Good morning! It’s time once again to look at a couple of terrible automotive ideas. Today, we have a couple of once-cute little hatchbacks that are currently screwed six ways from Sunday. But they’re cheap enough to pick up as projects. First, however, let’s finish Friday’s second-chance battle:
I expected as much. Those Porsches were all pretty cool, and despite having the little engine, I think the yellow one was the best of the lot. Personally, I like all three of these.
Today’s cars don’t need a second chance as much as they need a miracle. One has been sitting for four decades, and the other has been mauled in a ham-fisted attempt to “fix” it. And both were kind of disposable cars to begin with. But I think they’re both cool, or at least they would be if they were running, so I’d like to see someone tow them home and save them. (It can’t be me; my wife would kill me.) Besides, you know what they say about lost causes, right? So let’s check these two basket cases out and see which one is worth fighting for.
Oh, and a hat-tip to Sam Blockhan over on Opposite Lock, and the good folks at the Underappreciated Survivors group on Facebook, for alerting me to these gems. I’m beginning to feel a little like Fagin with my own band of street urchins going out and finding cars for me. (“You’ve got to pick a shitbox or two, boys…“)
1976 Fiat 128 1300 Hatchback – $1,000
Engine/drivetrain: 1.3 liter overhead cam inline 4, four-speed manual, FWD
Location: Davis, CA
Odometer reading: 61,000 miles
Runs/drives? Not for 40 years
What we have here is a piece of automotive history. You know how practically every automaker builds front-wheel-drive cars with transverse engines with the transaxle next to the engine? All of them have the Fiat 128 to thank for that layout. [Editor’s Note: Actually, I think I might give that prize to the Autobianchi Primula! It came out in 1964 with this layout! – JT] It wasn’t the first transverse-engine front-wheel-drive car; that was the Mini, but the Mini’s gearbox was mounted under the engine and used engine oil for lubrication; the 128’s gearbox sat next to the engine and used its own oil, like every transverse front-drive setup since, including – ironically – the new Mini.
The 128’s engine was designed by legendary Ferrari engine designer Aurelio Lampredi, who has one of the greatest names in all of automotive engineering. It’s a single-overhead-cam design with a particularly short timing belt replacement interval, only 30,000 miles. By that reckoning, this 128 is slightly overdue for its third timing belt, but I think that’s the least of its worries.
This car has been sitting since 1983, and outdoors, from the looks of it. Luckily, it’s in California, where not even a ’70s Fiat rusts too badly. It’s a tiny bit crispy around the edges, but 128s in other parts of the country (and world; these were popular everywhere) crumbled to dust decades ago.
Could this forlorn little Fiat be saved? Sure! But it won’t be easy. The engine is probably toast, but the 128 engine was also used in the X1/9 and the Yugo, both of which have more of a following than the 128 itself. Parts aren’t terrible to find as a result. It could be done. I don’t have high hopes for it, but I have such fond memories of my dad’s 128 that I hate to see one like this.
1987 Plymouth Turismo Duster – $1,200
Engine/drivetrain: 2.2 liter overhead cam linline 4, three-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Harrodsburg, KY
Odometer reading: 48,000 miles
Runs/drives? It did before somebody took the carb apart
I have a personal connection to this car as well, but not quite as nostalgic. My brother’s first car was a Turismo Duster. It met its demise in Chicago traffic when it caught fire at a stoplight. Fuel leak from the carburetor, I suspect. The Holley 2-barrel carbs on these old Chrysler 2.2s have been known to leak, and because the intake and exhaust are on the same side of the head, dripping fuel lands right on the exhaust manifold, and poof.
That could be why the seller of this car has taken the carb off and had it rebuilt. But why, if you go through all that trouble, wouldn’t you reassemble the car and get it running? Something else is going on here. It also sounds like they’ve swiped the battery for some other car, so besides reinstalling the carb, at the very least, you’ll need a battery.
On the plus side, look at these seats! They look almost as clean as when this car rolled off the assembly line in 1987. I seem to recall these bucket seats being quite comfy, as well. Good thing, too; even once you get this car running, the sluggish response from the three-speed automatic means you’ll be sitting in those seats trying to get somewhere for a while.
