Home » Which One Would You Take To The Early-Bird Special? 1988 Chrysler LeBaron vs 1994 Mercury Topaz

Which One Would You Take To The Early-Bird Special? 1988 Chrysler LeBaron vs 1994 Mercury Topaz

Sbsd 11 18 2025
ADVERTISEMENT

Sometimes you can look at a car and just tell that its owner is elderly. Older domestic cars that are suspiciously clean and stock, especially with AAA stickers in the window, are almost always the property of retirees. With modern cars, it’s a little harder to tell, because a few vehicles aimed at young buyers ended up being the darlings of older drivers, like the Scion xB and the Kia Soul. But the two we’re going to look at today have definitely done their time in the parking lots of bingo halls and sensibly-priced buffet restaurants.

Yesterday, we looked at two CVT-driven hatchbacks that had seen some serious use. A lot of you were as impressed as I was at the condition of that Dodge Caliber, considering its mileage, but not impressed enough to give it the win over the little cranberry-colored Mirage. There’s just something endearingly plucky about those Mirages; they’re like Rudy in car form, and you can’t help cheering for them.

Vidframe Min Top
Vidframe Min Bottom

Unless for some reason I needed the extra interior room, the Mirage would be my choice as well. If I’m going to drive something as uninspiring as these, it should cost as little to operate as possible. Besides, I don’t think I could ever stop being mad at the Caliber for not being a Neon.

Screenshot From 2025 11 17 17 12 51

Spending four years back in the mid-1990s working in a gas station/garage gave me an appreciation for a certain category of car: elderly-owned low-mileage American cars. I saw a lot of them; the neighborhood was near a college, but also home to a lot of retirees They all seemed to know my boss’s boss personally, and half of them got special deals on service because of it. I saw the same cars over and over again, at 3 months on the dot, for oil changes, even if it had only been a few hundred miles. I explained over and over that “winterizing” a car isn’t really a thing; it’s just checking everything over to make sure it’s ready for the cold weather. These folks clearly loved and appreciated their cars, and would have been highly offended if any young Honda-driving whippersnapper dared to call them “junk.”

ADVERTISEMENT

These two would have been fairly new cars back then, but they’re very much cut from the same cloth. I know they don’t hold much appeal to enthusiasts – a hundred horsepower and a three-speed automatic aren’t exactly a recipe for fun – but they are just about the nicest examples you’re likely to find, and they are that way because someone took care of them. Let’s check them out.

1988 Chrysler LeBaron Sedan – $5,200

573913665 838267411982317 7192256415059300830 N
Image: Facebook Marketplace seller

Engine/drivetrain: 2.5-liter OHC inline 4, three-speed automatic, FWD

Location: Bristol, VA

Odometer reading: 54,000 miles

Operational status: Runs and drives well

ADVERTISEMENT

In 1987, Chrysler introduced a redesigned LeBaron coupe and convertible, a streamlined shape that shared almost nothing with the earlier boxy K-car shape, even if it was the same mechanical bits underneath. But the four-door sedan and wagon stuck with the old shape for another couple years, to appease older buyers – and Lee Iacocca, who reportedly preferred this design.

572096091 838258588649866 7583489834600211341 N
Image: Facebook Marketplace seller

One thing that Chrysler has always done well, no matter who its parent company has been, is iron out problems in a design. The later in a model’s run you get, the better the cars are, and the LeBaron is no exception. Improvements like electronic fuel injection and balance shafts made the old K engine a more pleasant powerplant, and a bump up to 2.5 liters gave it more power and torque. The transmission is the same old three-speed Torqueflite, but half of the art of improving something is knowing what to leave well enough alone. The seller says this one has had some recent work including a new valve cover gasket (a common oil leak on these), and it runs and drives beautifully.

574288918 838258638649861 4152118751455544886 N
Image: Facebook Marketplace seller

The LeBaron was quite a bit fancier inside than its Aries and Reliant siblings, but you’ll notice the windows are still manual crank – they work fine, and we’re not made of money, you know. This is one of very few cars I can think of that paired manual windows with a digital dash, however. The interior is in beautiful shape, and the seller says everything works as it should, including the air conditioning.

571824144 838258651983193 1599808671841674394 N
Image: Facebook Marketplace seller

It’s very clean outside as well, with only a few blemishes and some faded trim. It has a landau top, but I’m pretty sure that was standard on the LeBaron sedans then; if you didn’t like it, go buy a Plymouth. Most photos show these awful Pep Boys wheel covers, but one photo shows the original Chrysler ones; hopefully all four of those are included, because you’ll never find a complete set of them.

1994 Mercury Topaz GS – $3,500

00c0c Drbzt3jh743 0cz0t2 1200x900
Image: Facebook Marketplace seller

Engine/drivetrain: 2.3-liter OHV inline 4, three-speed automatic, FWD

ADVERTISEMENT

Location: Sioux Falls, SD

Odometer reading: 35,000 miles

Operational status: Runs and drives well

GM and Chrysler had already been producing their front-wheel-drive midsize cars for a few years by the time Ford got into the game with the Tempo and Mercury Topaz in 1984. But Ford was leading the way among the Big Three when it came to aerodynamics, so the Tempo and Topaz looked a lot sleeker and more modern than their contemporaries. The two nameplates had different designs for the four-door sedans, but the two-door coupes looked the same, and it’s a style that still looks pretty good today.

