All right, we now return you to your regularly-scheduled shitboxes. Today, we’re going to be looking at a couple of commonplace old Fords with weird mechanical specifications. They’re both low-mileage and in good condition, but is that enough to turn your heads? Let’s see.
On Friday, we checked out a pair of expensive replicas of even more expensive classics. It sounds like a lot of you liked the idea of a Factory Five Cobra, but not that Factory Five Cobra. The Brazilian Porsche 356 replica won sort of by default, by about a 60:40 margin.
Most of you thought they were both way too expensive, and I agree. But sometimes it’s fun to look at things you can’t afford, and daydream. Going by the “rich uncle buying a gift” scenario (even though I don’t have any uncles left), I’d go for the Super 90 as well. The Cobra is just too garish for me.
Some of the most interesting – not desirable, mind you, but interesting – old cars are the evolutionary dead ends. Automakers have tried lots of ideas over the years, and not all of them pan out. Diesel engines were all the rage in the late 1970s and early ’80s; nearly every automaker gave them a try. And while all-wheel-drive is commonplace today, several companies gave it a try and then gave up in the ’80s and ’90s. Today, we’re going to look at two such dead ends from Ford: one diesel, and one all-wheel-drive.
1984 Ford Escort GL – $4,000
Engine/drivetrain: 2.0-liter OHC diesel inline-4, five-speed manual, FWD
Location: Preston, ID
Odometer reading: 22,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
At the start of the ’80s, American automakers were getting their asses handed to them by imports, especially in the small car market. And it wasn’t just the Japanese; VW was selling Rabbits as fast as it could make them. Both Chrysler and Ford used the Rabbit’s basic template to create their small cars: front-wheel-drive, with transverse four-cylinder engines and handy hatchback bodies. Our Ford Escort was marketed as a “world car,” but it didn’t share much with its European counterpart. It did share one thing with the Rabbit, however: an available diesel engine.
The standard gas engine in the Escort was Ford’s own CVH four-cylinder, but for the diesels it turned to its japanese partner Mazda. This car is powered by a 2.0-liter naturally-aspirated diesel that makes 52 horsepower. It has a five-speed manual transmission to make the most of that power. The seller claims that the 22,000 miles shown on the odometer are original, which means this is practically a new car. It comes with a whole bunch of new-old-stock parts too, a couple grand worth, the seller says. That’s good, because I imagine parts for a diesel Escort are getting a little thin on the ground.
The early Escort was a cheap car, built during a time when “Quality Is Job One” was a catchy slogan, but not quite yet a reality. As such, the interior isn’t anything to write home about. It’s in good condition, considering, but I can feel the squishy foam-covered vinyl of the armrests cracking through this photo. Don’t get me wrong; it’s the nicest 1984 Escort interior I’ve seen in decades, but it’s still a 1984 Escort interior.
It’s decent outside, too, except those hideous LED headlights. Sure, they’re probably better at helping you spot deer in the ditches than the stock headlights, but they just look wrong on there. Does anybody make LED retrofit lights for old sealed-beam headlights that don’t look like ass?
1987 Ford Tempo AWD – $2,750
Engine/drivetrain: 2.3-liter OHV inline-4, three-speed automatic, 4WD
Location: Tacoma, WA
Odometer reading: 49,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
The idea of powering all four of a car’s wheels goes back a long way, but early on, it was reserved for trucks and other off-road vehicles. Automakers experimented with all-wheel-drive for passenger cars here and there, but it was the one-two punch of Subaru and Audi that showed what it could do. Both Ford and GM gave AWD a try, but in strange places: GM chose the Pontiac 6000 as its AWD platform of choice, and Ford, well… Ford chose the Tempo.
“All-wheel-drive” isn’t quite accurate for these cars, as I understand it; unlike Audi’s Quattro system, in which all four wheels are powered all the time, and two of the differentials can be locked to aid traction in slippery conditions, this Tempo is typically FWD only. On slippery roads, you can push a switch on the dash, and the rear wheels kick in. Apart from the rear driveline, it’s a bog-standard Tempo, with the 2.3 liter HSC engine and a three-speed automatic. The ad lists the mileage as 494,000, but I’m certain someone read the odometer wrong, and that it’s actually 49,400. (They also list it as a 2006 model.) It seems to run and drive just fine, though.
