Since this is the second day in a row with cars meeting this criteria, I might as well make it official: it’s Cheap Stickshift Week. Manual transmissions are generally preferable for inexpensive used cars anyway; a failed automatic can pretty much total an otherwise decent car, but unless you really screw something up, the worst you can do to a stick is wear out the clutch. So we’ll just make a week of it, and have a good old-fashioned runoff on Friday.
Yesterday’s cars were both two-door coupes in good running order, but that’s about all we knew about them. To my surprise, it was a win for the GM car over the Japanese (or rather Mexican) import. The Olds Achieva, built right down the road from here in Lansing, Michigan, won you over with its snazzy styling and better-than-average powertrain. The biggest complaint I heard about it was that it was black. As the owner of a currently-filthy black car, I get it; they look great all shined up, but like hell otherwise.
The Achieva is absolutely my choice between these two. I have nothing but respect for that Sentra, and I wouldn’t turn it down, but up against a Quad 4 with a 282, it’s going to lose. That Achieva wouldn’t be all that quick, but that gearbox shifts very nicely, and the Quad 4 might be GM’s best-sounding four-cylinder ever.
I have always chosen function over form, especially when it comes to cars. I can appreciate a clean and well-kept car, but mine always seem to be a little dirty or have some cosmetic flaws somewhere. The oily bits, however, are kept in tip-top shape. The two cars I’m about to show you are no beauty queens, but they do seem to be in good mechanical condition and ready for some fun. Let’s check them out.
1993 Jeep Cherokee Sport – $2,200
Engine/drivetrain: 4.0-liter OHV inline 6, five-speed manual, 4WD
Location: Denver, CO
Odometer reading: 257,000 miles
Operational status: Ad doesn’t specifically say, actually
Some cars seem destined to be classics from day one. Others, while well-respected in their day, aren’t really appreciated fully until years later. The XJ-platform Jeep Cherokee seems to belong to that latter group. It sold well, people liked it, but it was in the hands of second and third owners that the boxy Jeep really came into its own. XJs have become the cheap 4x4s to modify and abuse on the trails. AMC and later Chrysler built a lot of them, and they’re durable vehicles, so cheap used ones aren’t hard to find. It is increasingly rare to find a stock one like this for cheap, though.
I’ll admit my eyes tend to glaze over when our illustrious editor-in-chief goes into the minutiae of Jeep lore, much like my wife’s eyes glaze over when I start talking about RC cars, but if I remember correctly, this 1993 model is one of the “good” ones. It has the legendary 4.0-liter inline six, along with the Aisin-Warner AX15 five-speed manual. It has over a quarter million miles on it, but that hardly seems to matter with these things. Everything is rebuildable, so as long as the body holds up, it’s basically immortal. The seller is a dealership, and they don’t actually say how well it runs or drives, but I have to assume it does run. Dealerships have nothing to gain by advertising a non-running car without saying it doesn’t run.
This is the best view we get of the interior, and it’s not much to go on. The seller does say that it’s a very basic model with crank windows, which is probably preferable for an off-road toy. We do get a good view of the manual shifter, which I really like the look of on these. It may or may not have something to do with The Goonies.
It used to be that nice forest green that was so popular on these, but the top half has been spray-painted flat black for some unknown reason. It doesn’t look rusty, but I know that rust likes to hide on these, so you’d be wise to check the underside carefully. If everything looks solid, give it a cheap DIY paint job and call it a day.
2001 Mercedes-Benz SLK230 Kompressor – $2,300
Engine/drivetrain: Supercharged 3.2-liter DOHC inline 4, six-speed manual, RWD
Location: Austin, TX
Odometer reading: 150,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
Remember when the Mazda Miata came out, and it was a big hit, and then suddenly automakers were falling over each other to create their own two-seat roadsters? Those were the days. Mercedes-Benz had been doing the two-seater thing for years with the R107 and R129 SL roadsters, of course, but they were large and heavy cruisers, a far cry from the lightweight Miata. This R170-chassis SLK is still no featherweight, but it’s a lot closer to a Miata or BMW Z3/Z4 competitor than the SL.