00606 Lrnqzkaf7il 0cz0t2 1200x900
Image: Facebook Marketplace seller

Mechanically, the Tempo/Topaz was a bit of a strange throwback: its four-cylinder engine was “all new,” but based heavily on the old Falcon inline six, and therefore an older overhead-valve design. It’s not a high-revving engine, but it’s reasonably smooth and efficient. It drives the front wheels through a three-speed automatic shared with the Ford Escort. Again, it’s nothing special, but it works. This one has a scant 35,700 miles on it, so it’s barely broken in. It could probably use a good “Italian tuneup,” but the seller says it runs and drives well.

ADVERTISEMENT
00g0g Hacrweoab6v 0cz0t2 1200x900
Image: Facebook Marketplace seller

As you would expect from the mileage, it’s in beautiful condition inside, though the carpet could use a shampooing. The interior of these is nothing special, but it’s comfortable and functional. Unfortunately, when the passive-restraint mandate arrived in 1989, Ford elected to equip the Tempo and Topaz with motorized seat belts instead of airbags. I personally don’t like them, but I know some of you don’t mind. I’ll leave it up to you to decide if they’re a dealbreaker.

00c0c 9rkri5wlwbp 0cz0t2 1200x900
Image: Facebook Marketplace seller

I always found it charming that the Tempo and Topaz coupes had luggage racks on the trunk lids. Did anyone ever actually strap luggage to one of these things? I can’t imagine it. This one is nice and clean outside, except for a few minor things, and since it’s a GS, it has nice alloy wheels on it. And of course, like all 1990s Mercurys, it has a light bar across the grille. Any bets on whether or not it has one bulb burned out, like they always seem to?

Yes, you’re absolutely right – these are both going to take thirteen or fourteen seconds to reach 60 MPH, and they’re both going to understeer like an overloaded Costco shopping cart. But if you’re concerned about that, you’re missing the point. They’re both very clean, low-mileage cars from late in their respective production runs, after their manufacturers had ironed out all the bugs. Yes, they’re priced a little high, particularly the LeBaron. But either one would do nicely for a second car, or as an offbeat weekend cruiser. You’re guaranteed to have the nicest one around in either case. Which one speaks to you?

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on whatsapp
WhatsApp
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on reddit
Reddit
Subscribe
Notify of
52 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Spikedlemon
Spikedlemon
42 seconds ago

Kcar’s price is far too high.

That leaves the Topaz. Any well-stocked nearby American junkyard would have ample parts to keep it running.

Shop-Teacher
Member
Shop-Teacher
46 seconds ago

I can deal with the seatbelts. The Topaz is a much better looking car.

Bill C
Member
Bill C
4 minutes ago

Both a bit pricey, but I’d pick the LeBaron. Option packaging was weird back then. We had a LeBaron GTS, the sporty hatchback, with a turbo. It too had a digital dash, but crank windows and manual locks. It was a nice car. It replaced a disastrous Tempo, so my choice is based on anecdata. This LeBaron with proper wheels and a little soap and water inside would be a nice little hobby car. Frankly I’d prefer a column shift, but can’t complain. The 2.5 at this point was better than decent.

Cheats McCheats
Cheats McCheats
5 minutes ago

I wouldn’t pay anywhere close to those prices for either of those. But if I had to choose, I’m taking the K car

Clusker Du
Clusker Du
16 minutes ago

Mercury Topaz might be the greatest Drag Queen name ever. Tens across the board!

The Stig's Misanthropic Cousin
Member
The Stig's Misanthropic Cousin
20 minutes ago

I don’t have much enthusiasm for either of these vehicles. I voted for the LeBaron because it is blue and has a cool digital dashboard. I wouldn’t pay $5,200 for this car, but there is an amount of money I would pay for it.

I don’t see much to like about the Topaz aside from condition.

MattyD
MattyD
21 minutes ago

If I’m getting a gramps-mobile, it’s gotta have 4 doors.

Jonathan Green
Member
Jonathan Green
22 minutes ago

Damnit, I’m now triggered!

F–k you Ford for ever introducing the Tempo/Topaz…

SirRaoulDuke
SirRaoulDuke
23 minutes ago

I’ll take the digital dash for maximum 80’s style.

StillPlaysWithCars
StillPlaysWithCars
29 minutes ago

I’ve never understood how to secure luggage on those racks since there’s no forward attachment points. Do you just ratchet it to the entire trunk? Leave it floating up there and go over bumps at 2mph?

Anyway Topaz for me I guess.

Racingtown
Member
Racingtown
30 minutes ago

I hate to say it, but the LeBaron is more interesting and my choice over the half used bar of soap styling of the Tempo.

Taargus Taargus
Member
Taargus Taargus
32 minutes ago

I don’t want the LeBaron, but I reallllly don’t want the Topaz. The price differential made me pause, but I got there eventually. At least the LeBaron is sort of a neat antiquity.

I’ve been in a number of Tempos/Topaz…es? Topii? And I’ve never witnessed one that ran “smoothly”. This includes relatively new examples back in the 90’s. The Tempo was a car we made fun of back then. And we weren’t exactly living the high life in our mix of GM/Hyundai/Chrysler products.

Recent Posts

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
52
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x