The Tempo AWD is its own model, but it’s basically equipped the same as an LX: power windows, air conditioning, cruise control, all that good stuff. It looks pretty good inside, too. The seller doesn’t give any indication about how much stuff still works, but based on the inaccuracies we know about, I wouldn’t trust them anyway. Try everything out, and see which buttons actually do something.
It’s nice outside, probably one of the nicest ’87 Tempos left. You know, it’s not a terrible-looking car for the time, actually. If Ford had offered the AWD version with a five-speed stick instead of the terrible automatic, it might have been a viable poor-man’s Audi 4000. Instead, it’s a curiosity. But for the price, it might make a good winter beater for someone.
The Escort lived on for many years, and the Tempo made it as far as 1994 before being replaced by the Contour. But there were no more diesel Escorts after 1987, and all Tempos were FWD after 1991. That makes these two essentially orphans. Interesting, as I said at the beginning, but not particularly desirable. But if you had to choose – and you do; that’s how the game is played – which one would it be?
You are correct the Tempaz system was not AWD it was 4wd. Ford did come clean with the refesh and started using Four Wheel Drive badges. One thing that should be noted is all of them regardless of the badge had a limited slip rear diff. So yes they are fun to drive in the snow and with the small amount of power and some decent tires they are unstoppable, well at least until the snow gets too deep, since the ride height was the same as the FWD versions.
It also has one of the most innovative 4wd systems. They are all automatic since the transfer unit simply replaces the transmission pan. The rear drive is then powered by a gear that meshed with the standard ring gear. The one “problem” with that design is that you need the set of “selective” pan gaskets to set the back lash. Since it is driven off of the reduction it doesn’t need a large ring gear out back to do reduction there. That makes the rear diff extremely compact and able to fit under the existing floor pan with just a couple of added mounts to hang it off of along with some added mounts for the drive shaft’s center bearing.
The weak spot in the set up is the fact that it uses U-joints in the rear half shafts. On the plus side they are the same as used in 4wd Ranger front axles. The minus is that they do operate at a steep enough angle that combined with the sealed nature of the OE parts leads to a short life. But they are easy enough to replace and some aftermarket units were available with grease fittings to extend their life.
A beige 80s shit box diesel with a manual, and its loosing the vote?!? What site am I on
Had to go tempo as well. Those LEDs tell me that owner makes poor choices.
Hopp Schwiiz!
Revealed preferences strikes again. And technically it’s not a wagon. It got my vote anyway.
Oh if it was a darker brown and a wagon, they wouldn’t have even had a vote!
Ugh the Tempo, use it as a winter beater for a year or two I guess.
Oooofff! $4000 for a 42 year old Escort Diesel is…does it come with gas for life because diesel is near $8/gal now. I’m also not that excited about a 39 year old Tempo for $2750 from an uber sketchy BHPH lot.
Voted Tempo because I could use it in the mountains (maybe?) until it broke or someone ran me off the road because I was creeping so slowly up an incline and holding up traffic.
Cars like these were why the Japanese were kicking our ass in the 80’s. They are the type of car (and associated horrible experience) that pushed people into Hondas and Toyotas, never to return to domestic. Ok, rant over.
It is over *ten pounds* a fucking gallon in the UK. I was looking at a veg oil conversion for my Volvo, as it would pay for itself pretty quickly, but the consensus seems to be that the D5 really doesn’t like it. Bah.
On behalf of the people of the United States of America, I apologize.
Heh. Fair enough 🙂
I want the Escort. I want to row my own gears to wring out every single one of those 54 horses on tap.
I want to experience the rapture from highway merging with a car too underpowered to get out of its own way.
I want to roll coal on F-150 gassers. There, I said it.
No other vehicle offers such a complete package as this one.
(T)Rolling coal on truck guys would be awesome. How do we accomplish this?
Tempo, but only because I remember just how flipping awful those diesel Escorts were.
Powered by C.R.A.P.
One of the more respected parts store chains, seriously.
Jesus an 80s 4 cylinder diesel or a tinbox with an extra transaxle
This is like being a contestant in a Saw movie
Holley Retrobrights are great drop-in LED replacements for old sealed beams. They look just like a normal sealed beam and don’t mess up the look of the car. They’re also DOT certified unlike all the blinding eBay garbage.
Diesel Escort for sure, though I do love the C.R.A.P. sticker on the Tempo. They come up from time to time on Dead Dodge Garage.
Good to know about the Retrobrights, though $250 a side is a bit rich. I just installed Hella H4 units on my pickup for $70/side and that is a nice improvement.
