Good morning! Today we’re taking a trip back in time forty years into the past, to look at a couple of vehicles with almost nothing in common except four rectangular headlights. Which one fits your vision of 1986 better? That’s what we’re going to find out.
We finished off last week with a couple of snowplows, and it seems evident that after eighty thousand miles of pushing snow around, a Jeep Wrangler is pretty well used-up. That clean F-150 might be more ungainly in tight quarters, but it isn’t about to fold up like a taco. I think you all chose wisely.
I’d happily take either one for a hour or so tomorrow; I have to clear the snow off our driveway so U-Haul can deliver the rest of our containers, and all I have to do it with is an eighteen-inch snow shovel. But honestly, I think my neighbor across the street has the right idea for small areas: a Polaris side-by-side with an enclosed cab and a plow blade. I’d rather have that than either of these.
As much as I hate to admit it, 1986 is now forty years ago. Dire Straits’s “Money For Nothing” winning MTV Video Of The Year, the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster, Cameron Frye kicking his dad’s fake Ferrari through a window – kids who were born when those things were happening are now old enough to have mid-life crises. Cars from that year are getting thin on the ground, and more than a little haggard. But I found a couple that aren’t too bad yet. Let’s check them out.
1986 Ford LTD Crown Victoria – $3,800
Engine/drivetrain: 302 cubic inch OHV V8, four-speed automatic, RWD
Location: Pflugerville, TX
Odometer reading: 54,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
Before the rounded Ford Crown Vic that everyone knows as a cop car came this boxy character, festooned with chrome and featuring a landau vinyl top. Although it’s about the same size as the later rounded models, it somehow looks bigger. And even in 1986, it looked like a dinosaur, especially next to Ford’s swoopy new Taurus. The LTD Crown Victoria, as it was officially known, sold well despite looking old; Ford built nearly two million of these things over its eleven-year run.
’86 was a big year for the big Ford under the hood: the venerable 302 V8 gained sequential electronic fuel injection, gaining only 10 horsepower but a whole lot of drivability and reliability. An AOD four-speed automatic transmission was the only option, of course. We don’t get a whole lot of information about its condition; the seller just says it runs and drives very well. The odometer only shows 54,000 miles, and considering this car’s typical elderly demographic, it could be correct.
It’s mighty nice inside, and I can tell you from experience that those seats are very comfortable. That bench seat won’t hold you in place during hard cornering, but that’s not what this car is for anyway. It’s got a bunch of power toys, and the seller says the air conditioning works fine.
It’s a little rougher outside, with surface rust on the trunk lid and dull paint everywhere else. It’s also missing its fake wire wheel covers on one side, apparently, and the side without wheel covers has blackwall tires instead of whitewalls. Sounds like a good excuse to find the right aftermarket wheels; these look good on Keystones or Cragars.
1986 Nissan 720 ST King Cab 4×4 – $3,999
Engine/drivetrain: 2.4-liter OHC inline 4, five-speed manual, 4WD
Location: Spanaway, WA
Odometer reading: 262,000 miles
Operational status: Ad doesn’t expressly say
The Nissan 720 is a truck I know well. I owned one in the mid-1990s, and it saw me through some really rough times. I bought it from a used car lot in Duluth, Minnesota, on a bitterly cold day; I needed a cheap car, and that truck was the only sub-$1,000 car on the lot that would start. I then put it in 4WD, and it heaved itself out of a three-foot snowbank like it wasn’t even there. I bought it on the spot.
This 720 is longer and fancier than mine; it’s a King Cab, in ST trim, which for 1986 came with an added bonus: electronic fuel injection for its NAPS-Z engine. It drives all four wheels through a five-speed manual transmission and a dual-range transfer case. It has a ton of miles on it, but so do all 720s these days. I wish I could tell you more about its condition, but it’s being sold by a dealer, and the description feels AI-generated and is completely useless. You’d have to go drive it to see how well it really runs.
The ST package got you bucket seats and a tach, but I honestly can’t remember if that steering wheel is what it came with or not. I know it was something fancier than the basic two-spoke plastic wheel that the other 720s got. It looks decent inside, but I bet the seats are a mess under those covers. It should have air conditioning as well, but there’s no telling whether or not it still works.
It doesn’t look too bad outside except for the mismatched tailgate. It isn’t rusty, or beat-up, and it still has those cool “ST” stickers on the back of the bed. Modern truck designers have really got to step up their vinyl graphics game; that’s all I have to say.
