Good morning! I just spent almost eighty bucks filling up my gas tank so today we’re going to look at a couple of fuel-sipping subcompacts. These both have domestic badges on them, but neither one was built here. They’re both cheap, but which one is the better deal? That’ll be up to you.
On Friday, we upped the price limit a bit, and looked at a vintage Packard and an overpriced Nissan. And I also gave you an escape hatch in the form of a brand-new Hyundai. Not many of you took the Hyundai, which I was happy to see. I’m also pleased to report that the Packard won the day handily.
That old green beast is definitely the coolest choice. Really, I just stuck that Maxima in there to see what you’d all do. I mean, I’d rather have that than a new Hyundai, that’s for sure, but there’s no way I’d pay that much for it. The Packard for five grand less seems like a lot better deal, but I bet if you wait a few years, you’ll be able to get cars like that even cheaper.
American automakers have a long tradition of looking abroad for smaller offerings than their own factories produced. Both Ford and Chevy built and sold compact cars in the late ’80s and early ’90s, but for their really small cars, they looked to their overseas partners. These two little runabouts have lived longer than anyone could have guessed, but do either of them still make sense as gas-savers today? Let’s check them out and see.
1988 Chevrolet Sprint – $2,400
Engine/drivetrain: 1.0-liter OHC inline-3, five-speed manual, FWD
Location: Molalla, OR
Odometer reading: 195,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
For twelve years, Chevy’s entry-level model was the Chevette. It sold really well, but it was outdated from day one, and by the mid-1980s it was positively prehistoric compared to the competition. To replace it, Chevy brought over a little Suzuki model from Japan called the Cultus, and renamed it the Sprint. Originally sold on the West Coast, it went nationwide in 1986, and in 1989 it was replaced by the second-generation Cultus, which we know better as the Geo Metro.
The Sprint is powered by a 1.0-liter three-cylinder engine like the later Metro, only without the benefit of fuel injection. With a tiny two-barrel carburetor, it makes only 48 horsepower, but this thing weighs less than the cargo capacity of most pickups, so it’s enough. This one makes the most of it with a five-speed manual. It runs and drives well, and the seller says it has a new timing belt and some other tune-up stuff, so it should be good to go.
The interior is actually in pretty good condition. The seller has added seat covers, which I imagine are covering up some wear, but they look okay. The dash and door panels are fine. I don’t know what it is about really simple little cars like this, but they really appeal to me. I wouldn’t trade my nice cushy Chrysler for it, but I do kind of miss them.
Outside, it’s a little banged up, but it’s rust-free. At least the only really damaged bit is the left front fender, so you can replace it easily, if you want. Personally I’d just leave it, I think.
1990 Ford Festiva L – $2,000
Engine/drivetrain: 1.3-liter OHC inline-4, three-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Ocala, FL
Odometer reading: 130,000 miles
Operational status: Runs well, due for brakes
Meanwhile, over at Ford, the Escort was the smallest car in the US lineup from 1983, when the European-built Fiesta left, until 1988, when this car arrived. It’s a version of the Kia Pride, based on the Mazda 121, sold here as the Festiva. In other parts of the world, this car was available as a four-door sedan or five-door hatchback, but here we only got this three-door hatchback.
Under the Festiva’s stubby hood is a Mazda-designed 1.3-liter four-cylinder. It started out with a carburetor, but by 1990 it had been upgraded to electronic fuel injection. This one powers the front wheels through a three-speed automatic (yeah, I know, me too), also from Mazda. It runs and drives fine, and it has a new timing belt, water pump, and tires, but the seller says the brakes “need some love.” The exhaust is getting noisy, too.
This one is in similar condition to the Sprint inside: covers on the front seats, but otherwise in good shape. The seller says the seats “aren’t bad” under the covers, so you could probably take them off if you wanted. This one does have air conditioning, but it doesn’t work. The seller is up-front and says it needs a new compressor. And yes, it has automatic seat belts, but the year before this didn’t, and neither did Canadian models. Standard seat belts are out there, if you really want to switch them out.
It’s faded outside, but I don’t see any damage. It looks like there might be a tiny bit of rust starting here and there, but nothing compared to Midwest cars. You could probably shine it up with a buffer if you wanted to, and it would look a lot better.
Whenever gas prices rise, small cars like this start to look a lot more appealing. And now, at five bucks a gallon, you start to wonder if you really need power steering or soundproofing, if the tradeoff is forty miles to the gallon. Sure, modern hybrids can top that, but not for just two grand. It rarely makes sense to change cars just to get better mileage, but if you’re looking for a car anyway, is it worth looking at these little guys? And if so, which one?
“I just spent almost eighty bucks filling up my gas tank.”
Last week I stopped at a no-attendants gas station where your card gets pre-approved for a maximum amount before you fill. The standard amount has been 120 Euros for a long time. The pump clicked off before the tank was full. And it was just an old Volvo, nothing with a 20 gallon tank or more.
Sprint all day. It’s in better shape, has the stick, and a carb, so it would be fun to tinker with and figure out a carb swap to wake it up a bit. Maybe there is a way to run 3 motorcycle carbs and get the head and exhaust breathing a little better.
