As I’ve mentioned before, the name of this feature is pretty vague. Not every car we look at is junk, nor are they all in rough condition. Sometimes we look at nice stuff. And sometimes, like today, we look at nice cars that have always been kind of crappy.
On Friday, we looked at two rough rear-engine machines, and it’s another instance where I thought the vote was going to swing the other way based on the comments. The Fiat 600 seemed to have more support, or at least more vocal supporters, but it’s the VW Thing that took the day.
It’s a tough choice for me. The Thing looks just like an AFX slot car that I had as a kid, and it was one of my favorites. But I prefer the idea of a fresh-out-of-storage car over one that has already been pushed in the direction of someone else’s tastes. I think I’d go for the Fiat, and raid the seller’s parts stash to fix it up.
I love “survivor” cars, as you may have surmised from some of my picks over the years. I like seeing cars that haven’t been restored, they were just never worn out to begin with. It’s even better if it’s the sort of car that no one would preserve on purpose, or ever bother to restore, like these two. Cars like these are reminders of how far we’ve come, and what we’ve tossed aside along the way. Let’s check them out.
1988 Chevrolet Cavalier RS – $4,750
Engine/drivetrain: 2.0-liter OHV inline 4, three-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Palmyra, PA
Odometer reading: 41,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well, but has a coolant leak
Early in its life, the J-body Chevy Cavalier was available in five different bodystyles: a two-door coupe, a four-door sedan, a station wagon, a two-door hatchback, and a convertible made from the coupe. The hatchback was never all that popular, and it left the lineup after 1987. For 1988, the coupe was redesigned to make it look more special and less like a two-door version of the sedan. This generation of Cavalier coupe was so ubiquitous in high school and college parking lots in the early ’90s that you’d think students were issued them. I haven’t seen one this clean in ages, though. Those other Cavaliers all led much rougher lives than this one did, clearly.
The standard engine in the base and RS model Cavaliers was a 2.0-liter version of Chevy’s 122 pushrod four-cylinder, often confused with the Pontiac-derived Iron Duke, but it’s an entirely different engine, altogether. (“It’s an entirely different engine.”) The 122 makes 90 horsepower and a lot of noise, and propels the Cavalier by its front wheels through a TH-125C three-speed automatic. You could get a Cavalier coupe with a five-speed manual, and that makes it kinda-sorta fun-ish to drive, but most of them have the automatic. This one runs and drives just fine, and it has had a lot of recent work done, but it has a coolant leak from somewhere that should be addressed.
It’s pretty fancy inside as Cavaliers go, with power windows and locks, as well as the classic ’80s Delco stereo with the sideways cassette slot. The seller has stuck some sort of screen device on the windshield, GPS or CarPlay or something, and in the process ruined a big chunk of the ’80s charm and outward visibility. Hopefully, whatever that is doesn’t come with the car. I mean, if you like that sort of thing, then more power to you, I guess, but for me it wouldn’t even last the drive home.
Being an RS model, it has red and black exterior trim instead of chrome, and some snazzy alloy wheels. They’re not as cool as the Z24 checkerboard-style wheels, but they’re not bad. It has a few minor blemishes, but no rust or sun fading; it was garaged its whole life.
1992 Mercury Topaz GS – $4,900
Engine/drivetrain: 2.3-liter OHV inline 4, three-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Wyoming, MI
Odometer reading: 45,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
In the last couple of decades, US automakers have shed a lot of brands. We’ve lost Plymouth, Oldsmobile, Saturn, Pontiac, Hummer, and Mercury, among others, I’m probably forgetting. Some folks might have been sad to see some of them go, but for the most part, thanks to badge engineering, their products were superfluous and available with a different grille down the street at another dealership. Such was the case with Mercury. It was Ford’s “cool” division in the ’60s, but by the end, Mercury cars were literally just mid-range Fords with a handful of cosmetic changes. You could probably change this Mercury Topaz into a Ford Tempo in half an hour by replacing a few parts, and no one would be the wiser.
