It’s natural to want to talk up a vehicle you’re trying to sell, and to minimize its faults, but I get amused when I see ads that go way over-the-top with praise, and gloss over some major shortcomings. Today’s choices have such ads. Hopefully you find them as entertaining as I did.
Yesterday we looked at two coupes in need of some help. I thought you all might have some more sympathy for that wrecked Acura, but apparently not – the only place that car was going to find sympathy, as my Uncle Bill would have said, is “in the dictionary, somewhere between shit and syphilis.” (Yes, he was, in fact, quite a character.) The Javelin won, I think in part, by default. Not trashed was all it needed to be.
I’m fully on Team Javelin here. I really like the second-gen Javelin’s styling, and the fact that it’s the fancy SST model with a six and an automatic tickles me. I wish you could still get options on cars ala carte like that. It made for some fun combinations.
Writing a classified ad for a car, if you give a damn about it, is hard work. You don’t want to be too long-winded, or no one will read it, but you still want to hit the points you think are important. You want potential buyers to get excited about it, but you also want to be honest about its condition. Sometimes, though, sellers go a little too far in talking up a vehicle, and the resulting ads can be humorous. Are they also persuasive? That’s up to you to decide. Here they are.
1982 Ford F100 XLT – $4,900
Engine/drivetrain: 4.9-liter OHV inline 6, three-speed automatic, RWD
Location: Two Rivers, WI
Odometer reading: 95,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives great
Ford’s F-series trucks are available in a dizzying array of configurations, so some confusion about which version is which is to be expected. But while using a heavier-duty truck for light work is simply wasteful, overloading a lighter-duty model can be dangerous. The seller of this F-100, a basic half-ton light-duty truck, is under the impression that it can haul as much as 3,500 pounds in the bed. That’s close to three times its rated capacity. Furthermore, they say that the aftermarket receiver hitch installed can handle 6,000 pounds, which is true for the hitch, but if the truck can tow that much, I’ll eat my hat.
This F-100 is powered by Ford’s legendary 300 cubic inch inline six, fed by a one-barrel carburetor – a tough engine, but a powerhouse it is not. I’ve driven a number of Ford trucks equipped with this engine, and they can barely get out of their own way. This one has a C6 three-speed automatic, which is a good stout transmission, but everything has its limits, and I’m afraid that if you push this truck as hard as the seller seems to think you can, you’ll find out those limits in a hurry. I have no doubt that it runs and drives well, but I do think that the seller’s claim of being “as smooth as a Cadillac” might be hyperbole.
It’s an XLT model, so it has fancy stuff like carpet and fake woodgrain. The bench seat is covered, but based on the condition of the rest of the interior, I’m hopeful that the cover is there to keep the seat nice, not cover rips and stains. It has a bunch of auxiliary gauges, which are a nice upgrade over the factory idiot lights.
It’s a Wisconsin truck, and that shows in the rear wheel arches – they’re eaten away around the edges. One front fender is a junkyard part, and the rest of the paint isn’t great either. But it’s still solid underneath, the bed looks good, and there’s no sign of rust-through on the frame.
2009 Volkswagen Jetta 2.5 S – $2,150
Engine/drivetrain: 2.5-liter DOHC inline 5, six-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Brighton, MI
Odometer reading: 178,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives great
You can use a lot of adjectives to describe Volkswagens from a couple decades ago, but “reliable” is not often one of them. Volkswagen’s push upmarket, which added a lot of complexity to its cars, resulted in cars that were excellent to drive, but very fragile and finicky. This Mk5 Jetta is one of the better ones from a reliability standpoint, but at 178,000 miles, the prevailing wisdom is that it’s reaching the end of its useful life. The seller speaks incredibly highly of it, however, saying that it has needed nothing more than basic maintenance and wear items for the past ten years.
This Jetta is powered by a 2.5 liter five-cylinder engine and a six-speed automatic transmission. This engine has a decent reputation, especially compared to VW’s turbocharged four-cylinder engines, but it’s still no Camry. The seller sings the praises of how well this one runs, how powerful it is, and how reliable it has been for them, but I’m always a little leery of claims that a car has “needed nothing” for long periods of time. Is that reliability, or deferred maintenance that’s about to catch up to it?
