For our final pairing this week, we’re going to check out a couple of cars that I must regrettably refer to as “classics,” even though neither one of them looks that old to me. You don’t see either one of them very much any more, and either one would be a welcome sight at a car gathering. But which one would you rather see pull in, or drive in yourself?
Yesterday’s slap-dash matchup involved two unfinished dune buggies. I thought the extra power from the Corvair drivetrain in the fiberglass buggy might be a selling point, but many of you wanted to know how hard it would be to return it to VW power. The sandrail, with all standard VW components, seemed to appeal to more of you, with the added advantage of actually running and driving.
I’d take the sandrail as well. I prefer my RC dune buggies in kit form, but when it comes to the real thing, I think I’d have a lot more success with something already assembled and running. And I’m pretty sure, with the addition of a few things like turn signals and windshield wipers, it could be street-driven here in Michigan. My neighbor drives his side-by-side (or sometimes his riding mower) to Dollar General; I can’t imagine anyone giving someone a hard time over a sandrail.
Wednesday night, we had an Autopian meetup at one of David’s old haunts: the Wal-Mart parking lot in Troy, Michigan. I didn’t count how many cars showed up, but the variety was amazing: everything from a Honda CRX convertible to a glorious baby-blue ’59 Imperial to a perfectly crusty Subaru Brat showed up. There was a whole fleet of Miatas, a couple of kei cars, an MGB GT just like my old one except it was green, a Shelby GLHS Charger, a fantastic Pontiac Sunbird turbo convertible, and so much more. And every time something new rolled into the parking lot, conversations faltered and heads turned to watch the new arrival pull up and park. The Met Gala has its red carpet; car meets have the turn in from the road. In both cases, the goal is the same: Make an entrance they’ll notice.
It would be foolish to choose a car based solely on that first impression; your own enjoyment of the car has to come first, and frankly, if you don’t love it, no one else is going to give a damn about it anyway. But it is fun to see everyone watching you pull in, even for an introvert like me. So for today’s Showdown, I picked two cars I think I could really enjoy, but are also capable of pulling focus when they arrive – at least, at an Autopian meet. Let’s check them out.
1987 Audi 5000 S – $3,900
Engine/drivetrain: 2.3-liter OHC inline 5, five-speed manual, FWD
Location: Paw Paw, MI
Odometer reading: unknown
Operational status: Runs and drives well
I grew up with Audis and Volkswagens. We had, at various times, a Beetle, a diesel Dasher, a Golf, a Scirocco, and two Audi 5000s. After my parents got divorced, my dad bought another 5000, because he missed it. The Scirocco was my first car, and after that died I got the Golf as a hand-me-down, and shortly after that I bought a ’73 Super Beetle for $250, but didn’t have it long enough to title it, so it barely counts. And yet, I haven’t owned a VW or Audi product since 1994. Were I ever to do so again, an Audi 5000 would be high on my list.
This ’87 model is just like the red 5000 that I drove to my senior prom, with one crucial difference: it has a five-speed stick. It isn’t a turbo or a Quattro; this car has a simple 130 horsepower naturally-aspirated version of Audi’s legendary inline five, and it only powers the front wheels. But it’s enough. These cars don’t feel fast, but then you look down at the speedometer and realize you’re doing 90, and it feels like 60. They’re just so smooth. This one runs and drives great, and it has a new alternator, water pump, and timing belt.
It’s in good condition inside, but it does need a couple things. The seller says the speedometer cable is disconnected from the transmission, which is why we don’t know what the mileage is. My guess is that the drive gear stripped out, and the seller hasn’t been able to find a replacement. One of the perils of trying to fix up a rare old car, I guess. You can always use a speedometer app on your phone; I’ve done that before. It also looks like the radio is missing, but that’s easy to find. Any single-DIN radio will fit.