The Topaz and Tempo use one of two different 2.3-liter four-cylinder engines made by Ford, and it’s not the one everyone loves in the Ranger. This is the HSC engine, an overhead valve engine that shares most of its design with the old Ford Falcon inline six. I could look up the horsepower output of it, but it doesn’t really matter; it’s probably ninety-something, just enough to move the car around in the least interesting way possible. It has a three-speed automatic, which doesn’t help the excitement factor at all. This one has only 45,000 miles on it, and it runs fine.
The Tempo/Topaz interior is not unpleasant, and the seats are reasonably comfortable – if you can get past the motorized shoulder belts. They seem to be less offensive on a two-door coupe like this than they are on the sedans; having the B-pillar that far behind you makes the position of the belt more comfortable. It’s all in good condition, as you would hope for such low mileage, and it all works.
It’s clean and shiny outside, and the seller says it’s completely rust-free underneath. It currently wears Mustang wheels with good tires, but the original Mercury alloy wheels are also included, with no tires on them. Personally, I kind of like the Mustang wheels on it.
I have personal experience with both of these cars; I’ve owned a couple of different Cavaliers and a ’92 Tempo coupe. I can tell you that neither of them is going to be exciting to drive, but they both have an honesty and simplicity to them that’s nothing like a modern car. They’re easy to work on, and probably dirt-cheap to insure. No, they’re not as rock-steady-reliable as a Camry from the same era would be, but they’re not unreliable either. And anyway, there’s no going back now; by reading this far, you’ve entered a binding contract, and you must vote for one of them. So what’ll it be?
Topaz, for the nostalgia and that they really are quite durable. My high school best friend had a ’92 Tempo (5-speed!) as his second car. Slow as molasses and very basic, but it did actually ride pretty well and was spacious for the time. I don’t recall that it ever had any major mechanical issues. This despite taking an unattended trip down a hill and softly rolling over – turns out the parking brake is required. I thought every single Cavalier of this era rusted away, even outside of road salt areas.
I had a ’90 Topaz in high school and it was gutless, but bulletproof. The only problem we ever had in 90k miles was he backlighting on the radio went out.
That said, I don’t like the coupes as much as the 4-door, and really wish it had a stick, but few did.
If the Cavalier had a different drivetrain (either a V6 or even a stick with the four-banger) it would have done it for me. It doesn’t, and since I know the Topaz will be *less* of a penalty box to drive, I went that route today.
Both are overpriced, however.
That platform was really known to go the distance. I’m sure repairs were simple and parts plentiful.
If I close my eyes, can still hear the Cavalier’s 1980-something GM crap plastic interior rattling over every tiniest imperfection in the road…
You’re just driving home from purchasing your new Cavalier, the rattles and creaks are already comming from everywhere and nowhere, they are incessant and relentless, they assault your ears from all angles until your sanitly begins to fail. You are already starting to consider dumping the car and renting an electric scooter to get home. It’s only 120 miles in the rain, you could probably do that, it might be worth it. Instead, you start stuffing little bits of rolled up napkins and disposable forks into the seams hoping to stop the noise for just a single moment. But nothing works, you find one squeak, your stop it but 3 minutes later another arrises, farther back and somewhere you can’t locate while driving. They will live in here forever. They will never stop… ever.
Merc today. Can’t do another 80’s GM Sh*tbox again, just can’t.
*reads SB descriptions*
*falls asleep, plants face on keyboard*
Huh?? What??
*rubs eyes*
Uhh, Cavalier, please… I guess.
It’s an actual color, which is nice, and I associate grey+red with the 80s so there’s a bit of nostalgia there. It has interesting wheels and it does *not* have automatic seat belts.
The interior and the engine compartment are both quite clean, and it costs a bit less than the Topaz.
Eh, as much as I hate mouse belts, the Topaz has the light-bar grille and reminds me of Mercury Jill Wagner, even though she never did a Topaz commercial.
Both are too much money and very boring. But one is red, so it wins.
For $150 extra, I’ll take the one that doesn’t appear to need work right away.
I always thought this generation of Cavalier was a handsome looking car, even if it wasn’t a great car. They’re durable as cockroaches too. I’ll have that one for sure.
And that screen will get yanked out immediately, and replaced with the Led Zeppelin II cassette I bought in middle school.
Back when this example was almost new I had a beater early-model, ’84 or ’85 Topaz. Also dull silver, mine was a 4-door with a stick. It would have to be the Cavalier by default because of those awful ’80s Ford seats that forced you to slouch whether you wanted to or not, back-breaking even after only a 30 mile drive.