It’s in very nice condition inside, and the seller says everything works fine, including the air conditioning. It even has heated seats, a nice feature for Great Lakes winters. I think VW had backed off on the crappy soft-touch plastic by this time, too, so it shouldn’t be all sticky inside like the Mk4 Jettas got.
Things aren’t as rosy outside; it has a lot of dents and dings, and the back bumper is toast. Apparently the seller tried to fix some damage to the plastic bumper with Bondo, and, predictably, it is now falling apart. A bumper cover from a junkyard, even if it didn’t match, would look so much better. I don’t see any signs of rust, however, which is impressive for a Michigan car.
These might be every bit as good as the sellers claim, and I hope they are. But I know for certain that Ford truck can’t haul or tow as much as the seller claims, nor is it likely that any VW product was completely trouble-free for a decade. But if you can overlook the hyperbole and wild claims, which one looks like a better deal?
That truck has the same vibes as a windowless cargo van with “FREE CANDY” painted on the side. I’m good.
Oof. This is another “neither” day. While I would ordinarily jump on the F100, as I can and have wrenched on every part of those trucks, having lived in that region I am highly confident the frame on that truck is swiss cheese. The Jetta is a different can of worms, but also likely crusty underneath but with the VW electrical nightmares I have experienced first-hand on friend’s vehicles. I guess if pushed I’d take the Ford.
The unkillable vs the electrical nightmare.Can you make it an easier choice?
I can’t believe I’m saying this, but I’m going with the 2009 Jetta.
Because the 2.5 five cylinders were decent, the automatics weren’t made by VW, and the Ford is RWD. Also, I think these were the years of the “swiss cheese” frames for the F-series/bronco?
I just personally kinda hate RWD pickup trucks. I get that people live in places that it isn’t an issue, but for me it is an issue (winter). If I want something RWD from this era I’d rather build up an el camino to start.
Even worse, I bet the ford has an open rear end. One wheel drive!
I once broke up a parking pad with a fork lift and loaded it all in the back of a Chevy 1/2 ton. Had to be 6000 pounds of concrete. The truck would barely move and the engine seized on the way back from the dump. That Ford could handle a measly 3500 pounds.
Is that pickup truck lifted? Or is just has smaller wheels on it?
Either way, my back hurts just thinking about that bench seat.
Check the F100 frame. If no rust, it’s a no brainer. Even if you have to replace the bed for rot, that’s doable with junkyards or aftermarket.
A falling headliner in a car from 2009? I’ve ever seen that in a car from this century. I think there’s more going on with that Jetta. F100 for me.
Welcome to 2000s era VAG products. My 2003 A4 has quite literally disintegrated and fallen apart faster than I could source and replace parts. Headliner is one of the more common ones. Seat backs, trim lamination, glove box hinges/catches, virtually every switch contact failing in various ways, door/window/sunroof seals.
Tow ratings in the US are really rather stupid. Of course you can tow 6000lbs with that truck. Slowly and carefully, in relatively flat terrain. Used to tow pretty near that regularly when I worked maintaining cemeteries all the time with one just like this – but completely base spec with a stick. 3sp+granny gear. It would tow a big trailer with a Bobcat and a couple big mowers on it just fine at 35-40mph. 3500lbs in the bed might be a case of you can do it ONCE though. But that truck looks like you would need a tetanus booster just to get near it, so no thanks. I’d be embarrassed to have it in my driveway looking like that.
My mother had this exact year and spec of Jetta, except in arrest-me-red. And it was a perfectly adequate car. I’d buy that as a kid’s first car to kill or a winter beater, so it does have a use case. For $2K if you get a couple years out of it, it’s a winner.
overloading a lighter-duty model can be dangerous
Unless.its a Ford Ranger. Then it’s Rangerous:
https://youtu.be/y4sYoL7rRWg
Just another day with a Ford truckin’ Ranger!
Not touching that VW with a 10ft pole. Some cars are good at hiding rust from the outside but I’m betting underneath is thoroughly crunchy. Overpriced truck for me.
I picked the F-150, because I’d rather walk than pay actual money for that Jetta, but the price of that truck is batshitcrazypants.