This car looked like nothing else on the road when it debuted in 1984, and all these years later, it still looks great. It’s a timeless design, and thanks to fully galvanized sheetmetal, an ageless one too. The seller does say that this car has never seen a winter, but rust isn’t much of a problem on these anyway.
1992 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme – $3,500
Engine/drivetrain: 3.1-liter OHV V6, four-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Cleveland, OH
Odometer reading: 39,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
As I’ve mentioned before, I spent the mid-’90s working in a garage attached to a gas station. It wasn’t quite a quick-lube; we could certainly change your oil while you wait, but you could also drop your car off in the morning and pick it up later. And for a few customers, we even picked up and delivered cars. As a result, I got to sample a lot of ordinary cars from that era, and a few stood out. I developed an affinity for GM’s W-body coupes, particularly the Pontiac Grand Prix and the Olds Cutlass Supreme. This car, especially in this very ’90s teal, takes me back.
I wish I could tell you this is one of the very rare Cutlass Supremes with a Quad 4 and a five-speed stick, but alas, it is not. This one just has a run-of-the-mill 3.1-liter V6, backed by a 4T60 four-speed automatic, just like millions of other GM cars from the ’90s. Its strengths and weaknesses are well-understood, and parts are widely available and cheap. This car hasn’t even cracked 40,000 miles yet; I’m guessing it was someone’s parent’s or grandparent’s car who rarely drove. You might have some soft parts to replace due to sitting, but otherwise it should be a nice reliable ride.
Back when this car was built, you could order options in cars individually, rather than only as part of a package. It made for some odd combinations, like a fancy digital dashboard with manual windows and locks. That digital dash, unfortunately, is the one issue with this car: the seller says it occasionally cuts out. It’s probably a loose connection behind the gauge cluster, which shouldn’t be too hard to fix. The dash top is also warping, it looks like, and I’m not sure how you’d go about straightening that out. Otherwise, it looks really clean inside.
The paint is in great shape, and there doesn’t appear to be any rust on it, but you’d have to take a peek underneath to make sure. This looks like the basic S model, based on the steel wheels with plastic covers, which these days probably makes it even rarer than the fancy models.
Ordinary survivors like these are some of my favorite cars to see at shows and gatherings, and judging by the reactions to cars at our meetup on Wednesday, I’m not alone. I get the feeling that either one of these would have been a hit. Which one would you rather watch roll in, or better yet, arrive in?
Looking at that Audi now, it’s easy to see where Ford got their inspiration for Taurus. That said, I’m going with my inner Olds Man(TM) instincts and taking the Cutlass Supreme. I know what I’m getting with that engine…not much, and I don’t care. I’d also hit up every online source I could muster to find appropriate Olds alloys from this era with the rocket logo on the center caps – they were beautiful, and could be found on several other models so there’s a chance.
Very hard choice today. Love the low miles teal and the Audi is not a quatro but is at least a manual. The Cutlass is just so boring. I will vote Audi but not easy choice.
The Audi if only because stick shifts are becoming such unicorns
Those late 80s-early 90s audis do absolutely nothing for me. They look like an overgrown VW Fox, which is about the only thing I can think to say about it because the styling is so bland, especially in faded beige. I imagine they’re fine to drive, but I damn near fell asleep before getting to that awesome teal metallic olds.
Parents had an 89 Cutlass Supreme, 2 door, since us pesky kids were all grown up by then. If I had to count the buttons in the car I’d still be counting. Theirs was white but that blue is pretty sweet!
Picking the Audi assuming it’s a better driving experience.
Those Audi’s always looked kind of cheap to me. Something about the shape of the body makes me think that the sheet metal is the thickness of a soda can and made of the same material. Even though I’ve ridden in several and know they’re solid cars, the feeling persists.
I’ve always been drawn to the exterior design of the Cutlass for reasons I can’t explain.
I voted Chevy.
For me, it’s the headlights. Liked them here for the same reason I like those in that year’s Camaro. Gives the car an edge without being over the top edgy.
