Yes, once again, we have Pontiac versus Ze Germans. But this time, they’re a little more evenly matched: both are AWD sedans with V6s and automatic transmissions, both are rare cars these days, and both will have you combing eBay for parts if the wrong system fails. Sound like fun? Too bad, it’s what we’re doing.
You all weren’t too happy about choosing between two Chrysler products yesterday either. I’m always a little saddened by assertions that a particular car, or make of car, is “complete crap,” with nothing redeeming about it. I just don’t think that’s true of any car. Sure, there are cars I wouldn’t buy again because of bad experiences (looking at you, GM-era Saab), but I can still find something positive to say about even the worst old hoopties I’ve had to drive. Besides, if you hated this choice, just wait until you see what I’m going to make you choose between later in the week.
Grandma’s Acclaim won yesterday’s vote, by a narrow margin, based mostly on its lower mileage and better condition. I think it’s worth the extra $500 as well; that van looks like it was ridden hard and put away wet. Grandma took good care of her car, and it shows. Besides, the 2.5/Torqueflite combo won’t win any drag races, but it’s reliable and easy to maintain.
All-wheel-drive cars are common these days, but back in the 80s and 90s, they were few and far between. But it seemed like nearly every manufacturer dabbled with 4WD or AWD at the time: the Ford Tempo, Mazda Protege, Nissan Sentra, Toyota Camry, Dodge Caravan, and Pontiac 6000 were all available with driveaxles going to all four wheels. Subaru and Audi, of course, made a business out of selling 4WD and AWD cars and did them well. You don’t see many of the others these days; I don’t think any of them sold particularly well. I haven’t seen an AWD Pontiac 6000 listed for sale in many years, and when the next listing was for an Audi Quattro only a few years newer, I knew it was meant to be. So here they are.
1989 Pontiac 6000 STE – $5,500
Engine/drivetrain: 3.1-liter OHV V6, three-speed automatic, AWD
Location: Waterford, WI
Odometer reading: 49,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives, but needs a little work
General Motors was trying really hard to run with the Europeans in the 80s, without a whole lot of success. Cadillac went after Audi 4000 and BMW 318i buyers with the Cimarron, which frankly was like bringing a banana to a gun fight. Chevy tried to add some black and red trim to the Celebrity and actually called it the Eurosport – which didn’t fool anybody. Pontiac offered a similar package on its 6000 sedan, called the STE, for Special Touring Edition. It was no match for a BMW 5 Series, which is what GM wanted it to be, but it was a pretty cool Pontiac.
The STE package included the optional V6, originally 2.8 liters but punched out to 3.1 liters by 1989. Front-wheel-drive STEs could be had with either an automatic or a five-speed manual, but the AWD version was automatic-only. Worse, it wasn’t even the four-speed TH440-T4, but the lowly TH125C three-speed unit. This car might have been a whole lot better received if it had a stick. This one has been sitting for decades and has only 49,000 miles on its fancy digital odometer. It runs and drives, and the seller has driven it short distances, but the cooling fan is dead, and it needs some brake work. It probably needs more than that, actually, after sitting so long.
The STE was the top of the 6000 range, which, since it’s a 1980s Pontiac, means buttons. Lots and lots of buttons. It has stereo controls on the steering wheel, which are redundant to the thousand or so buttons on the stereo itself. The climate controls are also a bunch of tiny buttons. The power seat controls are a bunch more buttons in the center console. How many of those buttons still work after thirty years in a barn is anyone’s guess. But it does all look nice and clean inside, at least.
It has a couple of rust spots outside, but the seller includes some underside photos, and it all looks good under there. The paint is shiny, and all the trim is intact. You’d be the belle of the ball at an 80s-themed car gathering in this car, for sure; there can’t be very many left.
1996 Audi A6 Quattro – $4,500
Engine/drivetrain: 2.8-liter OHC V6, four-speed automatic, AWD
Location: Danville, KY
Odometer reading: 110,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
Audi wasn’t the first to stick an all-wheel-drive system under a passenger car – that would be Jensen – but it took the concept and ran with it. After changing the face of rally racing with the original Quattro, Audi became synonymous with all-wheel-drive. Audi makes two-wheel-drive cars, but who cares? That little Quattro badge on the back is what we all came to see.
