It’s not uncommon for an auto manufacturer to alter a car’s appearance by just adding stuff onto the bodywork, nor is it uncommon for the aftermarket to step in and add stuff if the manufacturer decides not to. Today’s cars don’t have a whole lot in common, but they do share one feature: a big-ass rear spoiler. One came with it from the factory, and one had it added on later.
On Friday, we looked at two fun little cars with different functions, but the same spirit. There was a lot of love for both of them in the comments, and you all seemed to agree there was no bad choice. But in the end, “Miata Is Always The Answer” remains true.
I’d be happy with either of them, but as a couple of commenters pointed out, a good Miata is still not that hard to find, even if they aren’t as cheap as they once were. This one is a good deal, but not a great one, and if I wanted another Miata I think I might keep shopping. But when was the last time you saw a decent two-door soft-top Tracker for sale? I think if presented with these two options, I’d leave with the Tracker, just because of the novelty of it.
Generally speaking, I prefer most cars in their base trim, without all the spoilers and cladding and ground effects of the higher trims. Most of them look better that way. But I also have a weakness for completely pointless rear spoilers, and for cheesy aftermarket “body kits.” For your amusement and consideration today, I have a couple of two-door coupes that have absolutely no need of any potential extra downforce from their rear spoilers, whichever way they obtained them. Let’s check them out.
1986 Ford Thunderbird Turbo Coupe – $4,200
Engine/drivetrain: Turbocharged 2.3 liter OHC inline 4, five-speed manual, RWD
Location: Berea, OH
Odometer reading: 41,000 miles (but odometer is broken, so not accurate)
Operational status: Runs and drives, but needs cooling system work
In the 1980s, turbocharging was all the rage. Ford went all-in on a turbocharged variant of its 2.3 liter four-cylinder, and offered it basically across the board in Fox-body cars. The newly-restyled 1983 Thunderbird put an emphasis on sporty driving instead of luxury like the previous generation, and the turbocharged engine fit that mission perfectly. It even came with a manual transmission, which hadn’t been seen in a Thunderbird in years.
This is the non-intercooled version of the 2.3 turbo, making only 155 horsepower, which is sadly still a little more than the V8 available in other models. The transmission is a Borg-Warner T5 five-speed, and the rear axle has a limited-slip differential. This one has been sitting a while, and the seller has done quite a lot of work to wake it up, but the cooling system still needs attention before you drive it too far. At the minimum, new hoses and a radiator flush are necessary.
You won’t find a velour bench seat or a column-mounted gearshift in this car like you might expect; instead, this car has nice leather bucket seats with lots of adjustments, and all the power doodads the ’80s had to offer. The seller says the power windows don’t work, which is probably why the driver’s side door panel is off. The odometer has stopped, so the seller doesn’t know how many miles are actually on it, but with a car this old it really doesn’t matter.
Outside, it’s faded unevenly, like it was parked outside in the same spot for a long time. All the black plastic is now gray, and the paint has seen better days. It has an aftermarket body kit including front and rear spoilers, headlight covers (though it looks like one is missing), and a truly hideous grille insert. But if it really does only have forty-something miles on it, and it sat for a long time, there’s a good chance it isn’t rusty underneath.
1991 Pontiac Grand Am LE – $2,995
Engine/drivetrain: 2.5 liter OHV inline 4, three-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Wadsworth, OH
Odometer reading: 77,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
If you’re going to call yourself GM’s “Excitement Division,” you had better deliver. Pontiac talked a good game, and had a few certified bangers in the performance department, but it also made a whole lot of ordinary cars that weren’t particularly exciting at all. The N-body Grand Am was available with a turbocharged engine and Oldsmobile’s twin-cam Quad 4 at various times, but most of them settled for significantly less. This one is equipped exactly like the driver’s ed cars at my high school.
Pontiac’s “Iron Duke” inline 4 has its roots back in the 1970s, first in the rear-wheel-drive Sunbird, but eventually found in Jeeps, pickups, Firebirds, and Camaros too–not to mention a hundred thousand postal vans. In the ’80s, it was turned sideways for FWD use, given throttle-body fuel injection, and renamed the Tech IV. Nobody loves this engine, but millions of drivers relied on it for decades, and it rarely let anyone down. As is nearly always the case, this one is bolted to an automatic transmission. It runs just fine, and the seller just had a new battery put in.
