I spotted an (insert obscure car name here) classic car today! (Archived)

andre1969

Wouldn't the EPA's website be a pretty reliable source, though? Sometimes I think they print those brochures early, and there might be last-minute running changes to the engine offerings.

I have noticed discrepancies in those big Consumer Guide auto encyclopedias they put out every so often. For instance, they mention the '76 LeMans as having the Chevy 250-6 standard, but the Grand LeMans having a 400 V8 standard. But, the sales brochure says "But what about Grand LeMans' practical side? It begins with a dependable 250-cu.-in Six under the hood. And a new two-stage choke system for smoother running during warm-up."

"Or, order any of five available V-8's. Including the small 260 V-8." They don't go on to list the other four V8s, although I'd presume they were the 350-2bbl, 350-4bbl (which I've heard was CA/high-altitude, and that's what my car has), the 400-4bbl, and 455-4bbl. At least, I think the 400 and 455 were 4-bbls, although hp was low, something like 180-185 for the 400, 200 for the 455.

The sales brochure also tries to trick you with some seductive word play. For the LeMans sport coupe, it says "There's an impressive list of available gear to order from. Order a 400 V-8. Or the new, fully synchronized 5-speed manual transmission." Notice how that makes you think ooh, a 400 with a 5-speed...Hey, "Remember the GOAT!" But, I believe the actuality was you could only get the 5-speed with the Olds 260.

I also love the line "But don't decide yet. Not until you get acquainted with our 455 4-bbl (okay, that answers my guess the 455 was a 4-bbl). It's acquired quite a following in recent years." Right on...I'm sure people were rushing out in droves during the Arab Oil Embargo to snatch up those 455-powered LeManses! But, I digress...

fintail

Spotted in Portugal:



Nice mudflaps, I prefer blinds to curtains.

sda

Dad had a79 Eldorado diesel. I believe it was 120hp, later years 105hp. It ran well and was decently quick at the time. It made a nice almost like 4 barrel like moan under hard acceleration. It got an honest 20mpg in town and 30+ on the road. It fell prone to many of the problems those diesels suffered, mainly blown head gaskets every 30k. I have read in several forums where diesel mechanics took a liking to these engines and they could be made reliable. They found with a good water separation system, which GM didn’t provide, these engines would go the distance.

ab348

sda said:

I have read in several forums where diesel mechanics took a liking to these engines and they could be made reliable. They found with a good water separation system, which GM didn’t provide, these engines would go the distance.

Yes, that's true. I used to know one of those fellows. He collected discarded GM diesel cars the way some people collect coins. He could do what needed to be done that made them reliable and used them as daily drivers for a long time. I've lost touch with him but I suspect the cars probably succumbed to old age by now, not diesel failure.

omarman

Those Olds 350 diesel blocks took on new life when converted to run on pump gas or racing fuel.
This street engine was built from an 80s Olds DX block bored and stroked to 442 cubic inches. The shop owner said he wanted something different for his '71 Olds 442 street car.
https://youtu.be/VRq0Ebg8aDo
Claims 500hp with a street cam grind.

andre1969

From what I've heard, GM's Diesel was actually pretty good in some ways, providing better acceleration, less stalling, better warm up, less clattery sound, less visible pollution, etc, then most Diesels of the era. The problem though, is that they just didn't last.

I've also heard that the '80-85 version, which was the 105 hp version, wasn't particularly bad. But by then, the damage to its reputation had been done. The second fuel crisis did help their sales for awhile, but once the fuel was flowing cheap and easy again, demand dried up.

Once they came out with the V-6 version, that was stuffed into some FWD cars and the RWD A/G body, I think that one wasn't too horrible, either. I wonder though, how something like a Cutlass Ciera with that engine would handle. The FWD cars were already nose-heavy, and I'd think the Diesel would make that even worse.

roadburner

I remember the introduction of the 524td in 1985; a BMW engineer stood up and said, "We would like to thank GM for single-handedly destroying the market for diesel passenger cars in North America."

andre1969

GM definitely gave Diesels a bad reputation. But, I wonder how much a shifting market changed things, as well? Once the fuel was flowing cheap and easy again, there just wasn't that much incentive to put up with a Diesel.