OR car > FL car, and even tho I prefer a Festiva to a Sprint, with these 2 I went Chevy; with the AT & those belts plus some rust, I’ll take the carb instead.
I like Festivas of this generation. A friend in college had one and it was a fun little car (in a stick shift). No manual AND no AC? No thanks.
The yellow car seems to have more rust, so I voted for the red car. Too bad, because I’d rather have yellow and fuel injection, but rust suxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I see both of these as good engine swap candidates.
The Festiva can accept most mazda 4 cylinders from the era, including some very hot ones like the BPT. Unfortunately, the manual swap parts may be hard to find.
The Sprint could be swapped to a Swift GTi powertrain at double the horsepower, or a 3 cylinder turbo, or even a 1.6.
That being said, I’m going with the Sprint, because that Festiva body looks rough in the pictures, like they just applied yellow spray paint over the rust.
These cars remind me of a time in my life when I could barely scrape together a dollar for a gallon of gas and I subsisted mostly on 10 cent packs of ramen noodles. I had a Geo Metro that was fine-ish, but was a major financial mistake on my part. (Financed with no prior credit history at 21%.) That was a part of my life where I learned a lot of lessons and I have no wish to look back on it every time I look at my driveway.
I guess I’ll take the manual and also save $400? Even more since the Fiesta apparently needs new brakes.
You got those prices backwards. You’re paying $400 extra for the manual, but you don’t need brakes, so wash?
Whoops! I sure did mix those up, so yeah, I guess I’m purely choosing the manual here and some extra MPG in this hypothetical world. In the real world, this isn’t happening. Ever.
Same here. I had to vote, so Sprint, but just no.
The little Suzuki is very simple to work on, and they just go and go. It’s not fast, but it’s not as slow as some might think. They get the job done and have a lot of personality. 50 MPG all day long is nothing to sneeze at in 2026. They also have no electric gadgets draining down the battery while it sits parked.
Someone needs to invent an easy-to-install heat pump for cars that don’t have AC. I would probably buy a couple of them, along with a couple of higher-output alternators…
https://outequippro.com/products/rv-air-conditioner-12v-11500-btu-rooftop-air-conditioner-with-heat-pump-for-rvs-vans-campers-trailer?gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=22696193000&gbraid=0AAAAAp9fLJxLjFsMUjwI6CFanReF2Wn3f&gclid=CjwKCAjwlY3WBhANEiwApsNrLcLrSfcAD5TTf8vov1fb6zy43jk8fpHldrYYskPgIdh7UmtxA-wVKhoCsn4QAvD_BwE
Another neither day. Both are overpriced death traps.
There is simply no way I’m going back to a car with carbs and I can’t image the hassle of keeping it on the road and passing emission testing every 2 years. I can’t help but notice that it does not have current tags. At least the Sprint manages 39 mpg even if it only has 48 hp and no A/C. (I will also never buy a car without A/C ever again)
The Sprint has broken A/C and despite the size, death trap age, and limited power only manages 28 mpg. Yes, the auto Festiva is only rated at 28 mpg. The manual bumps that to 33 mpg.
These things are basically motorcycle equivalents, in terms of safety and sophistication. Death trap? I guess, but not any more than a used Kawasaki Ninja. Overpriced? Again, not really. Plus they probably have a title, which is never a guarantee with a 20(+)-year-old used bike.
The key difference between a motorcycle and these cars is that the motorcycle is fun. Yes, motorcycles are dangerous – but we overlook that danger because of the fun. I also wear full gear on my motorcycles including an airbag vest.
Also, a $2,000 vehicle is not hard to find in Oregon where we don’t use salt so vehicles don’t rust away.
I could have a little fun on my commute with the Sprint. It’s less than 10 miles, so I think I could handle it being AC-less. I’m usually on a motorcycle, so not really that different, safety-wise.
Sprint = next rallycross car.
Oh hell yeah. That would be awesome.
Both will be miserable on modern roads. Tiny, vulnerable to basically everything else, noisy and absolutely dog slow. The 3-sp auto the Ford will be worse even with a bit more horses on tap (although not many).
That being said, the Ford looks to be in better shape, is yellow, has less miles, has at least the hope of AC (after repairs) and most importantly fuel injection. I am not going back to a carburetor under any circumstances, that ship sailed years ago.
I agree, I hopefully will never again in my life buy or own something with a carburetor.
I adore the Festiva. An excellent no-b.s. car. Even with the automatic.
I have known some festivas and they are tough but even though I would hate carbs from this era, cars this small should not have auto transmissions. it is a safety thing.
In the 90s, my buddies mom had the 4 door version of that sprint with the 3 speed auto.
She used to drive 4 of us from the suburbs into Toronto on the 401 almost every weekend.
It was underpowered for sure, but surprisingly adequate.
Sprint for me. It’s about as basic as you can get without walking. I like basic cars.
I know where a running factory turbo motor is for the Sprint, so I know which way I’m going!
I was all set to vote for the Ford because it is Jim Anchower approved until I saw it was an automatic. So the Chevrolet all the way here.