Good morning! We’re sticking with stickshifts today, because two cars came up on the Underappreciated Survivors group on Facebook that caught my eye. They’re both cars that were very common in their day, but nearly always seen with automatic transmissions. These two, however, are equipped with manual transmissions. Does that make them interesting enough to consider? We’ll see.
Friday’s runoff featured nothing but manual transmissions, and only cars built after 2010. I confess I’m surprised by the outcome of the vote; I don’t know which car I expected to win, but it wasn’t the VW Golf. But win it did, by almost a two-to-one margin over its nearest competitor, the Nissan Juke.
That would be my first and second choice as well. I really like that Golf, but I’d have to see if it was worth the extra two grand over the Juke. The other two, the VW Tiguan and the Hyundai Elantra, don’t interest me all that much, and they didn’t interest very many of you, either, from the looks of it.
Younger readers may have heard some of us older folks refer to manual transmissions as “standard” transmissions. That’s because up until the last ten years or so, they were just that: standard. Order a car with no options, and you got a stickshift. Some cars were almost never seen with their standard transmissions, though; virtually everyone who bought one opted for an automatic. These two managed to sneak off the assembly line without an optional automatic. Let’s check them out.
1979 Ford Fairmont – $9,000
Engine/drivetrain: 2.3-liter OHC inline 4, four-speed manual, RWD
Location: Willowbrook, IL
Odometer reading: 47,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
Ford’s RWD Fox platform had a hell of a run, and produced some well-loved cars, but it all started here. The Fairmont debuted in 1978 as a replacement for the Maverick, which was based on the old Falcon platform that dated all the way back to 1960. Never let it be said that Ford doesn’t get its money’s worth out of a design.
The Fairmont was available with a bunch of different engines, but this one has the most basic option: the 2.3-liter overhead cam four-cylinder from the Pinto. This engine had a long and distinguished career under the hoods of Ranger pickups, but for the Fairmont it was barely adequate power. It drives the rear axle through a four-speed manual. It has 47,000 miles on it, which sounds low these days, but when this car was new, getting 100,000 miles out of a car was doing really well. It’s a one-owner car, and the seller says it’s “ready to enjoy.”
It’s unbelievably clean inside. It looks like there might be a hole worn through the side bolster on the driver’s seat, but apart from that, this could be a picture from a Ford brochure from 1979. Whether or not that’s a good thing, I’ll leave up to you.
It’s almost as clean outside. The paint is original, and it’s in fine shape. The vinyl top is kind of a bummer, but at least it’s in good condition. Now, about the price: Yes, it’s a lot. But this might be the nicest Fairmont left. Someone will want it. If that someone isn’t you, then no hard feelings; just vote against it and move on.
2004 Pontiac Grand Am SE – $3,200
Engine/drivetrain: 2.2-liter DOHC inline 4, five-speed manual, FWD
Location: Rockville, VA
Odometer reading: 175,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
The Pontiac Grand Am was so ubiquitous for so long that I can’t imagine anyone in the US hasn’t crossed paths with one. I know I have. I’ve never owned one, but I’ve driven a few, worked on many others, and I did own one of its sister models, an Oldsmobile Calais. Like this Grand Am, my Calais was a four-door sedan with a manual transmission, which must have been rare in either case.
To get a manual in a Grand Am, you had to equip it with a four-cylinder engine. For 2004, that meant a 2.2-liter Ecotec engine that made just 140 horsepower, but was a lot more refined than the Quad 4 of earlier models. It’s durable, too; this one has 175,000 miles to its name, and it’s still going strong. It has a new water pump and thermostat, so it should be running nice and cool like it should, and the seller just put new tires on it as well.
The interior is exactly what you expect: fuzzy gray seat fabric and lots of gray plastic. The SE model designation sounds fancy, but it’s actually the base model. Note the crank windows and lack of buttons on the steering wheel. Uninspired as GM interior materials circa 2004 may be, they actually hold up fairly well. This doesn’t look like the interior of a 175,000-mile car. The seller says everything works fine, including the air conditioning.