My grandparents bought an '85 LeSabre sedan with the Olds 307. It was rated at 17/24. I just pulled up the specs for the Diesel. It was 20/28. I actually thought the Diesel was better than that...for some reason I was thinking it was more like 21/30? I don't know how much Diesel cost by 1985, but I'm sure 87 octane gasoline was under $1.00. I remember when I started driving in 1987, it was usually around 85-95 cents. But, it just doesn't seem like it was worth it, by that time, to put up with all the inconvenience of a Diesel.

Also back then, wasn't there a much smaller network of Diesel stations in the United States? I seem to recall Consumer Guide theorizing that one reason Mercedes sold a lot of Diesels, but Cadillac didn't was that Benz owners were really more concerned the prestige of that three-pointed hood ornament, and would buy it regardless of what engine was under the hood, wheras Cadillac owners didn't like the idea of having to hunt down a truck stop and fill up among the big rigs. So while that could be sort of a back-handed comment about Benz owners being pompous, it did also suggest that Diesel wasn't so easy and convenient to find in those days. Of course, when the gasoline ran out, but Diesel was still available, that was a different story!

I just checked the fuel economy estimates for the 1985 BMW 5-series, according to the EPA. Looks like the Diesel, a 2.4/4-speed automatic, rated at 24/30, while the least efficient gas model was the 3.4/5-speed, at 16/22. The most efficient gas model was a 2.7/4-speed automatic, rated 20/26. So going from Diesel to least efficient (but most fun, I'd imagine) engine setup was a fairly big mileage penalty, but not so much if you went for the 2.7. I wonder if only offfering the 5-Series Diesel with an automatic hurt its sales any? Didn't most BMW buyers tend to go for a stick back then? Now I could see something like a 7-series not being that popular, with a stick, and the 3-series was probably the most likely to have a stick...but I'd think a stick would have been common in the 5-series?

roadburner

andre1969 said:

I just checked the fuel economy estimates for the 1985 BMW 5-series, according to the EPA. Looks like the Diesel, a 2.4/4-speed automatic, rated at 24/30, while the least efficient gas model was the 3.4/5-speed, at 16/22. The most efficient gas model was a 2.7/4-speed automatic, rated 20/26. So going from Diesel to least efficient (but most fun, I'd imagine) engine setup was a fairly big mileage penalty, but not so much if you went for the 2.7. I wonder if only offfering the 5-Series Diesel with an automatic hurt its sales any? Didn't most BMW buyers tend to go for a stick back then? Now I could see something like a 7-series not being that popular, with a stick, and the 3-series was probably the most likely to have a stick...but I'd think a stick would have been common in the 5-series?

The North American E28 5 Series lineup was a bit odd. The 528e had the high efficiency "eta" 2.7 liter version of the M20 I6. It was tuned for low rpm torque and redlined at what Car and Driver described as a "Cadillac-like 4700 rpm." It returned its best fuel economy by accelerating at 75% throttle and short-shifting it at 2500 rpm(IIRC). The introduction of the 528e caused much consternation among the BMW faithful as it was considerably slower in both acceleration and top speed(a pitiful 122 mph) compared to its predecessor- the M30 powered E12 528i. Munich calmed the US waters with the introduction of the E28 533i, powered by a M30 I6 displacing 3.2 liters(and later 3.4 liters in the 535i). The 535i was fairly quick for its day, with a 0-60 time in the high sevens and a quarter mile in the low 16 second range. Manuals were especially common in the 533i/535i, and to a lesser degree in the 528e. In 1988 BMW introduced the first M5, powered by the racing derived S38 DOHC 16V I6. While not quick by today's standards, a 0-60 of six seconds was very impressive for its time.
I don't think the automatic hurt the sales of the 524td; being a diesel hurt the sales of the car. And today there is a small cult of 524td fans who simply love them.

omarman

From a NYT article IF IT'S MILEAGE YOU WANT IT'S STILL DIESEL YOU'LL GET By Thomas L. Friedman Aug. 23, 1981

As Supplies Fall, Prices Rise

Q. How much have prices changed?

A. In July 1980, the weighted average diesel fuel price in the United States was $1.11 a gallon. This was 10 cents less than regular leaded gasoline and 15 cents less than regular unleaded gasoline, according to Trilby Lundberg, associate publisher of the Lundberg Letter, a survey of national gasoline prices.

