The bottom end of the online classifieds is chock-full of some pretty uninspiring cars. Some days I scroll for ages looking for something, anything, to inspire me. I see dozens of Chevy Malibus and Ford Escapes and other hopelessly mundane vehicles that I just can’t think of anything to say about, good or bad. But I strive to offer a variety here, and in that spirit, today I offer two dull cars that at least caught my eye. I hope you like one of them.
This is in direct contrast to yesterday’s choices, which were too weird for most of you. When the vote total is that low, I know I’ve pushed things too far. Thank you to the fewer than 500 of you who did get into the spirit of the game. Your reward is a big silly Ford F-150 that’s cosplaying as a semi truck.
I kind of like the billboard truck just for the familiarity of it, but then again, I ended up hating the job I worked at that was near that truck. So maybe I don’t want the reminder. Yeah, I guess the F-150 is the right call here. At least it runs, and it’s a conversation starter.
I think we’re going to look back at the cars of the late 2000s and early 2010s as being “the last good ones.” The bugs had been ironed out of drivetrains, everything ran well, and they had all the features you wanted without all the gimmicky shit and nagging nannies that today’s cars have. Sadly, we never recognize a golden era until it fades away. The good news, I guess, is that cars of that era are reaching the bottom of their depreciation curves, so there are some deals to be had. Let’s check out a couple of cheap sedans from 2009 and see which one does it for you.
2009 Volvo S60 2.5T – $2,000
Engine/drivetrain: Turbocharged 2.5-liter OHC inline 5, five-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Odometer reading: 162,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
Volvo made roundy RWD cars in the 1960s, boxy RWD cars in the ’70s and ’80s, boxy FWD cars in the ’90s, and roundy FWD cars starting in the early 2000s. They’re always a step behind the times fashion-wise, but somehow, no matter which era they’re from, Volvos almost always manage to look timeless. Plenty of other cars from fifteen or twenty years ago look dated, but this S60 is still a handsome machine, even if this isn’t the most pristine example around.
The trim level, 2.5T, tells the tale of the driveline: it’s a 2.5-liter turbocharged engine. Easy enough. But Volvo wasn’t content in this era to make engines with even numbers of cylinders; this is an inline five, mounted transversely in the front and driving the front wheels through a five-speed automatic. It runs and drives well, and with only just under 162,000 miles on it, it should have plenty of life left. The seller does say it has a minor coolant leak; rather than fixing it, they’ve just been topping it off. That’s probably a better solution than dumping stop-leak into it, I suppose, but it should be found and fixed.
The interior shows some signs of wear, but nothing serious, and those seats do look comfy. The S60 is as different from the old boxy Volvos on the inside as it is on the outside; gone is the stark industrial-looking dashboard of the 240 series. This looks like a proper modern car inside. It does have a few electrical gremlins: one power lock doesn’t work, and there’s some weirdness with the key fob. And am I reading it right that the wipers don’t work? That’s kind of an important thing to fix. On the plus side, the air conditioning works fine, so you’re good in the heat – just not a rainstorm.
It’s a bit banged up outside; the right front fender and right mirror have seen better days, and it looks like a lower valance panel on the front bumper is missing. But at least it isn’t rusty, and at this price point, you can forgive a couple of scars. They just make it look tough.
2009 Ford Fusion S – $2,150
Engine/drivetrain: 2.3-liter DOHC inline 4, five-speed manual, FWD
Location: Chicago, IL
Odometer reading: 173,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
Ford’s midsized car game was dreadful for a long time before the Fusion came along. There was the Granada, which was a warmed-over design from the early ’60s. Then there was the Fairmont, which despite the later triumphs of the Fox platform was a horrible car. The Fairmont was followed by the Tempo, which, ew. The “world car” Contour showed promise, but much like the Ford Escort of the ’80s, it was just far enough removed from its European counterpart to vaguely suck. But the Fusion was pretty good. It’s as if Ford finally built a castle on a swamp that stayed up. Mazda helped, though.
The Fusion is built on the same platform as the Mazda 6, and it’s powered by the excellent Duratec/Mazda MZR four-cylinder engine, here displacing 2.3 liters. A five-speed manual transmission came standard, but you don’t see them often. This one has it, and that makes it an especially good choice as a used car, assuming you’re able and willing to drive a stick. The seller doesn’t give us much information about its condition, so an inspection is a good idea.
This is the basic S model, with everything you need and probably not much you don’t want. It’s got power windows and locks and whatnot, and a stereo with an “aux” input, which makes it better equipped than most of the cars I’ve owned. It’s in decent condition inside too, and the AC works. Honestly, what more could you want?
Outside, it’s a perfectly nondescript city car, in a non-color, with just enough dings and dents to make it blend in. The plastic wheel covers have left the chat, but good riddance, I say. I don’t see any signs of rust, but it’s a Chicago car, so take a good look underneath to make sure it’s all solid.
Neither one of these is going to be a whole lot of fun, despite one being turbocharged and one being a manual. But they should both be reliable, and that’s a lot more important if you only have two grand to spend on a car. And two grand seems to be just about the minimum for a decent cheap car these days. $500 beaters are gone, and they’re not coming back. But I’ve had my share of $500 beaters, and these are both much better cars than all of them were, so maybe we’re better off these days. If you found yourself in need of a cheap set of wheels, which one of these would turn your head?
Fun fact: the current Pope, back when he was just a regular priest, drove a manual Fusion. He’s from Chicago even. This could be the Jo(h)n Voigt’s LeBaron of the 21st century!