With a GM car from this era, when you open the door, there are no surprises. The color palette may vary, but if you have ever spent any time in one, you know exactly how this car’s interior feels, sounds, and smells. This one is in nice condition, as you would hope from its low mileage. It’s a pretty basic Grand Am, without power windows or locks, but that’s just fewer things to go wrong. It does have air conditioning, but it “needs a charge.”
This was originally a Kentucky car, and the seller hasn’t driven it in the winter since purchasing it, so it’s unlikely there’s any rust hiding under that trademark Pontiac plastic body cladding. Pontiac was in its monochrome era in 1991, so the cladding is the same color as the paint, unlike earlier two-tone Grand Ams. The grille doesn’t match, however; it looks like a replacement from a junkyard. A can of white touch-up paint would make it look a whole lot better.
Some cars, like the Ferrari F40 or the Plymouth Superbird, need their gigantic rear spoilers for stability at speed, but I think a Thunderbird and a Grand Am could get along without them just fine. But would they still feel the same? Would I still have singled out these two cars from the sea of ads on Craigslist and brought them to your attention? Who knows? All I know is it’s now up to you to choose between the kinda-high-performance car with the aftermarket spoiler, or the rental-spec car cosplaying as the sporty version.
The ‘Bird Coop was going to be picked and then I realized the Pontiac would be less work and I could gift it to the grand children with only some two sided tape work, they could not say no to a GRAND MA.
An iron duke with an automatic… oof.
First car baby brother bought for himself was a used ’88 Tbird V6. I’d go for a stick T/C in a heartbeat. Interior looks great for the age, and it’s a Fox Body – lots of options!!! Gotta find a factory grille though to replace that abomination.
T-Bird is a rust bucket – no way I”m paying $4200 for a rusty car with cooling issues.
The Pontiac is a no-go with no A/C. Likely needs a few grand to get back to running condition. (Which is why it is for sale)
EDIT: On a positive note – I REALLY wanted this gen T-Bird when I was in high school in the 90’s. There were a few for sale but I couldn’t come up with the money.
I have to go T-bird (The 1983 Ford in my username is one), but not at that price. I just picked up a running, driving, not too rough 1983 TC for $1500. The VENT WINDOW doors will go on my car (been looking for YEARS), and the drivetrain (with some upgrades) will end up in my Ranger. I would probably pay that for a well equipped ’87-’88 model, though.
And, I never was a fan of the aftermarket grilles for these cars (this one especially), but I don’t have any problem with the wing or the ultra-80’s headlight covers.
Hmm – row-your-own turbo ThunderChicken vs. Iron Puke mit 3spd autotragic. Not much of a contest there – bird me up.
I’d say it’s over-priced, but $5K is the new $1500 – inflation is a bitch.
LOL that T-bird is crackhead priced, 4200 and barely runs and needs lots of work
The white car is in better shape at a better price.
Yeah, had same thought. There are no winners today but you can choose less of a loser. 🙂
This is a tough one. There’s a bigger performance upside of the T-Bird, but I’ve always hated the way that generation looked. And that one in unevenly faded gold and chalky plastic ain’t helping. Plus, working on that old 80’s turbo stuff looks like an absolute nightmare.
Screw it. Just give me the mouse-fur lined Pontiac.
My mom had a similar Grand Am except it was maroon without the spoiler.It really wasn’t a bad car.It survived 2 teenage boys and a bunch of Pennsylvania winters.That Turbo Bird just seems too ratty.
I do like the Thunderbird, but it’s a little high for a project. Equally priced to the Pontiac, I’d have gone the other way, but the Grand Am is the better deal.
Going with the T Bird just because it has leather and all the options.
I like the look of the Grand Am better but the T bird drivetrain wins it for me.
I’m not sure I’d want either, but I was pleasantly surprised at the interior condition of the ‘bird. There is probably potential there if you want to spend money. The Grand Am is probably ok if you just want something 80’s and play metal on the tape deck and drive around for sh*ts & giggles. I actually like pre-facelift Grand Am’s better, with their more blunt nose and sealed-beams. EDIT: I forgot to point out the vent windows in the bird. Ford was the last to offer them (in cars, Panther till 91 I think.) These were definitely an option, don’t really recall seeing many, and on this car especially by then they would have been considered old-fashioned and incongruous with the aero profile of the car.