So there they are, two survivors from the same year that couldn’t be more different. But in a way, they complement each other, so I’m going to give you a “both” option in the poll. I can think of far worse two-car garages than this one. But if you had to choose one, which would it be?
I had an ’83 2WD KingCab. In many ways, I think it was better than the ’91 Toyota V6 I replaced it with.
Taking pictures of the truck in the rain was a choice.
I bought a rusty, beat up 720 for 700€. It is shockingly fun to drive, a competent offroader and a useful tool.
If that brown one showed up for sale in my area I’d buy it and turn mine into a parts car.
720 is the answer here.
I gotta go with the 4wd, manual Nissan pickup truck. Utility always wins for me.
I have to go with the mini truck, I love the brown and tan, chunky tires, and manual transmission. I have comfy cruiser and sports car handled, so I will take the back to basics utility vehicle for my 3rd parking spot.
Nissan 720 for me. I’m no fan of the 1980s Panther body Fords. And I prefer a manual Nissan 1980s truck (which I’ve driven before) over a 1980s Panther body (which I’ve driven before) any day.
The Ford seems likely to be the better financial proposition, and would probably complement my Tracker for a 2-car garage better, but that Nissan is WAY too cool to resist!
As someone who’s two car garage currently has an ’89 LTD Crown Vic Squire on one side, and a ’93 Tracker on the other, I agree they absolutely do compliment each other!
Nice!
Hells yeah on the 720, and that ain’t a bad price for a 4×4, either!
Really don’t want either of these heaps taking up space in my driveway. Given that I’ve spent more miles than I’d like (albeit two thirds of a lifetime ago) trekking in a full sized Detroit V8mobile, I’ll take that rustbucket truck. Never had a truck and it doesn’t get much trucker than this.
I’ve a couple of stumps that want pulling. I’d still have most of my ever-shrinking front lawn intact after I’d finished the work.
The Crown Vic is in great shape and would certainly make for comfie cruising, but that’s about it. Normally, I don’t take the truck option, but this Nissan would be great for taking up rutted dirt roads to get to the good hiking trails (which is as close to 4-wheeling as I’m likely to get). I’ll take the one that’ll keep me truckin’ through what’s getting to be an even longer, stranger trip than expected.
When I was a kid my friend’s dad always drove Ford panther bodies and he had one just like this in blue. I still remember how comfortable that car was.
The Crown Vic is the better deal here. But depending on your style, the truck could be improved upon. Be nice if it were a little cheaper and transparent in the details.
The Nissan wins by default. And also, it has a cooler interior color too 😀
The Ford is tough, comfy, and I love the patina. It’s also a LOT less miles.
The truck is a truck and has a manual tranny.
Both seem like high $$ for what they are, but if forced to choose I’d take the Ford. Fortunately, I’m not forced to choose.
Both! (One should always be running to take me to Autozone and buy parts for the other.)
When I saw the choices, I thought truck for sure. And I was right. A Nissan King cab with 5spd and 4×4. Oh yeah, all day long. Nothing again the Vic but the outside is a lot rougher than the inside so no go for me there. That truck I could use today. Wish it was a little closer.
That Nissan is beautiful.
Nissan. Now, if I can just find my Grateful Dead American Beauty cassette.
This continues to prove that I can’t predict the Autopian readership’s tastes . . . I would have thought that the truck would be a runaway win!!
As another survivor from 1986, I’d take the truck. It looks a bit like how I feel…
Nissan. AOD in the Ford is not great and strangely very little is interchangeable one year to another in the box versions like this. even though they all look pretty much the same.
No love for the big ol’ boats, so the truck wins by a mile for me (plus, it’s fantastic design-wise)
Would do the truck with happy smile.
But it is still about a grand too high in price.
Grandma’s car holds not interest at all.
I went with the “both” option.
I like almost any pickup truck built before 2000. Old pickups are cool and this one is no exception. This truck also looks to be in good condition. The pictures make it look dull and worn, but I think a lot of that is the awful Washington weather. This truck would look good with a carwash and some sunshine.
I also like the Ford. I’m not a fan of small ’80s cars, but the big ones are cool. This could be a very nice car with a cheap paint job. Aside from the paint, I don’t have a lot of concerns (I’m a bit bothered the seller describes the AC as both “frio” and “caliente” in the original ad, but I got a B- in high school Spanish so maybe I’m misunderstanding something). Even if the AC is dodgy, though, the low miles and interior condition make this car worth the asking price. I also suspect it has little, if any, rust.
I took it to mean “cold AC and hot heat.”