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?
I owned an ’84 5000 in ’92. This car famously caused me to invent the “10 year old Audi rule.” The rule is don’t buy a 10 year old European car – it will eat you out of house and home.
I loved this car – it nearly broke me.
The styling was great, the “fit and finish” (especially compared to domestic cars of the era) was awesome, and it drove incredible. The problem? Every little thing that went wrong cost 5 times as much to fix as it should, and some of the problems were just simply impossible to overcome.
Fuel gauge never worked – The specialty foreign car shop (only one who would work on it) gave up after two (expensive) tries.
The door handles kept breaking. There was a tiny plastic part inside the door handle that would crack in half in the cold. making it impossible to open the door from the outside. This effected the most used handle, of course. You couldn’t buy the part, so you had to replace the entire handle, a really expensive experience. I bought 3 handles over my 2-1/2 year ownership of the car, but most of the time my options were: (a) leave the driver’s window open, (b) open the passenger side door and reach through, (c) open the rear door and reach around. Options a and c required leaving the doors unlocked, which is not a good idea in the city (or if it rains).
The final straw was when the car needed brakes. A routine brake job at the time (pads and rotors for the front) was a little less than $100. On this car? – $500. I sold it the next month.
I sold the car in ’94 and have wanted another Audi ever since. I have been tempted by older Audis, BMWs, Mercedes, etc. But I always invoke my rule and talk myself out of it.
I plan to purchase a new A6 soon. But it will be a lease, and I will turn it back in at approximately the time the warranty runs out.
Brain says Olds. Heart says Audi.
Brain won this time.
The Cutlass wins this one, because it’s peak-90s-GM teal, and I actually saw them when I was growing up, and thought the front end with the lower-profile sealed beams was really cool.
I can appreciate the Audi more now than I did back then, especially because inline 5s are a weird thing and I’ve owned 2 cars with them (but diesel), but the Cutlass still wins.
I don’t mind the Audi, but I also don’t like the Olds. This generation of the 2-door W-bodies has really awkward proportions, and the rest of the Olds design does that no favors. I guess I’ll go with the Audi, but I had a coworker with an almost identical (but much rustier) 5000, so I know how much of a masochist someone has to be to tolerate how quickly they can bleed your wallet dry.
Having once actually owned a W-body – gimme the stick shift Audi.
This is actually a tough decision as both cars are interesting and charming in their own ways. If I didn’t live in an area with multiple shops specializing in old VWs and Audis, I’d probably choose the Olds.
I actually don’t hate the W bodies, but I’m not passing up a 5000 with a stick in good condition.
Having driven an Audi 5000 for a while, I know exactly how reliable they are at breaking down regularly, so even though I honestly prefer the Audi I voted Olds because I also like to get where I am going.
I finally got rid of the 5000 when I realized the money I was spending every month getting it fixed (lived at an apartment with just a carport at the time, no wrenching allowed) was more than the payment on a new car…
It’s easy to forget just how revolutionary this generation of Audi 100/5000 was when it debuted, and how much influence it had on cars that came afterwards. The would likely not have been an aero-influenced Fort Taurus or any number of other sedans of the mid-late ’80s if it hadn’t been for the Audi – and the Audi would have been a much bigger presence on North American roads if it hadn’t been for the 60 Minutes hit piece on it.
Then again, I may be biased because I spent a lot of my childhood in the backseat of an ’85 5000 turbodiesel.
Bias or no, there’s no way I’m choosing a milquetoast 1990s Olds over an automotive milestone.
The Audi no doubt influenced the overall shift toward aerodynamic styling, but Ford also launched the Sierra in 1982, which had a much more direct impact on the Taurus development than the Audi.
That’s a fair observation – my take probably comes from a North American perspective. The Sierra wasn’t seen on our shores until being sold as Merkur a few years later, so the influence didn’t seem obvious. The ’83 Audi 5000 looked like nothing else on the road on this side of the Atlantic. I expect some automotive historian has already done this, but it would be interesting to look at the parallel design and development of the C3 100/5000 and the Sierra. If I remember correctly, they debuted only a month apart in Europe.
This is the closest I’ve seen in this site, and it makes sense. Each one is an interesting proposition.
I’d choose the comfy spartan coupé, since I already DD a manual hatch with a receding hairline.
Hello Mark, I have a suggestion.
In the future, can you please list the price of the vehicle in the text of the voting buttons :
for example: Gimme the Audi – five cylinders plus five gears equals awesome. $3,900
I always find myself scrolling back up to the story to check the vehicle prices before I vote.
(Just a suggestion)
I’ve got to go Audi. I was never a big Audi fan but have driven many and have many friends who’ve had them. They are really fun and engaging cars to drive when they’re running and don’t have some weird electrical poltergeists present. But I would never buy one.
The only thing I like about that Olds is the paint color. That’s it. I thought they sucked when new and were meant for an older crowd. I had one friend who actually bought one of these new right after graduation. Man, that thing had issues from the start.
So, while both of these would get some attention when they rolled in, mainly as survivors and a bit of nostalgia, I’d rather pull in with the Audi.
Neither car is appealing and both are overpriced.
I drove enough of those creaky old GM-10/W-body coupes to never want to drive another no matter how clean or low mileage it is. My vote goes to the Audi.
I voted Audi.
My vote comes down to personal bias against ’90s and late ’80s American cars. I knew a lot of people who drove well-used shitbox examples of cars like this Cutlass in the early 2000s. This particular car is nice, but I don’t think I could see a car like this as anything other than a disposable POS you drive because it beats walking. The logical part of me thinks the Cutlass is the better choice of the two (it is in great condition, I love the color, and I can appreciate a preserved ordinary car), but I’m not always a logical guy so I can’t vote for it.
I think I have antinostalgia for ’90s and late ’80s American cars, if antinostalgia is a thing.
Yes, antinostagia is a thing – it is called reality. It is someone that has lived though a time and years later remembers both the good and the bad and when it came to cars of the 80’s and 90’s most were objectively bad.
Counterpoint: I believe the mid-90s (to late 2000s) brought some of the most dependable vehicles in history. Gone were the carburetors, in was MPFI, simple 4spd autos and 5 spd manuals were the norm, OBDII had just been introduced for easier diagnostics and almost nobody was trying to re-invent the wheel, nor compromised reliability with wet belts, 0W-20 oil, CVTs, Dual Clutch transmissions so they could squeeze an extra 1 or 2 MPGs.
Styling and interiors were a low point, though.
Tough decision. 90’s teal looks better and better among the sea of grays our roads have become, plus the headlights on that Olds are so dang cool-looking. But that Audi is just such a clean design. Sure, it’s boring beige with a milquetoast engine, but it’s a 5-speed with normal seat belts, so it wins my imaginary Internet bucks today.
GM really had a thing for velour-style fabrics.
I’m picking the Audi even though it’s so plain that it’s beige due manual transmission, and I hate the handling of old GMs.
If the Audi wasn’t that ugly fleshy colored beige, I would like it better. Cutlass wins on color.
Those Cutlass seats are amazing. Like being assaulted by the Pillsbury Dough Boy.
If the Audi was a Quattro it would be an easy yes, but with just FWD, even with a stick, I just don’t see this one being worth the effort. It’s really just an old, kinda generic sedan with all the age related maintenance issues along with the added bonus of being hard to find parts for. IMHO, Quattro was what made this generation of Audi so special, without it, it’s just an old car.
The Olds is a bit novel for the low miles and I always kind of like the look of these, especially with the squinty mailslot headlights so it gets my vote today.