The original Quattro system featured manually-lockable differentials and was available with a manual transmission only, but by 1996 an automatic transmission was available, and the diffs took care of themselves. The funky five-cylinder engine was also gone, replaced by an overhead-cam V6. It’s a more fitting drivetrain for a comfy executive-class sedan, but it’s not as much fun. This one runs and drives great, and has just had its timing chain replaced, along with a new radiator and thermostat.
This one has a lot of buttons on the dash as well, come to think of it. It has all the bells and whistles you’d expect from a German luxury sedan, and this is well before the touch-screen era. This is the only clear shot we get of the interior, but it looks good in there.
This pearl-white color was the color for Audis in the 90s. It seems bland, but photos do not do it justice. It’s really pretty in bright sunlight. Personally, I’d prefer dark green, which was the other common color for these, but I wouldn’t kick this one out of my garage. It’s nice and shiny, and rust shouldn’t be a problem; Audi started galvanizing its bodies in the 80s.
Every family crossover has all-wheel-drive these days, but it used to be something special. One of these is an evolution of a legend, and the other is a valiant attempt to emulate it. Neither one will be low-maintenance, and parts for both will be an increasing problem as time goes by. So your mission is to decide which one is more worth the trouble: the one-off American special, or the classic German with a pedigree?
I wanted one of those all-wheel-drive Pontiacs since the 90’s so this is pretty easy for me. That one appears to be in pretty nice shape.
Going for the Pontiac for the nostalgia of the mouse fur interior, relentless two-tone standard GM grey plastic and expected creaking of the cheap interior parts.
same!
This is a tough one, but I think the Audi gets the nod. The Pontiac is great, but I have seen how bad they can rust in the upper Midwest and this one sitting for a long period of time makes the price just a tad too high for me. The Audi has its own issues, but I love the C4 generation, so the lower price and routine use helps it grasp the win from the Pontiac.
My parents had a 6000 STE when I was in college, this car could hustle, I had the digital speedometer into the triple digits a number of times. And you cannot stress enough how many buttons there were! I havent seen one in forever.
Voted Audi, newer, cheaper and probably easier to keep running long term…Job #1 is to change those headlights!
That Pontiac is a time capsule. It would definitely get looks at the local Cars and Coffee. The people who know, know.
If looks of pity and mild revulsion are your thing then I suppose that’s your best bet.
I loved those A6s, but the Pontiac (it’s an A, too!) is my pick.
That’s one of the best A-bodies there is. And I’m always reminded of that picture of an airborne 6000 STE from a magazine road test back in the day.
That would have been in Car and Driver, which later took one on its legendary Mexico comparison test odyssey and somehow managed to not break it. Any car that could survive a week with Brock Yates and Don Sherman gets my vote.
Wasn’t that the one where they clobbered a cow with it?
And yes, Dear God I am both old and an automotive dork that I remember that from when I was a kid. Some memorable writing at C&D back in the day.
Team Pontiac here. I don’t say this from a position of expertise over Pontiacs, but rather having spent 2 decades with that Audi’s successor in Passat form. While the 2.8 V6 (all 2-3 minor variants of them) are one of the more solid engines in VAG history, I just feel a lot more confident in the GM having held up for so long. Plus I haven’t seen one in a decade, it’s the more unicorny of the two unless you live in certain swaths of the Midwest 🙂
The underbody might change my mind.
I prefer the Pontiac, but it’s going to need a lot of attention after sitting for so long. I know the Audi isn’t a portrait of reliability, but you could buy it and use it right now, at least. The Pontiac is going to be a project, and I’m sure parts for them don’t exactly grow on trees any more.
That’s where I ended up as well. Definitely remember the Pontiacs, maybe even on the cover of one of the car mags at the time (R&T? C&D? Prob not MotorTrend) and even though it’s not BMW quality, I liked it. But after sitting that long? Ugh. Picked the Audi as I could drive it now, but I do like ALL the buttons in the Pontiac.