If I’m going to spend my Internet Money today, I’m taking the Audi. It was a terrific car in its day, and I second everything Mark says about it. The 5000 would represent far greater danger to my wallet, though, I admit, as Audis were never inexpensive to get service and parts for. Still, absent a 5000 Turbo Quattro here, I’m still going for it.
The Olds looks zoomy enough, but the door belts, automatic and a general lack of enthusiasm for ’90s GM interiors (based on experience, BTW) outweighs the teal appeal.
If it’s me whipping my camera out at a car meet? The blue of that Cutlass is going to grab me more than Das Weiss Audi. I mean to own, the Audi, being a stick, would probably be more fun, but it’s not as eye-catching as the Olds. I voted the handsome blue Oldsmobile today.
Also it’s impossible for me to see that Cutlass and not have my mind wander to how good they looked as NHRA Pro Stocks.
Unusually tough choice today! I was teetering Audi because of the stick, but the nasty color lost it. I’ve always had a thing for that model of Olds . . .
Olds. I should want the Audi because it has an online five and stickshift and honest three-box styling. But it’s the color if a hearing aid, and not powerful enough to put up with 40-yo Audi headaches.
I’ve always liked the styling on the Cutlass Supremes and there’s no better paint color.
Oh that’s a beautiful description of one of the worst car colors.
Hey! My Widex are two-tone grey!
Besides that, yes, the color is merely prosthetic. In the worst way.
That teal, on the other hand…
Wow, that Oldsmobile. The 3.1 with that transmission feels like a four cylinder even by 90’s standards. The seatbelts are attached to the doors. I’ve heard those tiny headlights are hard to get replacements for. 39K miles was a lot for that car back in the day.
But it’s blue, it’s awesome, it’s the 90’s analogue to my ’68 Olds. Therefore I want it. Olds all day.
The cutlass digital dash issue is probably the ribbon cable. I’ll take the Cutlass because of the cool color and it being a 2-door, although I’d prefer a manual transmission version with regular seatbelts.
Today is two very near misses on my personal car past.
I owned two similar cars long ago at different times. From my own experience, the Olds wins because it is likely to be more reliable, not just in a “I gotta get to work” kind of way, but also a “what the hell is that weird noise?” kinda way. Also, it’s a couch on wheels if that’s your bag. Although mine more so, as it was the sedan with the front bench w/ fold down arm rest.
That 5000 is not special enough to put up with the headaches it will bring.
Audi all the way
Tough one today, but I’m a sucker for 90’s teal.
Audi. Even though the teal is fashionable for being very 90’s I lived through the 90’s and never liked that color. Plus I just like the Audi.
Audi. Because its perfectly cromulent. If the Cutlass had the 3.8, I might consider it.
Is the Audi the better driver’s car? Almost certainly. However, like Mark I have always liked the Olds Cutlass Supreme. I think its styling is still striking to this day and it gets my vote even with the V6 and the automatic.
Audi – 5 X 5
Neither would go in my garage, but between the two I’d go with the GM and give it away. I wouldn’t want to saddle somebody with upkeep on that Audi.
I picked the Audi, but if it doesn’t have AC, I could easily be swayed to the Olds.
My Uncle Jack loved those old Audis. When the unintended acceleration hit piece came out, he was thrilled. He knew it was BS, so now he could pick used ones up CHEAP. He’d buy them and drive them into the ground traversing West Texas highways.
Even the pillow on the seat is clean and orderly. That Audi has been cared for, and it wins today.
W Body > W VIN
If it were a Quattro, this would be a slam dunk – that’s one of my short list dream cars. But I’ve never had any great affinity for other Audis. And I’m not a big GM fan but the ready availability of parts and stalwart nature of W-bodies in general tips the scale here.
Cutlass.
Neither one really do it for me, but the Audi is the choice between the two. It’s a manual, the 5 cylinder might be fun? Does the AC work in either one? Might be a factor.