I try really hard not to give sellers too hard of a time here, but there is an error in this ad so egregious that I have to say something. The seller has this car listed as an SLK320, with the 3.2-liter V6, but one glance at this engine bay will tell you that that’s a four-cylinder engine. That makes this an SLK230 Kompressor, not an SLK320. It would be an understandable mistake, except that the seller claims to be an experienced mechanic, and in two different places the ad says that this is the V6. That’s a mistake on the order of making an acceptance speech for an award you didn’t win. They do say that the car runs and drives well, but I suppose we had better take that with a grain of salt, too.
Mercedes interiors of the early 2000s were not the high-quality, indestructible environments that they were in the 1970s and ’80s, and it shows. This car has cracked and torn leather, flaking paint on the center console, and heavy wear on the steering wheel, all at only 150,000 miles. It still looks comfortable, and it’s fine for a car this price, but it’s not what you’d expect to see in a premium car like this.
It’s pretty scruffy outside, too. There’s hail damage, bad paint, and cracked plastic. The grille is absent entirely. In addition, the seller says the power-operated folding hard top is no longer power-operated, though it can be lowered and raised manually.
If you’re shopping at this end of the price range, you’re going to have to compromise on something, and it makes more sense to me to compromise on aesthetics rather than mechanical condition. A car won’t leave you stranded due to ugliness. These are definitely both ugly, but they seem to be in decent shape where it counts. Which one would you trust?
I voted for the SLK because it’s more my type of vehicle. Now having said that, this is likely a terrible idea. In my experience, when a mechanic dumps a car, it typically is because there is something that needs to be fixed that is either expensive OR the guy couldn’t figure out.
If he can’t tell a V6 from a straight 4, there’s probably quite the catalogue of mechanical conundrums that are beyond him…
Jeep. There is no substitute.
Wow, this is a slaughter. A jeep that looks beat up is still a jeep, a Mercedes in that condition screams “trying to look rich”. Also in terms of maintenance and repairs it wouldn’t even be close even if the Benz wasn’t clapped out and sketchy
You walk into the House That Tracy Built, packing a skanky Merc? Prepare to be schooled.
Nothing more expensive than a cheap German car.
I prefer the 6 speed Mercedes, but that seller is lying like hell! The hail broke the front grille??? Did it also buckle the paint in a pattern that resembles a front-end collision? Did it also conveniently delete the 320 badge from the back?
I would start with the Mercedes, and would call him/her out on all of it and see where the price landed. Or maybe I’d run all the way to the Jeep, which is not my preferred vehicle, but as a lifted wagon it would be serviceable.
SLK. It’s got that neu Groß Altima Energie
I hate to bleat with the rest of the heard, but nothing is more expensive than a cheap Mercedes. Give it to me straight, I’ll take the Jeep.
It took quite the PoS to make me want a flippin Jeep, but that seems a far less painful choice. Obviously that thing should run forever and I’d find some use for it every other week or so.
Both. I am not ashamed. I like them both.
For those of us who might actually roll the dice on deals like these, I’m compelled to put a couple asterisks on this statement:
“Manual transmissions are generally preferable for inexpensive used cars anyway; a failed automatic can pretty much total an otherwise decent car, but unless you really screw something up, the worst you can do to a stick is wear out the clutch.”
Taken as a whole, that’s generally true if you wrench, but might well be false if you’re just telling yourself you *could* wrench.
Firstly, wearing out the clutch is just stage one of destroying a manual. Once that happens, synchros get crunched and the snowball of abuse rolls down to the gutter where the vehicle gets offered up as someone else’s problem.
The other thing is that some cars’ parts (*cough* Mercedes *cough*) cost a lot more than others, so even if you have the skills to correctly perform a clutch job in an SLK, you might actually spend less having a shop put a decent used or rebuilt slushbox into an XJ if it were so equipped.
I like SLKs – but not that SLK.
Back in the early ’90s my office had a small fleet of XJ Cherokees for field work. I still have fond memories of beating the crap out of them and getting to places I had no good reason to go, and always getting back home again. So for nostalgia’s sake, Cherokee it is. And to paraphrase MIB II, [Cherokee] you look like crap. No, [Mercedes] YOU look like crap!