Poncho. Price is way too high and I don’t want either, but fake money and all. I would in fact love to make that into a Gambler sedan though.
Sadly, neither. If I’m shopping for an early 90s AWD sedan with unavailable parts I’ll just search for a Galant VR-4.
Most of the 6000 mechanical parts can be bought at NAPA. IIRC, the rear-drive running gear was from the GM M-vans and in-turn, S-trucks.
It’s irrational, but that 6000 STE is the perfect mix of my 1st (’85 6000) and 3rd (89 Grand Prix) cars. Its a total crap trap, but it’s getting the vote today.
Gotta be the Audi, if for no other reason than it hasn’t been sitting. But really, there are lots of reasons to pick it. Namely, it’s somehow cheaper
The Pontiac is suffering from the “it’s rare, thus it’s valuable” theory.
I really wanted to vote for the Pontiac, because I like it stodgy rental/government fleet manufacturer GM gets a little freaky with its cars. Hard pass on this particular car at that price. With all the work it needs from sitting I don’t know that I would offer half of what the seller wants.
The Audi is the better buy between these two by far, IMHO. It’ll still need regular tinkering but the driving experience will be more worth it.
I had an affinity for all of the goofy, high spec GM cars of the late 80s/early 90s, especially the 6000 and Grand Prix STE sedans and the Bonneville SSE. I also always really liked the Audi 100/UrS4/A6 cars. I never drove a GM A Body but nearly bought a 5 speed 100 with the V6.
The Pontiac represents a huge missed opportunity. GM went to all that trouble to put AWD in an A-body, kept it to one low-volume model and didn’t offer it as a wagon.
Typical GM.
With hindsight we now know that they should have morphed it into at least an Outback-style wagon, if not a crossover—maybe one styled a little more conventionally than an Aztek and named after(ish) a different North American indigenous group.
Behold the x-citin’ ’93 Pontiac Klovis, the alternate history progenitor of an entire class of cladded transportation!
GM still would have screwed it up, though
Boy, the design of the A6 withstood the test of time much better than the 6000. Yes it’s 7 years newer but looks so much better.
Disappointed there are no underhood shots of the 6000. I’m assuming the V6 is mounted the right way (like the Audi?)
Parents had a 89 Cutlass Supreme with an equal number of buttons everywhere. I think the radio alone had a dozen or so buttons.
I’m thinking it the other way around, the Audi looks dated but the Pontiac’s clearly from another era, very much an ’80s car although I’d prefer the original squared-off roofline that fits the rest of the body style much better.
Too many busy lines on the 6000 bumpers and trim for me. After looking at that, the simplicity of the Audi won me over, Looks better to me than any Audi today.
Definitely agree with the older roofline; I remember the original 6 “headlight” front end and so many buttons inside-a high school friend’s mother had one of these new and it was always a treat when she would pick us up from band practice. Nostalgia is a hell of a drug but I voted Audi
The Audi is miles better to look at. I guess I get the radwood appeal of the 6000, but man it is not a looker.
You malign a 3-spd auto in an American car from the late ’80s, and do not to bring up that Chrysler continued to use a 3spd auto into the 2000s?
So did Toyota.
I’ll take the weird Pontiac, despite that awful transmission.
While they’ll both be problematic, you’ll have a FAR easier time finding parts and information for the Audi.
Plus, having owned a ’93 100cs Quattro, these things are TANKS in the snow.
I never knew Pontiac made an AWD car.
It’s not often I will vote for a used Audi.
There’s no way I’d ever pay $5500 for that Pontiac. I wouldn’t have paid it when the car was three years old, still daily drive-able and with parts available.
I have an strong hate for GMs of this vintage, but it is justified by experience.
I just had to abstain because I couldn’t even bring myself to vote for a 29-year-old used Audi.