And yeah, I’m team Diesel Escort, it’s probably some kind of personality disorder.
Approximately 20% of the value of my truck is the headlights. 🙂
I’ve driven a Tempo. It was a basic, pretty decent car and did fine on the freeway even climbing the Tehachapi Pass with the A/C blasting. It’s a car I can recommend so it’s my choice today.
Gigantic nope from me on both of these turds. My wife had a Tempo in our early years and it was the biggest overheating p.o.s. that ever existed. So glad when the collision we were in with it sent it to the junkyard.
Big nope for both today, but I’ll play the game anyway and go Tempo, mostly because the headlights on the Escort are the worst I think I have ever seen.
Brown, manual, diesel, wagon.
This brings back memories.
Even given the price of diesel fuel right now, I have to pick the Escort. Not saying I wouldn’t swap that engine out for something gasoline-fueled in pretty short order, but I have driven an AWD Tempo, and it was even more depressing — if such a thing is even possible — (and slower) than the FWD Tempo and Topaz.
You made people vote an automatic Tempo over a stick Escort. Impressive job, Mark!
same, came down to price today for me, if I ever pulled out 40 $100 bills to buy a car it would not be an Escort, eps not a diesel escort!
The hatchback is more useful, but it’s only a 2-door. Had it been a 4-door, it would’ve been more successful and gotten more votes here. Also, high diesel prices are holding it back. Even if you don’t like the LED headlights, you can always swap in Hella E-Codes or something. It’s also the winner by default if you live in California, due to their overly strict smug check (diesels are exempt thru 97)
I’d take the Escort over a VW diesel LOL
The Tempo AWD is cool. You don’t need all 4 wheels powered all the time. Most car companies understand this.
You know what though? The Tempo AWD is probably better than that other blue oval’s AWD sedans due to not having a shitty boxer engine, and since the AWD isn’t always on, it won’t be as thirsty, either.
Tempo looks like a much nicer place to be stuck during a snow-day commuter slog. Toss in a couple generic all-weather mats from the nearest parts store and you’ve got a perfectly cromulent winter beater.
I don’t remember 80’s econocar diesels being great. One of our family friends had a 86 Olds Cutlass Ciera with a diesel and it absolutely reeked both inside and out. The engine compartment was equally nasty. And god it was slow. But…. it got great fuel economy. Important in 1980’s rural Tennessee. But I’d take the Escort because I like weird shit.
Eeeww, I’ll take “neither”.
But mainly I stopped by to say that I agree that most LED retrofit headlights look awful on cars designed with sealed beams in mind.
Except… There’s somebody where I work who has a YJ retrofitted with LED headlights that use all-round elements inside the rectangular housing, and darn if they don’t actually look good on the YJ. It helps that these particular retrofits are designed with some semblance of practicality and taste, not just “modern style.” The main lamps inside a DRL ring are almost the size of the small headlights of an original WWII Jeep, which is what I think helps the most. The other elements are far more subdued. The look actually anchors the controversial YJ style back to a more traditional Jeep “face.”
Not really interested in Ford’s 2.slow diesel, and for $4k? Man, please.
I’m partial to 80s diesels. Preferably non turbo.
So you like going nowhere fast?
Occasionally going somewhere achingly slowly…
Your username checks out 🙂
I think the AWD Tempo automatically came with the “H.O” version of that horrid HSC engine, which granted a couple extra horsepower to offset the AWD losses.
Not a couple 1, but at least most of them came with the cool cast aluminum valve cover proudly noting it was the HO engine. AWD/4WD was the only way to get the HO engine with an Automatic.
You are correct. All All Wheel Drive/Four Wheel Drive Tempos and Topazes came with the 2.3L HSO enigne out of the Tempo GLS/ Topaz LTS/XR5. And only with the 3-spd automatic trans.
Wrong if I’d take both and take them to car shows every weekend? You know you never see either at a car show. But both cars everyone there either owned or rode in at sometime in their life. Both are in their 80s glory still with velour and tan a plenty. You’d have a ball there all day hearing about people’s parents owning these and how they learned to drive in them.
I guess the Tempo would be a marginally less awful way to waste your money
Waste? Since when has buying an old crappy car ever been a waste? Never, ever, ever….
These used to be $1K beaters, or even less if you were lucky. Voted Tempo but neither next time lol
They’re still 1k beaters. Their sellers are confusing “uncommon” with “special”.