It wouldn’t cost much to get that Jetta back in presentable condition, and you could recoup at least a quarter of the price by selling off the Audi wheels, which I think are a bit shameful in this application. And I’m quite familiar with the 2.5. That’d be my pick. The F100 doesn’t appeal to me, not in that condition and spec.
Another choice between hardship and misery. I have done time in a Mk3 Golf, and while it drove really nicely, the number of things that could break in a car with basically no features was amazing. It’s the Ford by default, but the rust tells me it’s not long for this world, either.
The Mk. 3 was pretty bad. I had a Mk. 3 Jetta, albeit a loaded VR6. Window regulators and vacuum lines galore. Not to mention the A/C compressor that seized and exploded and threw shrapnel into the radiator and condenser.
The Mk. 5 was much more serviceable.
“I do think that the seller’s claim of being “as smooth as a Cadillac” might be hyperbole.”
Maybe not if the Cadillac is an 8-6-4 engine with a bad spark plug.
F100, but “solid” underneath needs to be seen to be believed. I had a 78 with the 6 cyclinder, which I bought off a friend 2 years after the Phenolic timing gear went and helped him change it. Of course it was outside in December with a Trap over us in a snow squall.
I’ll take the truck. I think it’s overpriced, but after looking at the pics in the ad, I think those miles might be legit!
I’ve driven a ’73 F-150 with the 300 and a three on the tree. I became fixated with shifting into 3rd at 20 mph. No bucking. No knocking. Just a gradual increase in speed.
Have a 92 F-250 with the 300 and 3 speed with creeper gear. Can confirm you can drop that in top gear at 20 mph. On the highway I wish I had the 5 speed but I don’t want to give up the creeper gear.
There were two 5-speeds available — the most common was the Mazda-based 5 speed, which is not the one to put in a work truck. The one to have was a Borg-Warner “5-speed” which was really a 4-speed with a granny low in 1st.
Wow didn’t realize they offered more than the Mazda one. Man that B-W is the one to have! What I have in my F250 is pretty much the same as the T-18 I had in an old CJ-5. It was fun to idle up steep hills in 4 low.
My family had one in the 90s; both types were on the lot at a Michigan dealer. The B-Ws were less common, but more popular for work trucks and showed up in lower trim levels more commonly. I don’t recall the exact ratio setups, but I suspect the regular 5-speed was 4+overdrive 5th for fuel economy and EPA averages, while the B-W was either 1:1 in the top gear, or only very mild overdrive.
The problem was mainly with pairing the 300 I-6 with the conventional 5-speed; it could lug the guts out of the less robust transmission. V8-powered trucks had peakier torque curves; the driver was more likely to shift accordingly and not lug it so hard.
I have driven a truck with that combo before and it struggled to merge onto the freeway unladen. They are great trucks but that seller is crazy, and that truck is a bit overpriced given the rust. Sadly I chose the Jetta because the price makes more sense to me, but I like the Ford better, that interior is pretty charming. Ultimately Jetta, $2k is the new $1k and that car will limp along for awhile without getting any more serious maintenance.
Having owned and worked on an Mk5 Jetta, I’m not going back there! And the truck is just too much money for that example. Since it’s only fake internet money, I guess I’m voting truck.
The Ford has a near infinite supply of donor vehicles all over the countryside, so it gets my vote simply for parts availability.
Sourcing body bits for that VW (at shitbox pricing) would be a challenge in most places.
Not really. There are tons of those Jettas being parted out, or in junkyards all over the country. I think you’d struggle more with the F100, just because it’s aged out of ubiquity.
I’d wager quite a bit of money (and I’m not one to gamble) that within a thousand mile radius of where I live (north central part of the US), there are way more ’80s vintage Ford pickups in the junk yards and pick-em places than there are VW Jettas. It might be closer to parity on the coasts, but even then, sourcing domestic parts should be way easier and cheaper than for European imports.
The truck is twice the price it should be, or a little more. I’m unenthusiastically endorsing the battered but cheap Jetta, a trip to the junkyard, and a few cans of blue bumper paint.
$2k is a decent price for a beater I guess, the truck does nothing for me.
That Ford sounds almost as mighty as an Isuzu.
Two unkillable engines, but with a gulf in pricing between the two.
I’ll take the one that’s certified to withstand Torch’s ownership.