You say the Audi is from before the touchscreen era, then show the interior pic with a large touchscreen slapped onto the dash. Not sure what it does, but someone added that and made it far less desirable instantly. The Audi is still probably the better car, but I have had to work on one too many VAG products and have always had a soft spot for Pontiac, and even more so for the 3.1. Plus, it’s a better color, and more off beat, so I’m driving
excrementexcitement today!The GM A-body cars were a decent effort at saving the investment from the rightfully maligned X-body designs. They were reasonably reliable in their simple base form. But they were all absolute garbage to drive and had the fit and finish that made Yugo think they could take market share from GM. The AWD Pontiac version is actually interesting and rare, but I still don’t want to drive it.
The Audi would mean constant repairs to keep it on the road but at least it would be enjoyable to drive while it runs.
They really were terrible vehicles.
My parents bought a new Citation in 1981. Everything was a step up in quality from there.
To be fair, the STE was BY FAR the best of a mediocre bunch. It was compared VERY favorably to the Audis of the time – but that time was long before this generation of Audi debuted. It compared much better against an original 5000 (boxy or aero versions) that also had a 3spd slushbox and a much weaker 2.1l five. Though IIRC all Quattros of that era were stick-shift only. No automatics with AWD until the next generation, which was the Audi generation BEFORE this one.
This gen of A6 was when Audi really upped their game big-time and was much more on par with BMW and Mercedes. And left the ancient STE in the dust. Comparing a car that debuted in ’82 with one that debuted in ”94 is just not going to end well. And this n/a V6 is probably THE most reliable engine Audi ever made.
This 6000 is for sure peak A-body. My parents had a Celebrity, and I had the Buick version very briefly. I don’t hate them as cheap and cheerful transportation, but they sure had their limitations.
I don’t have much experience with the Audi 5000, but I do with a boxy 4000CS Quattro, with the manual, of course. The Audi was infinitely better than any A-body in how it drove. They weren’t in the same universe. The A-body cars were closer to the Citation than the Audi. A bit like comparing a VW GTI of the era to a Ford Escort of the era. The Pontiac might have had more power, but I don’t know how much good it would do you with the 3-speed. The Audi was more needy for sure. I recall the headlight switch needing to be replaced regularly enough that there was always a spare in the glove box.
The newer generation Audis were for sure a leap forward in refinement!
Agree on all counts. The A-body was literally just a refined version of the X-body. It was *better* for sure, but it wasn’t great and in typical GM fashioned soldiered on far past it’s sell-by date.
I find that when a component fails THAT frequently, most of the time you haven’t found the root cause of the problem, you are dealing with a symptom. Something else is causing it to fail… In the case of a headlight switch, probably excess current draw due to dirty connections or some such. Though given some Audi electrical issues I helped a friend with, poor design. He had a first-gen 100 that burned up the wiring harness to the cooling fan, because Audi decided that the fan circuit didn’t need to be *fused*. WTF? So of course when I rebuilt it for him I included a fuse and a heavier duty relay.I think the stock relay was meant to act as a fuse, sort of, but when the relay melted itself into a solid lump, bad, bad things happened. Germans should stick to the oily bits an vacuum systems and leave the electrons to the Japanese!
Yeah, it was a college friend’s car and we spent a number of afternoons tracking down little issues, many of them electrical. The headlight switch was the thing that we couldn’t figure out to save our lives. It got to the point where he kept an extra switch on hand, or we needed to disassemble a lot more stuff than we were willing to. One of the downsides to working on your only car.
No doubt – the right number of cars is one more than you actually need, LOL.
As an 80s kid, I want to want the Poncho. I really do. But all that 80s GM electronica is a ticking time bomb that may or may not go off because, you know, the clock was made by GM in the 80s. And a 3-speed automatic is just shameful.
The Audi looks better, has decent miles, will be more fun to drive and seems to have been loved and driven instead of stuck in a “barn” for 30 years. That’s the one I’d pick.
When this Pontiac debuted, Audi also only had 3spd slushboxes. The problem is GM couldn’t be bothered to make their 4spd work with the AWD hardware. And of course, they barely updated the A-platform in the decade it was in production, and it’s not like it was new when it debuted, being a warmed-over X-platform. GM. Sigh.
I picked the Pontiac. Mark nailed me exactly. It’s my kind of weird.