSabre vs a 1986 LeSabre. The 1985 was body on frame, RWD, v8, carburator, solid rear axle, steering box, pitman arm, etc. Pretty much the same damn car Buick had been building since 1953.
The 1986 was unibody, more powerful and fuel efficient muli-port fuel injected V6, a foot shorter, 700lbs lighter, same interior volume, more precise rack and pinion steering, independent rear suspension. Basically the new car jumped ahead by 30 years tech wise.
Same thing with the fox body LTD vs the Taurus. Or a Plymouth Volare vs the K car.
There definitely were some RWD purists…”Oh, it’s FWD, what are you, a sissy?”
My recollection in a family of shade tree mechanics (with a brother who wrenched for a living) was that all of the things like FWD, fuel injection, electronic ignition, etc. were not received well simply because it was so against the norm that was the way cars were forever. So now you had to learn a whole new set of skills (and have a better understanding of electronics not to mention computers!) if you wanted to work on these more complicated cars. The other factor too was that the first cars with much of this new stuff were ‘foreign’ (distinctly there was a ‘foreign car repair’ shop in my hometown).
In 1987, Infiniti was still two years out so the Max was the top rung of luxury for Nissan here in the the states. It’s almost unfair to compare it to the pedestrian 626 – a sedan for people who simply needed a sedan. In this case, for what the Mazda lacks in options, it seems to make up for in overall condition. It’s a charming, simple car…yes, it is refreshing to see one again.
More gears in an auto the better. Maxi for me.
Just way too many miles on the Maxima. I don’t really want either but one must be chosen, and the Mazda it is.
Back in the 80’s I worked at a quick-lube and NOBODY wanted to do the oil filter on this generation of Maxima. It was behind the engine, under the blazing-hot exhaust manifold, with several hoses in the way. I was the only one who figured out a way to avoid massive forearm burns and earned a lot of favors by doing them on someone else’s bay.
Anyway, this Maxima has way too many miles compared to the creampuff Mazda.
Draping two clean shop towels over that manifold was my M.O.
We had a heat-resistant sleeve we’d put on. It helped, but fishing the drippy filter up through all the crap behind the engine was never fun. There was a heater hose, or a power steering line, or something that was right in the way. And if I recall right, there was just no spot underneath that it would fit through.
A girl I knew in high school had this or a similar Mazda. Same color. It was simply called, “The bitchin’ Mazda.” I’ll take Bitchin’ Mazda for 500 please, Alex.
I picked the Nissan, but I like both. And the ’87 Maxima wagon with a 5-Spd is where it’s at since I used to own a fully loaded one.
Automatic seatbelts. Ugh.
220,000 fewer miles???? Sold.
Yeah right? Those are the same miles you’re gonna get.
“This might also be the only car ever built with both button-tufted seats and automatic seat belts.”
Have you forgotten the Toyota Cressida?
I would opt for the Nissan if it had lower mileage – but the dials nearing 300K, the Goldbergian seatbelts, and its overall beigeness are my red flags.
I had an ’89 Mercury Tracer (Neé Ford Laser, aka Mazda 323) which had 82 hp from its fuel injected 1.6L. With its 5 speed it could be driven with alacrity – but saddling that power with the automatic and larger body I’m certain would be snooze inducing.
It’s probably due for a new timing belt – but I’ll take the blue 626 anyway.
Gimme that classic 4DSC!! Wish it had a stick, but it’s going to be much more comfortable and usable everyday than the 626.
Wrong gen, the next Maxima was the 4DSC.
They weren’t terribly sporty at this point – more like a cross between euro styling and American tufted luxury
If the Maxima was an order of magnitude closer in mileage and wear to the Mazda, that’s how my vote would have gone, but the price is too high for a vehicle that needs the front end rebuilt.
Ordinarily and despite my history with Mazdas I’d pick the Maxima for the bells and whistles and cylinders, but it has a lot more miles. But if the Mazda really doesn’t have air conditioning installed, I guess that evens things out some. I guess I could reconnect the HVAC mode selector and steam clean those seats,
That era of Maxima is a fine example of why we need Nissan to survive.
It’s really a shame that an entire generation knows only the post Renault “alliance” Nissan. They really made some great cars prior, and their engineering was on par with their competition.
“post Renault “alliance” Nissan…” i see what you did there (Viva AMC!)
I remember these from high school. That Nissan was a Luxury car back when new. Also the Mazda with 83 horsepower shows that 300hp/L is fun but not necessary.
I think that I would go with the Mazda for and extra $300 for 220K fewer miles.