But really, this is a “neither” day, five grand’s too much for nostalgia without at least some driving fun. If it were an Escort GT or Tracer LTS vs. a Cavalier RS V6 wagon it would be another matter…
Driver’s Ed car was a Cavalier, but Grandpap had a Tempo. I’ll take the Topaz in honor of Grandpap’s car.
Having extensive time in both of these platforms, I hate the Cavalier less. so it gets my vote.
No build, remove the tacked on BS, drive it into the ground as God intended, and move on with my life trying to forget the circumstances that led me to this path.
FoMoCo made some great, interesting cars in the 1980s… and then there were the Tempo / Topaz malaise-mobiles. A friend had a one in college that was usually broken and always brown, an entirely appropriate color for a turd.
On the other hand, my best friend in high school had the Pontiac version of that coupe in the same bright red, and it was a cool car for the day. I immediately heard Beastie Boys banging from the tape deck when I saw the car in the photo. GM today, for the nostalgia lulz.
Cavalier.
In moments it’ll be transformed into a time machine, smelling of cigarettes, beer and cheap cologne. Cassettes of the Cure, REM, the Clash and Depeche Mode will suddenly appear in a case that never leaves the back seat. Unpaid parking tickets will grow in the glovebox.
No Marty, I made a time machine out of a Cavalier.
You almost got me Mark. I’ve said many times I’d never vote for a Cavalier, but you managed to find a worthy adversary.
Still voted for the Topaz though.
The Cavalier is sort of cute and very red and since I (somehow) never drove one back in the day they have no particular negative associations for me. There are no winners here, mind you, but this seems like a bit less of a loser.
I hate the Topaz so much I feel like going back in time and punching Don Peterson…
I don’t want to like either, but the Cavalier appeals more if I was going to have a gun put to my head and told I had to buy one. I blame nostalgia, my dad had a Cavalier wagon the same vintage, in the same red and RS package, for a good chunk of my formative years. Was considerably more pink though by the time he got it.
Was replaced by a second generation Geo Prizm, a 94 if memory serves, that was also red when new and pink by it’s departure. Learned to drive stick on that car, I remember at the time being impressed how much nicer a car it was than all the other GM cars my family owned. Learning about the Toyota connection helped explain that!
I’m going with the Cavalier. At least it’s not gray/silver.
Topaz looks cushier, whereas the RS has premonitions of sportiness…i.e. writing checks it can’t cash. But they’re just crosstown rivals in the same segment…I guess the Topaz will win since it doesn’t have a coolant leak.
I see it’s a plague or cholera kind of Monday. If I can’t have some flavor of K-car, then I guess the Topaz will have to do.
I hope I’m not being too Cavalier by picking that gem of a Topaz.
Like ’em both as relics of an era of honest, functional transportation > ours of “premium” used wherever possible in ad copy, but Topaz for the trunk lid luggage rack alone. Always enjoyed how they stuck around well into the areo era, like an anachronistic reminder of the 60s.
Luggage racks sold because people in that era still had “space anxiety,” having been accustomed to what was seen as the US birthright of a full-size V-8 powered RWD car. Our Tempo had a luggage rack, and they were popular in my area on Accords, Cavaliers, and numerous other cars in the “compact” size class.
Nah! The luggage rack was to make the car look “sporty” like the old European roadsters. It was an appearance thing. No one I knew ever used them as anything more than an appearance item.
I used mine. But that was on a Fiero, so luggage space was limited.
…going with the Merc. The Mondeo-based cars that followed it were way better, but I’m not in a Cavalier mood today.
If I had money, I’ll tell you what I’d do.
I’d go downtown and buy a Mercury or two!
That’s stuck in my head now, thanks.
What can I say, except you’re welcome.
$5k is where we are at boring shitbox econoboxes? Alrighty.
I drove a few Cavaliers working at a dealership in 91-92, guess I’d go Topaz.
Yep, $5k. I buy salvage cars for a living and even 20-year old lawn ornaments are fetching $600 plus in some markets.
No doubt the Topaz. When is the last time anyone has seen one of these? And it looks pretty darn nice too.