What Do You Expect For A Thousand Bucks? 2001 VW Golf vs 2002 Jaguar S-Type

There was a time in my life when $1,000 was an awful lot to spend on a car. Most of my automotive purchases in the 1990s were half that or less. Thankfully, those days are gone, but I still like to look around once in a while and see what’s available for cheap.

Wow, you all really did not like that Skylark yesterday. Or was it just because it was up against a terrible Porsche? Yes, I called it terrible, and I stand by it. An automatic Boxster is the sort of car some junior executive who knows nothing about cars would buy when he’s trying to look cool. No self-respecting enthusiast would be caught dead in it. That’s why it’s so cheap, not because of some hidden flaw.

The Skylark, on the other hand, is GM doing what it does best: over-styling an ordinary car and somehow making it work. I mean, it’s named after a bird; it should have a beak, right? It just makes sense. And that 3300/TH125 combo will run until the end of days. So I’ll take the Buick, and no, you can’t have a ride when your dumb automatic Porsche conks out again.

The last dirt-cheap car I bought was a 250,000-mile 1995 Toyota Corolla, purchased for $500 two days before the COVID lockdowns went into effect. I bought it to save money on gas, since I had been commuting in my big green truck prior to that. It ran fine, and the air conditioning even worked. I sold it two years later for $1,500 and ended up breaking even on it. (I would have made money if I had just put up with its worn-out shocks instead of replacing them, but it was awfully floaty.)

You can’t find a running car for $500 anymore. I mean, you might, but you had better be in the right place at the right time. Even $1,000 is getting tough. But I did find these two, and from the sounds of it, they’d both at least make it home. Let’s see which one feels like the safer bet.

2001 Volkswagen Golf – $1,000

Engine/drivetrain: 2.0-liter OHC inline 4, five-speed manual, FWD

Location: Grants Pass, OR

Odometer reading: 210,000 miles

Operational status: Runs and drives well, burns a little oil

There was a funny VW ad back in the 80s that we didn’t get here in the US, featuring a Princess Diana lookalike storming out, throwing away her wedding ring, hopping in a Mk2 VW Golf, and driving off. The tagline was “If only everything in life was as reliable as a Volkswagen.” To a lot of people, especially after the Piech era, calling Volkswagens “reliable” is laughable, but as long as you choose a nice simple one, they can still have the same never-say-die attitude of the old Beetles. This Mk4 Golf is a nice simple one, and despite looking like it has been through a war zone, it isn’t ready to die just yet.

Volkswagen put on some airs with the Mk4 Golf and Jetta, making them significantly fancier-feeling than previous versions, but VW engineers knew to leave the important stuff well enough alone. This car uses the same basic McPherson strut front and twist-beam/trailing arm rear suspension that had served water-cooled Volkswagens well since the 70s. And its base engine, which this one has, was the same old single overhead cam four-cylinder, now displacing 2.0 liters and making 115 horsepower. The turbo and VR6 guys called it the “two-point-slow,” but this tortoise just kept chugging along while their fancy high-performance hares ended up in the shop. This one has 210,000 miles on it and still runs fine, and thanks to a host of new parts, should continue to do so. It burns a little oil, but that’s not a big deal as long as you check the level at every fill-up.

The Mk4 Golf’s interior felt really classy and upscale twenty-five years ago, but a lot of them have aged like a box of frozen burritos left out in the sun. The soft-touch plastics disintegrate, switches and buttons stop working, and trim falls off. We only get this one photo of the interior of this one, and I think it’s because it’s probably worse than it looks from here. But hey, it’s a thousand-dollar car. And the seller does say that it has a great stereo in it.

Outside, it’s beat; the hood and one fender don’t match, the grille is missing, the clearcoat is coming off in sheets, and it has this nasty-looking dent above the left front wheel. But a cheap car that looks like hell can be a good thing; my aforementioned $500 Corolla didn’t have a straight body panel left on it, and one taillight was 60 percent transparent red tape. But it meant I could park it anywhere without fear. It’s that freedom of imperfection thing again.

2002 Jaguar S-Type 3.0 – $1,000

Engine/drivetrain: 3.0-liter DOHC V6, five-speed automatic, RWD

Location: Columbia Heights, MN

Odometer reading: 291,000 miles

Operational status: Runs and drives, daily driven, has a few issues

When a small, independent car company gets bought out by a larger one, enthusiasts often worry. They fear it will be the end of the brand, that the new models will just be the same as the big company’s cars with a different badge. It’s the same sort of reaction heard when an indie band signs with a major label; they’ve “sold out,” and won’t ever be the same again. But there’s nothing wrong with a little production value, and an indie carmaker wouldn’t be for sale if it wasn’t in trouble. Ford’s stewardship of the Jaguar brand was less destructive to its reputation than the British Leyland years, and the cars, while they had some Ford parts, were unmistakably Jaguars.

The Jaguar S-Type takes its name, and much of its styling influence, from a Jaguar sports sedan from the 60s, but under the skin, there’s a lot of Ford DNA. Its basic platform is shared with the Lincoln LS, and its engine and transmission are both from Ford, a 3.0-liter V6 based on the Duratec line, with a few tweaks, and the same five-speed automatic reviled by so many former Ford Explorer owners, including me. This one seems to be holding together well enough; the car has almost 300,000 miles on it, and the seller still drives it daily. It needs a new oxygen sensor to quell a rough idle, and it has an exhaust leak (the two may be related), and the front brake calipers are a bit sticky, but apart from that, it sounds like it’s in decent mechanical condition.

The interior is worn, but honestly, not as bad as I would have expected. The driver’s seat upholstery is shot, and the steering wheel rim has had its finish rubbed off, but I’ve seen a lot worse. The driver’s side window doesn’t open, and the moonroof can be finicky, but it sounds like neither of them allow water in, which is good. Also, there’s something broken in the steering column that prevents the tilt feature from working. It telescopes, but doesn’t tilt. Here’s hoping it’s where you want it already.

It’s a Minnesota car, so of course rust is a possibility, but it just had a bunch of suspension work done, so at least some bolts under there must be able to be turned. The way to keep a car from getting rusty is to keep it clean, and with this many miles, my guess is someone has been taking care of this car. It does have a little rust coming through the paint on the driver’s door; it looks a little like an old accident repair that’s failing.

A thousand bucks for a car is nothing these days; hell, lots of people have payments that are that much. I mean, they aren’t what you’d call nice cars, but if you just need cheap wheels, or just want something to mess around with, they’re perfect. So what’ll it be: the Volkswagen that sticks to the old ways, or the Jaguar with the heart of a Ford?