It’s been a while since we really scraped the bottom of the barrel of the used car market, so I thought it was high time to look at some cheapies. I looked at several cities and dozens of ads before deciding on these two; cars this cheap in running condition are not easy to find. But they are, I feel, a fair representation of what six hundred bucks can buy you these days.
You were mostly in agreement about two things yesterday: the Toyota was the better deal, and both cars were overpriced. As I’ve said before, I don’t price ’em; I just present ’em. Were they overpriced? If they don’t sell, then yes. But I have a feeling they will. The Camry’s fuel injection and extra gear in the transmission gave it the edge, it sounds like, but the Nissan’s possible smoke issues didn’t do it any favors.
All things being equal, I’d prefer the Nissan. I just like the feel of them better. A three-speed automatic doesn’t bother me, and my old carbureted Nissan/Datsun pickup ran like a top, so I’m not too worried about the carb either. However, since I quit smoking in 2003, I can’t stand the smell of cigarettes. I’d have to give this Nissan a good sniff test before deciding.
Now then: You lot are a tough audience, do you realize that? Every car I show you, someone thinks it’s too boring, someone else thinks it’s too expensive, or too this, or too that. I figure if I keep mixing it up, and everyone is disappointed once in a while, I’m doing okay. Money is the most common complaint; I see a lot of comments like “That’s a $500 car at best.” Well, I hate to be the one to tell you this, but some of those were $500 cars, several years ago, but not today. In fact, I wanted to find $500 cars for today, and didn’t find any that I personally would drive home after purchasing. $600 was the best I could do. Let’s check them out.
1996 Mazda Protege LX – $600
Engine/drivetrain: 1.5-liter DOHC inline 4, five-speed manual, FWD
Location: Arnold, MO
Odometer reading: 200,000 miles
Operational status: “Runs and drives fine”
Mazda is sometimes overlooked in favor of other Japanese makes when it comes to cheap used cars, but over the years, it has actually become my favorite. Mazda cars are just a little bit sharper, a little bit zippier, than its competitors, especially if you find one with a manual transmission. And apart from some rust issues – in which Mazda is by no means alone – they’re very reliable and long-lived. Witness this second-generation Protege sedan, which has been ridden hard and put away wet, but still does its job without complaint.
This generation of Protege came with one of two four-cylinder engines, either a 1.5-liter in the DX and LX models, or a racy 1.8-liter in the rare ES model. This is an LX, so it has the 1.5 liter, coupled to a five-speed manual gearbox. The seller says it runs and drives fine, but the clutch is getting a little soft. It will probably need replacing eventually, but if you’re careful with it, it should last a while yet. I’ve nursed soggy clutches for years before they became a problem.
The only interior photo we get was taken through the driver’s side window, so it’s a little hard to see. But it looks like typical cheap-car fare: some wear and tear, a possible cigarette burn on the driver’s seat, and so on. When you get down into this price range, you pretty much get what you get when it comes to interior condition. It does have some creature comforts like power windows – assuming they still work.
The seller says it’s “not winning any beauty contests,” and I think that’s an understatement. Rust has had its way with this car’s underside, and the rocker panels are more or less gone. And the wheel arches aren’t far behind. But it’s the price of one payment on a new car these days, so if it holds together until the clutch gives out, you’ve gotten your money’s worth out of it. Driving a car this cheap is all about managing expectations.
1996 Saturn SW1 – $599
Engine/drivetrain: 1.9-liter OHC inline 4, four-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Inglewood, CA
Odometer reading: 139,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
Saturn is a maddening chapter in the General Motors saga. Conceived as an import-fighting brand of inexpensive cars, borrowing nothing from the existing GM family of vehicles, the first Saturn cars did exactly what they were supposed to do. They were cheap, well-built, and practical, if a little rough around the edges. True to form, GM spent years improving the breed, and then ruined the whole marque by turning it into Chevy Light. But for a while there, in the middle, Saturns were really good little cars, with a lot going for them.
This is a second-generation SW1, S for S-series, W for wagon, and 1 for the base model, with a single overhead cam engine and a basic equipment package. This one isn’t quite as basic as some I’ve seen, though; it does have power windows, air conditioning, and cruise control. It also has an automatic transmission, which is a bit of a letdown for some, but at this price point, beggars can’t be choosers. It runs well, but hasn’t been registered for over a year, so it’s got some cobwebs to blow out. Hopefully it wasn’t sidelined because it won’t pass smog.
It looks good inside, but it doesn’t have that many miles on it, so it should. The driver’s seat bolster is a little smashed down, but that’s about the only flaw I see. These old Saturns aren’t anything fancy inside, but they’re functional and sturdy, and that’s all you really need. We could do with some more straightforward, honest cars like this these days.
The clearcoat is toast, sacrificed to that warm California sun, but the beauty of early Saturns is that they never look beat-up, because you can’t dent them. It does have some pretty good scuffs on the bumpers, but that just means they’re doing their job. I kept waiting for the other shoe to drop, reading the ad for this car, and it just never did. But there has to be something wrong with it, for this price, right?