The paint on the hood is shot, and looks like it might be heat-damaged; could this car have suffered a minor engine fire as well? The seller isn’t saying, only that it ran before they took it all apart.
Yeah, I know. Neither, right? Look, just pick one. Tomorrow we’ll do cars that, you know, run and drive and all that. These two caught my eye today, so they’re what you’ve got: the progenitor of several decades of front-wheel-drive cars, and one of its progeny, a sporty Mopar coupe with a catchy jingle. What’ll it be?
(Image credits: Fiat – Craigslist seller; Plymouth – Facebook seller)
Thanks guys, now I’m going to have the Cocaine Factory Duster song in my head all day.
That popped into my head immediately!!
I picked the Duster because I don’t wanna be sad no more. I don’t wanna be alone, what for?
In my Duster, my Duster, my Plymouth Turismo Duster I’d be leaving it all behind.
That Fiat is going to require a lot more parts, many of them made from unobtainium. The Plymouth looks like a much better starting point. Both are undesirable enough that you can perform blasphemous engine swaps. Both are begging to become lemons cars.
Wow. Once again, I’m forced into the “I can’t believe the ____ is so shitty that I’m voting for a ____”. That Fiat looks like a pterodactyl took a dump on it, which is pretty much the nicest thing you can say about it. The Plymouth would be a pretty crummy car once it was up and running, but at least it would get up and running without replacing everything in it. Hopefully.
I wasn’t around in 1983, but was it common for seven year old cars to be parked and forgotten back then?
It wasn’t terribly common, but it did happen with some cars.
However, at the time, Fiats in America aged in dog years. So this one was 49 when it was parked.
Back in the day, rear window louvers were fairly common on these b/c sporty and fast-looking. But I’ve never seen side window ones like here; their inevitable downward angle almost seems to telegraph s-l-o-w.
I have a lot of nostalgia for the abysmal K-cars I’ve owned, and this Turismo would satisfy my urge to have another.
I actually like the shape of these, and getting GLH parts for it to see what you could wring out of it before it blows up would be a fun project. It’s never going to be a classic, so why not?
Super cheap for a starting point that looks to be in really nice shape, other than the paint.
The fiat is interesting, although despite getting points for the odd body style, this is one of the rare cases where the sedan variant looks better.
The less said about the duster the better ????
I voted, but I’m disgusted by it.
Exactly.
It’s weird but it’s been the case like that for the last several years hasn’t it? And it doesn’t look like that’s going to change.
Well, quite.
Yeah, I feel dirty, too.
$1,000 for a rusty Fiat that hasn’t run in 40 years. The used car market is nuts. Low miles, ran when parked.
Next up Blan(d) Turismo. If you can find a better car, buy it. At least the gray color will fit perfectly with the miasma of gray on modern roads.
Author’s note to the editor’s note: I knew there was one before the 128. Couldn’t for the life of me remember what it was. I bow to the master of arcane automotive lore.
However… A car that sells 75,000 in Italy won’t change the entire automotive landscape. But a car that sells three million worldwide is another story. So I think it’s safe to say that without the Autobianchi there would be no 128, but without the success of the 128, there would be no everything else with that layout.
A thousand dollars for a Fiat 128 that looks like it was left behind after the Apocalypse and hasn’t run in 40 years?! Even Reagan had another run in him more recently than that pasta strainer. Still, it’s real Italian, unlike the ersatz Turismo. (Turismo Duster? WTF Iacocca? ) Plus, the Fiat’s got a certain je ne sais quoi, David Tracy elan.
I’ll take that Turismo. I’ve worked on that engine before and know I can get it done. Only paying $300 for it though.
Wait, I just went to look at the actual ad for the Fiat, it says it has a liened title? As in someone loaned money against a POS that hasn’t moved in half a century?! I am hoping that means something different in CA, because there’s no way right? RIGHT?!
Maybe an old divorce settlement?
I voted for the Plymouth, as it seems the lesser of the 2 evils. That Fiat is gonna take a lot of work. Really, I’d just save my internet money for something else.
The Plymouth didn’t have a fire; that’s definitely, 100% typical Chrysler clearcoat failure. Guaranteed on all Chrysler products made from 1978 to …
Uhhuh. Anyway!