The Volvo is totally a better car than the fusion. The fusion is great to drive, it was a good vehicle. It has not aged well, mostly because they rust like the dickens. Are nice to drive, and that’s because they’re mostly a Mazda.
For all my vocal howling about my S 60 experience, they broke a lot and were a hassle too keep ahead of the weird issues with, they were built quite well. Maybe not as premium as their Audi contemporary, I would not put them in the same league as Mercedes or BMW, though you could cross drop a C class or three series against them, but they were a great car in terms of the engineering and thought that went into them. Some of the tech let the early models down, but by 2009 they were very well sorted out.
Old Volvos are generally not worth anything, so they are a great bargain. They’re easy to fix, even these, and parts are abundant because they were made for so long, and the P2 platform spans many models. This is one of the cars that convinced Ford to buy the whole company to pile many of the blue oval vehicles onto a derivative of the platform and save themselves, as well.
Bear in mind that the trunk is Corolla – tiny with a aperture that makes it difficult to get things in there sometimes. The backseat is tight for anyone over about 5’8″, and if you put child seats in there, you will have to move your front seats up unless you are very fun sized already. The upside is that the five cylinder and late AW transmission are pretty much trouble free. Don’t use the polyurethane upper engine mount. Just go with the factory rubber one. They eat front ends every 85,000 miles or so – lower control arm bushings, upper strut bearings and mounts, and swaybar end links.
There’s more stuff out there, and parts, aftermarket, and DIY info and knowledge then there was during my S 60 ownership, so it should actually be pretty easy. Engine maintenance alone favors the Volvo.
I’d risk it for the biscuit just for 5-cylinder noises, honestly.
If you’re shopping at this end of the price pool, the Fusion makes far more sense financially, IMHO. While the Volvo generally started out as a more desirable ‘luxury’ car (or maybe near luxury depending on how you classify it) at this point in it’s life its just an old car that will likely need increased repairs/maintenance due to it’s age but the cost of the work/parts is still at the luxury premium.
The Ford can likely be completely rebuilt using just what the local Autozone has in their back room and any local hack, shop or shadetree mechanic can work on it. This seems to me the better direction for someone with only 2 grand in their pocket for a car.
As a bonus, this one still looks decent, aside from the black steelies which I personally don’t like but others may, and the 5-speed is a plus at least for me but again, this is preference.
…damnit. I wanted to be miserable today. Monday the bridge I use to go to work closed, and I nearly took out an eye with my string trimmer. This morning my not even 4 month old bootlaces broke from pulling them snug, and someone honked at me because the light changed as I was checking for traffic at an intersection. I am understandably miserable.
But you give me a perfectly acceptable turbo 5-cylinder Euro and a stick shift sedan. Why can’t you let me stay angry!?
…fine, stick shift Fusion.
I feel like the Fusion is far more likely to keep running without too many expensive or fatal problems so it was an easy vote for it. I’ve had a few Fusions as rentals and they were all pretty good cars to drive.
I’ll take the Fusion. I had the next generation and it was a great car. Besides, I always thought the Fusion looked excellent, and even if this one is the basic version, I think it would be great transportation. The Volvo is showing it’s miles in that interior and I don’t understand how it got those dents without also getting massive scrapes.
Disagree that the 2000’s will be looked back on as peak car. Maybe for the generation riding this site but future generations will look at them as gas guzzling death traps without essential features.
It is a sign of age to think what one grew up with was the best. In the 00’s my father thought modern cars were full of useless tech and gimmicks. Peak car for him was the 60’s. Hated EFI and anything computerized. ABS and traction control? Useless government nanny tech for people that never learned to drive a car….
I had a Fusion just like this with the stick. Super slow car but I enjoyed it a lot as a commuter car. I had close to 200k miles on that engine but the rest of the car was rusting out. Ill take the Fusion.
Fusion, I’d really like a rallyX car that I don’t care about at all, and this would fit the bill nicely.
Cheap to acquire, and when I kill it, I can dispose of it without any emotional baggage.
As far as prep work goes, a pair of wheels for my 4 year old Blizzaks should do it.
I knew the Fusion would walk away with this one as soon as I saw the stick. It is a good deal as long as the underside isn’t too crunchy. For my cheap beater though I’ll go with the fancier Volvo. I don’t want my winter months to feel too much like a punishment while my nicer car hides in the garage. At $2k I can easily afford to fix anything that seems worth fixing.
Fusion. No turbo and a super common car so parts will be more readily available- both in the after market and junk yards
I like those S60s with their responsive turbo five and super comfortable seats. But the interiors of that gen seem to age like milk in the sun. The front quarter panel creases aren’t helping either.
Stick shift Fusion all day every day. Although, this gen of Fusion seems to have simply disappeared from the roads rather suddenly a few years ago. Is there some fatal flaw that takes them out around the 12-15 year mark?
Mine had rust pretty bad when I got rid of it.
Rust. You don’t see many 1st gen Fusions in Michigan these days, and when you do they are usually more iron oxide than car. It’s a shame because mechanically they are sound and easy to keep running.
I was going to go with the Volvo but that thing has been beaten up. I will vote the Fusion for a point a to b car.
That fusion is clean and I can at least row my own, so Ferd it is!
Didn’t the Fusion have a ton of problems? Recalls? A friend had one and I had to rescue him on his way to dump his at the dealership for a trade-in. Guess it’s Volvo day.