I am eternally grateful that my days of having to rely on cars like these just to get to work have passed. Handing over a few hundred dollars, often all I had in the world, for some clunker and then hoping it started and ran the next morning as well as it did the night before, was nerve-wracking. It’s always a gamble, and all you can do is use your best judgment. One of these looks to be on its last legs, but its last legs are known to be pretty good. And the other looks really good at first glance, but is it too good to be true for the price? There’s only one sure-fire way to find out. Which one would you gamble on?
The Saturn- duh…
…long roof, Saturn, less than a grand…the only problem is that it’s in California and I am not. Also it hasn’t run in a year. Hm.
I’ve done the rusty with a stick, I’ll use my imaginary money to rent a U-Haul and get the Planet Wagon.
Lack of rust and wagon wins, though the Mazda would be more fun to take and beat to death, but that rust makes me think it wouldn’t take much.
Heh.
I’ve owned different versions of these very vehicles in my <$5000 car life.
The two Saturns were a coupe and a sedan (both 5-speed), the Protege one generation newer (alas an automatic).
That Protege died of rust in the salt belt, and this one is DOA.
I’ll add the Saturn wagon to complete my Saturn S-series sandwich collector card.
Hmmm.
Manual transmission, so that means that I should be picking the Mazda.
But wagon means that I should be picking the Saturn, even if it is an automatic transmission.
But the Saturn is a dead brand, so what would parts availability for it be like? So I can clearly not choose the wagon.
But the Mazda has a terminal case of rust. So I can clearly not choose the sedan.
“You’ve made your decision then?”
Not remotely! Because the Mazda comes from Japan, as everyone knows. And Japan is entirely peopled with Japanese people. And Japanese people are used to having people trust them, as I trust in this brand. So I can clearly not choose the Saturn.
Shirt, I don’t know which one to choose. Can I just choose both?
Truly you have a dizzying intellect.
Saturn because wagon, and because I like ’em.
I know it’s possible to compare what % of a given make/model’s production is still registered, and I would bet money the Saturns are in the top five for their model years. It’s shocking how many of these are still running around–they’re eligible for vintage plates these days!
I wanted to go for the Mazda, but here in Ontario, our one-time safety inspection will fail cars for rust, but nor for smog, making the Saturn the only one I’d ever expect to get on the road here. Auto is sad, but wagon helps, at least!
My father in law had one of those Saturn wagons. It was a tardis, he was able to do ALL of his stock runs for the computer store he owned with it.
However, the seat adjustment was broken, and my short-ass had to drive it basically laying down.
“bUt cAsH 4 cLuNkErS kIlLeD aLl oF tHe ChEaP uSeD cArS!!1!11!!!”
Find a better way to disguise your Obama hate, guys (not referring to anyone here)…
Bad take. You don’t have to hate Obama to be salty about C4C. It was a bad program and legitimately screwed up the used car and parts markets while acting as thinly-veiled corporate welfare for the automakers during a recession. And it was wrapped up with a very thin environmental justification that was borderline insulting.
You can support everything else Obama ever signed and still be pissed about this one.
My experience has taught me that hate for C4C and hate for Obama often go hand in hand.
My personal opinion is that C4C was a good idea, just very poorly executed. My father was selling cars at the time. Many people came in with the intention of getting a cheap used car from “all of the cars people were turning in for Cash 4 Clunkers”. That’s because there was no public information campaign about how the program was supposed to work.
It was a mistake to mandate the vehicle’s engine be destroyed instead of stripped for usable parts and the rest properly recycled, not shredded. Not only that, but there were inconsistencies in the way the retirement process was done. My dad’s dealership literally shot the poor things, but most places chose the far more messy process of intentionally seizing the engine, spewing fluids all over the ground.
And the GOP did nothing to help.
On the whole he wasn’t a bad president
It also didn’t help with parts availability. Really not even body parts.
For the record, most econoboxes were not victims of C4C. They were most probably just used up, rusted out or had an untimely demise (crash, stolen, etc).
C4C had a minimum threshold of 18 MPG combined fuel economy, so these would’ve never met the criteria.
C4C ended up with tons of usable SUVs, vans and trucks, though…
Nah, I’m good. I’ll take a bike or a bus pass over one of these turds
Normally I’d say “Mazda” – but that one is burnt toast.
The Saturn looks like it could be a decent driver after some work.
So it’s the little red wagon today.
At that price and with the registration issue, I am very, VERY skeptical that the Saturn will pass smog in California. The question then becomes whether the car is still worth it after you pay for a new cat. This makes the choice between it and the Mazda a little tougher, but I just can’t drive something as beat up as the Protege at this point in my life. I’m going with the Saturn despite the fact that it’s probably really a $2000 car rather than a $600 car.
Saturn for the cool headlights!
But really no redeaming features on the black one. Or it might smell of pizza? 😉
That mazda wouldn’t pass inspection in MA, so it’s only good for parts or scrap. That makes the Saturn an easy choice.