Just because the Fiat isn’t showing rust doesn’t mean it hasn’t rusted. (I knew an X1/9 owner. In California. All Fiats rust.) Looks to me like this one’s missing all the floor pans.
And an 87 carb’d 2.2? Not even the TBI? I honestly didn’t even think you could get a carbureted one in 87! Mated to the A413, ugh. It’s a perfectly cromulent transmission for the time, when you have power. The claims of 96HP and 119ft/lbs were always wildly optimistic.
The Fiat’s probably unsavable besides being undesirable, and the Turismo’s so undesirable as to be unsavable.
“Just because the Fiat isn’t showing rust doesn’t mean it hasn’t rusted. (I knew an X1/9 owner. In California. All Fiats rust.)”
Can you think of a car of this era that WOULDN’T have rusted when exposed to the elements like this for 40 years? Even Mercedes W123s have their limits.
FWIW I was an owner of a California X1/9 for a few years, mostly kept outdoors. Rust wasn’t any more of a problem on that car than it was on our other cars. That’s even more impressive given the car had spent its early life in Hawaii.
I have an entire cocaine factory that believes the Duster is mighty fine.
But yeah the clear coat failure is how you know it’s a Chrysler.
Wow yeah definitely a neither day for me, I voted Fiat though just because I know I am never going to get either running, so might as well save the $200 (well maybe more like $150 after I buy a hazmat suit because I am not getting in that thing in my clothes). But the Fiat is also just far more interesting, and seems a good platform for modification. That engine and all the wiring is junk, so rip it all out and swap something else in. It also looks so odd as a 2 door with that massive panel behind the door just begging for another one, and odd cars are my jam.
Rust kills the 128 and this one doesn’t look that rusty, maybe fun.
Offer a low dollar amount and take it to see Tony for a laugh.
The Plymouth is not worth even thinking about, easier to fix, but then why?
Am I the only one seeing the mulch-covered ground underneath the drivers seat?
I think that’s just a collection of the same debris as is on the ground giving the illusion of a hole.
The problem is that it is completely feasible that a 70’s Fiat could have a rust-hole like that under the driver’s seat.
So can just about any car when left outside exposed to the elements for 40 years, especially if in the mountains or within a couple of miles of the ocean.
But Fiats of this era can rust in 0% humidity. My hypothesis is that the Italians included rust accelerants in the paint. Since they’ve had to look at the same buildings for the last 4000 years, they must want different cars driving by these building every once in awhile to add a little variety. Can’t blame them really.
I honestly would have considered the Fiat, but it looks like there have been generations of critters living under the hood and that’s a hard no from me.
Pretty sure a pic of that Plymouth’s engine would at a minimum show spiders living in the intake manifold and a mouse nest where the battery used to be.
Oh let’s be real here, there’s a hole in the floorboards, those generations have been living and crapping inside too!
I don’t think that’s an actual hole. It might be a nest though.
I picked the Fiat. If it’s going to sit derelict in my driveway for a year until it loses project status and becomes junk, I can at least try to fool people into thinking it’s something rare, exotic (it’s Italian!) and potentially valuable.
Nobody is going to think a Turismo is valuable.
FIAT because it’s a great blank canvas for whatever zany swap can be dreamed up. Supercharged 670 cc Predator? Sure! Old EV kit gathering dust? Charge! It’s rare enough to get looks but not desirable enough for people to be mad with a hacked up one. Sure there will be That One Guy who objects. Everyone else will not give a hoot.
We all know a Predator goes in a Renault 10.
Yes indeed. Just where the Predator gods intended.
The 128 may be a rather rare version, at least in the U.S. It’s the three-door hatchback “Familiale,” a model I’ve never seen before. Had to look it up, in fact, as all the 128s I can recall were the two-and four-door notchbacks.
That’s certainly not enough to get a collector to grab it and give it a full resto, but then it’s being stacked up against an unmemorable — and to me, anyway — unlikable car.
So I voted for the Fiat, because why not?
If I’m going to fail at reviving one of these, at least let my end be a Viking funeral. I’ll moor my hopes to this particular Plymouth rock.
I voted, because that is the game, but in reality, I would not take either car if they were given to me.