The paint is in really good condition, and as a southern car, it probably doesn’t have any rust. This dark pewtery silver isn’t all that exciting, but it suits this car. The SE model doesn’t have the silly lower body cladding or weird spoiler that the GT model has, and in my eyes, it’s better off without it.
Automatic examples of these two cars are a dime a dozen – or at least, they were in their day. Does the presence of a manual transmission in either one magically make either of them a collector’s item? Probably not. But it would make them conversation-starters. Which one appeals to you?
I love that Fairmont (did I say that?) but even with house money I couldn’t part with $9000. If it had a 250, maybe. Grand Am by default. At least I can find the horn.
Never, ever, Grand Am.
I’ll negotiate the Fairmont seller down, strap a giant turbo/intercooler to it and burn that single tire to the ground.
Grand Am! Well, this was easy…a Fix Or Repair Daily/Found On Road Dead…Fairmont. For $9K?! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha…I’ll admit the interior is in great shape but it’s still a… Fairmont. I’ll take the awesome Pontiac and have a blast cruising in it. It’s way cheaper and a good deal for a car in good shape that will run badly (or good!) longer than other cars will run at all. I miss Pontiac!
I have always thought of the Grand Am as a pretty neat design,maybe because I am used to European stuff. The Fairmont is boring in every way and also overpriced.
If the prices of these were the same, then I’d go with the Fairmont.
But the prices are not the same. I’d pay up to $5000 for that Fairmont. It’s not a special car. It’s just a survivor and it was never a great car… even when new.
For that Fairmont to be worth $9000, it would have to have the 302cid V8 paired to that manual. As it is, the asking price is pure Crack Pipe.
So my vote goes to the Grand Am.
If we’re talking really money, the Grand Am is the obvious answer–but since this is internet bucks the Fairmont is so so much cooler.
It’s a face-off between a barely-collectible car and an economy purchase. I had to vote for the Grand Am, though without the lower body cladding, I barely recognized it. I wasn’t sure if it was an AI-interpretation of a Pontiac, it looked so odd to me. But for the price, it’s fine. Had the Fairmont been a Caprice or a Monaco, I might’ve thought about it, but at least a 6 cylinder would be tempting.
I like the Fairmont better, but if you’re asking $9K for it, then it better have a spicier engine in it.
Flip that 9 over and it might be a deal. Since it’s not the case I had to go with the Pontiac
I want the Fairmont, but not at that price. Grand Am for the win!
I’m the biggest “alternative Fox Body” advocate on this site – I’ve owned 6 LTDs and 2 Fairmonts – and even I think this Fairmont is very overpriced.
As others have said, the biggest selling point of the Fairmont is that it’s a Fox platform car so it’s easy to build it into something quick. Not many people are preserving Fairmonts as time capsules. So if you’re buying the car to modify you might as well find a car that’s not quite as nice at like half the price. They’re still around.
I used to daily a ‘79 Pinto Squire wagon (the woody), with that exact powertrain. It wasn’t fast, but it was fun to row your own gears. If there’s not enough power for you, drop in the turbo T-bird mill for double the fun.
Lucky…my ’79 Runabout had the 3 spd auto.
I looked it up and was surprised to learn that the Pinto wagon and Fairmont 4-door were within about twenty pounds of each other.
I didn’t know this, but I’m not shocked. One of the downfalls of the Pinto was its weight – heavy for an economy car, and thus not great on gas. By the time Ford built the Fairmont, they were erring the other way and body panels felt like tinfoil.
Fairmont! I would drop a 302 in and go hurt feelings.
We would be Driving Excitement if the Grand Am had something a bit warmer under the hood and if the apparent sword fight that destroyed the headliner had occurred in the backseat where it would be less visible. The warping dash right in my line of sight above the gauges would bug me more than is rational.
I don’t want a ’79 Fairmont. Never have. But I’ll stupidly fork out 3x the internet dough for such a well-kept anachronism in that color combo.
I actually like the Pontiac, and it’s only about an hour away from me.
The Ford on the other hand, it’s in fantastic shape, but $9000? That says that all the cool classic cars are now unaffordable. That one certainly isn’t cool.