IMHO, rare T-bird. That wins all day everyday.
I’ve driven both models and the handling dynamics of the T-bird are a level above the Grand Am. The T-bird engine was way better to drive too. Neither engine was praised for longevity.
Shitbox showdown is living up to its name today.
I was never a fan of that generation of Thunderbird. I knew two people who drove these in high school and both of them were contemptible assclowns. I’m sure there are good things about this generation of Thunderbird, but to me, they are inexorably linked to assclownery. This particular car isn’t even nice. I appreciate the seller’s honesty in highlighting the flaws of this vehicle in the original ad, but between the rust, removed door panel, faded paint, and mechanical issues, you would be out of your mind to pay anywhere near $4,200 for this car.
I’m not overly fond of the Grand Am either. I knew a guy in high school who drove a ’91 Grand Am. He was good people, but the car was utter garbage. It broke constantly, and ended up getting sent to the crusher with 70k miles on the clock. The car also had several rust holes beneath the plastic cladding. This was in the late 90s, so the car wasn’t even old. His car might be the exception, but it was such a POS that I don’t think I could ever see this car in a positive light.
Obviously, this is a neither day for me. For voting purposes, though, I went with the Pontiac. It is cheaper and in better condition than the Ford; it also helps that I don’t associate it with high school jackasses.
I can’t believe I went for the FWD, naturally aspirated automatic here today, but that T-Bird has been beat hard with the ugly stick and I just don’t want anything to do with a car that someone thought looked good like that. I have also always had an unnaturally strong hatred of these T-birds. It’s the better car, but I went Grand Am anyway today.
Don’t really like either option, but I’m going to have to go for the Thunderturkey. Fix up all the bad stuff on it, then add back in an intercooler, and give it a light tune… Shouldn’t be too difficult to get this dynoing at 200hp.
At the end of the day, it wouldn’t be too hard to swap a Mustang’s 5.0 in there from the era.
My brother had an SVO in high school, thay 2.3 turbo can be pretty fun. This should be an easy choice rwd, 5 speed manual , limited slip, turbo vs fwd, 3 speed auto, naturally aspirated. How is this even close.
The price. No way that T-Bird is worth $4K.
I’d rather over pay for a car I could have some fun with than over pay for a car that I would resent everything about.
The correct answer today was neither.
If neither was an option it would be the “correct” answer most days. These are shit boxes after all. Then this would be any fun
Thunderbird for me. It’s a Fox-body Ford underneath. And that means parts/service is plentiful. And I’m curious about those headlight covers and body kit it had.
Plus, it’ll be more interesting to drive and has more potential than that Grand Am with the Iron Duke mated to a slushbox. People have gotten a lot of power out of that Ford OHC 2.3L engine and has been used a lot in racing
https://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/grm/lets-build-a-23-lima-screamer-for-cheap/178154/page1/
Also, judging by how poorly the passenger headlight fit, it looks like the Grand Am was in some sort of collision and poorly repaired. Clean title? All that means is the collision wasn’t reported.
tough choice for some. the Turbo Coupe has most of what you might want and then some with that odd body kit, but it is not the 1987 with a bullet nose and NACA scoops from the factory. I guess in this case it really depends on what you intend to do with the car. The Poncho is the perfect winter beater in my opinion. The T-Bird has a lot of better things about it, but it needs to go to an enthusiast of that era t-bird and I am not that person.
The Grand Am is the perfect example of the sort of car that was EVERYWHERE and is now just never seen. I love well preserved examples of mediocre cars.
Grand Am for nostalgia purposes only. For some reason a ton of my friends owned Grand Am/Beretta/Cavaliers at one point, probably because we were young and they were cheap. Actual ownership purposes I’m skipping both.
Meh-car Monday indeed
Gross, not a fan of either. Not the Tbird at that price. Not the Pontiac in that configuration.
I’m probably in the minority, but I’m going Pontiac because it cheaper and spend the difference on other projects.