Wow, I thought it would be close until I saw that exterior shot of the Mazda and then the rocker panels. No thank you!
Saturn all the way esp. at that price. It will probably go another year or two no problem and for $600 what more do you want?
I voted for the Mazda.
My logic: These cars aren’t long for this world. You buy a car like this because it is cheaper than renting a car and more convenient than the bus. Cars like these are a temporary solution while you save up for the 2001 Camry of your dreams.
The Saturn is a poor choice. It looks good, but that only raises the asking price. Niceness is a liability in a three-figure car. As for mechanical condition, we know it hasn’t been registered in over a year, presumably due to a failed inspection. Given it sat that long, it is likely seller unsuccessfully tried cheap fixes. Seller claims it runs good, but I’m calling BS. I think this thing is broken and not something you can rely on now.
As for the Mazda, this car looks like meth on wheels, but it runs, drives, and can pass a Missouri safety inspection. The manual transmission lowers its price because normies don’t know how to use a third pedal. Overall, this is a $1000 car with -$400 worth of features and ugliness. It will be rotted into the ground by next July, but who cares? By then you will be rolling in style in your high-mileage used Camry. It is the better interim vehicle than the Saturn.
The Saturn would have to be extremely broken to make it a bad deal. Even if you had to spend $1500 on parts to get it usable, you’re only in the entire thing for a little over $2k, which it’d be worth all day long. It could also theoretically live to double its mileage with proper maintenance, since these are pretty bulletproof. The Mazda has a finite lifespan with that amount of rust, no matter how well it runs. Engines are fixable, rust to that level is really not.
If the Saturn were drivable and currently registered I would have voted for it for $2000. But I’m going by the information available. Both of these cars are in locations that require inspections, and only one appears to have passed.
Plus, as much as people like to think of certain models as “bulletproof”, there are a hell of a lot of ’90s Saturns (and other famously reliable ’90s cars) rotting away in junk yards. I don’t think it is realistic to expect a nearly 30 year old econobox to be reliable transportation for the long term.
I’m sticking with the Mazda.
There’s really not much to go wrong, mechanically, on either car. If you do basic common-sense maintenance items right after purchase I don’t see a reason why both couldn’t keep going for many tens of thousands more miles. It’s just that the Mazda will probably disintegrate before it gets there.
There is definitely less to go wrong with these cars than modern cars. Still, the vast majority of ’96 Saturns and Proteges are no longer on the roads, so there must be something that mechanically totaled them.
I’m also not saying the Mazda is the better bet for the long term (I’d be shocked if that car made it until next fall) – I’m saying neither are good bets for the long term and the Mazda happens to be ready at the moment. In this price range, ready at the moment is more important than better long-term outlook.
I’m sure you could keep this Saturn running indefinitely if you really want to, but I suspect that overwhelming majority of people (at least, outside of The Autopian comment section) are going to view this vehicle as an expendable beater for short-term use only.
I stand by my vote for the Mazda.
The Mazda looks like it was a Cleveland / Buffalo cruiser…I know St. Louis has some winter but that rig is really rusty. The Cal Sat could run another two decades if you’re mechanically handy.
My BFAM has like 3 of these Saturns that he uses as basic transportation and for towing his popup camper.
It’s fun seeing all the little mods he makes to them, like installing a transmission cooler with custom pump, or the custom intakes.
Normally I’d go for the manual option. And normally I’d pick a Mazda over a Saturn.
But in this case, the manual Mazda option is something that is rusted out and has been beat to shit. Plus it needs a new clutch. And where I live, with all that rust, it won’t pass the safety certification that enables the registration needed for on-road use.
So to me, that Mazda is either a parts car or for off-road use.
So my vote goes to the slushbox Saturn due to it appearing to be in much better overall condition… and looks like has a decent chance of being registerable without have to do a ton of work to it.
Wagons are cool and have lots of space inside, and like others pointed out, it’s an SW2.
Yeah, Mazdas like to rust, and this limacon era Protege is no exception. Too bad we never got the 323 Neo that Canada got.
I have seen cars as bad and worse than the Mazda cruising around the Great Lakes area. That said assuming the Saturn isn’t too much worse than it’s being presented it’s an easy win.
By the time I sold my protege it still looked better than the one in question today but had softball sized holes through the floor. I am really skeptical about the Saturn since that price seems to good to be true, but assuming they have a clean title and keys, that is a steal.
That Saturn, with about $2k worth of parts and lots of salvaging, could be converted into a 50 mile range EV capable of 45 mph. Double cost that to make it highway capable with the same range at highway speeds.
That is an impressive amount of rust, I haven’t seen rocker panels like that outside of upstate NY. The wagon looks like a perfect beater, Saturn for me today
That poor Mazda. That car has seen things, not good things, but things. Roll it into an ditch somewhere and let that poor thing die.
The Saturn (as others have mentioned, is most likey an SW2, not a SW1) is the easy choice here.