Since it’s only pretend money, gimme the overpriced, underpowered Fairmont and I’ll hunt down a 5.0 for it. I can’t help it, I like Fairmonts and Zephyrs. We had a couple of 6-cylinder examples and a 302-powered wagon in the family. I test drove a 4-cylinder manual 2-door once–0-60 in 6.2 minutes if the wind was favorable. Obviously the Grand Am is a way better deal, but no part of me wants it.
Thank you for playing the game properly! It’s up against a Grand Am…it’s all pretend, and people are going for a…Grand Am. WTH
Just the fact that the Fairmont still exists and hasn’t been melted into something else yet, is enought for me!
Don’t care about price or driving experience or anything else.
That Fairmont is waaaaaaaaaaaaaay overpriced. Even half that price is too much.
Unfortunately, I had to vote for the gray car. Lots of space under the hood, and that engine is really good on gas too.
I’m taking the Grand Am and pretending to be Martin Riggs chasing bad men down the highway.
Since it’s pretend money, I’m going with the Fairmont. In real life that’s at least double what I would give for it, but I have to admit that its condition is exemplary of a carefully cared for survivor.
It wouldn’t survive in its current guise for long. Don’t get me wrong – its outward appearance will not change appreciably. But under the hood, it will become a Mustang SVO in all but appearance.
Blow the cobwebs out of that 2.3. Those Limas take well to automotive CPAP and believe it or not, the turbo engine was actually available from the factory, though I would add intercooling and a higher blowoff because I know a Lima can deliver 175 all day, given sufficient encouragement and support.
Replace that 4-speed with a T-5 from a Mustang. Replace the rear end with a takeoff from a Mustang, too, to avail ourselves of more gear spread and perhaps a relaxed highway cruising setup in addition to shorter gears for a better dig at the stoplights. I don’t want to make a dragster, just something with some athleticism under the oh-so-square off-the-rack business clothes.
I hate the red interior. HATE it. And I would absolutely leave it untouched.
I’d also be swapping in some donor Mustang GT suspension and brake parts to improve all aspects of handling over the OEM Fairmont.
I agree with your option to fix up the Lima vs. a 5.0 swap. It is a highly under-rated engine that can be built-up for more than adequate power for this car.
“Nah, it’s just got the base-model 4-cylinder it came with.”
“…and I did some plumbing work under there too.”
“This is the Way.”
Well, obviously not the $9,000 monstrosity. They were terrible when new. So I’m voting for that Grand Am (no it is not driving excitement!).
I do love the ad for the Fairmont. It stats that it is paid off. If someone still owes on a car like that, it’s time to really evaluate your life decisions. It also states no accidents. The damn car was an accident when it rolled of the assembly line.
I did vote Grand Am, but what the hell happened to the headliner?
Let’s have a vote for that.
A) Lettuce
B) Taco Bell
If your Taco Bell meal and/or lettuce-borne parasite is causing blades to shoot our of your head while driving, call your doctor immediately.
The fact it’s still up is a pleasant surprise. GM car headliners collapsing at 10 years is a given.
I owned the coupe version of that Fairmont as a 1981 model. Bittersweet Glow paint with a reddish interior. Comfortable ride. Great A/C. Very slow. Entering an interstate, you could time the acceleration with a calendar. I agree that a turbo 4 could make it livelier, but if all you did was in-town driving the standard 4 is adequate. Keep the oil level up and it will last almost forever.
You make a very valid point. Old cars don’t last like they do now.
They might have a buyer if the Fairmont was $3,000 but $9,000 !!! I’m not yet in an insane asylum.
Neither for me today.
The only thing that Fairmont’s missing is the plaid cloth seat inserts. That and being a wagon would make it absolutely perfect.
Trivia; Fairmonts with auto-on-the-column had a vertical PRNDL indicator between the speedo and the other big round gauge hole. The blanking panel on manual cars (and floor-shift autos) had one of those faux-heraldic crests ’70s Ford was so fond of.
I have one of the blanking panels and plan to use it on my floor shift Fairmont instead of converting to Mustang gauges.