Today, the average price of diesel at the pump is about $1.32 a gallon - 2 cents a gallon more than regular leaded gasoline and only 4 cents cheaper than the average price of regular unleaded. In several East Coast cities diesel fuel actually costs more than regular unleaded gas.

Q. Will diesel prices continue rising?

A. About as fast as you can say OPEC. All fuel prices will increase during the next decade as crude oil supplies worldwide dwindle. The Department of Energy predicts that the price of a gallon of diesel fuel, adjusted for inflation, will increase 127 percent by 1990 while the adjusted price of a gallon of gasoline jumps 125 percent.

Interesting crystal balling there. I remember paying $1.00 per gallon in 1989 when my work commute was 40 miles.

I agree that falling pump prices contributed a lot to the waning interest in diesel cars back then. Maybe with the unfortunate side effect of driving interest in the "new" SUV market.

andre1969

I can remember my Mom starting to have a fit in late '79, when I think gas prices went above $1/gal and started staying there. At the time, she had a '75 LeMans with a Pontiac 350-2bbl, that got about 15 mpg in her type of driving. Her commute to work was about 19 miles. However, that year, we moved to southern Maryland, about 40 miles away from my grandparents. Prior to that, we had been living with them, after my parents got divorced. Well, Grandmom and Granddad both got sick that winter (nothing major, just the flu),plus Mom got homesick, so every other weekend we went up there to visit. Mom was getting sick of the high fuel prices. Plus, the LeMans never did run right after Dad wrecked it in '77 (part of the reason for the divorce). In February 1980, she traded that LeMans on an '80 Malibu coupe, with the 229 V6, and she regularly got in the lower 20's with that car.

The most I can ever remember paying for fuel, once I started driving, was around $1.75 per gallon, but that was during Desert Storm. After that, it seemed to settle back down to around $1/gal. Ironically, prices didn't start shooting up again, until November 1999, right after I bought my 2000 Intrepid. I went from an '89 Gran Fury copcar with a 318-4bbl that called for Premium, and was lucky to get 12-13 mpg. I had a second job delivering pizzas back then, so that's one reason the mileage was so bad. Well, the Intrepid got about 20 mpg, even in the worst of my driving. Between the improved fuel economy, plus not having to pay extra for premium, I figured that Intrepid would save me about $150 per month in fuel. Its first fill-up was around $1.39 per gallon, and I remember that seeming expensive, although it went even higher. So with the higher fuel prices, plus the way they started widening the price gaps between 87/89/93 octane, I probably saved even more than I anticipated.

My memory might be a bit fuzzy here, but I remember prices getting up to around $2/gal in late '99/early 2000, and then falling some over the summer. Then in 2001 they spiked again, back to around $2. But after the 9/11 tragedy, they plummeted. I bought my '79 5th Ave in October 2001, in western Maryland. I had a friend go out with me in the Intrepid, and he followed me back, driving the Trep. When we got back near my house, I filled up both cars. I seem to recall that 87 for the Intrepid was under $1/gal, although I splurged a bit for the 5th Ave, and put either 89 or 93 in, since it was an older engine, so it might have been around $1.20-1.30. Prices stayed low through early 2002, then started creeping up again, ultimately hitting around $4/gal over the summer of 2008. But, once the Great Recession hit, they plummeted. I remember filling up on Christmas Day, 2008, for $1.499/gal, for 87.

I just gassed up my '03 Regal yesterday, and 87 was $2.099/gal. I think 89 was $2.399 and 93 was $2.599. That's one thing that annoys me a bit, that even after prices fell, the gaps between the grades didn't seem to, although as a percentage I guess they're similar.

I think another side effect of that second oil embargo and the '79-83 turmoil, was with the way the Feds interfered with the auto makers, but left that big loophole for trucks, it almost forced buyers into trucks and SUVs. Just about all gasoline-engines over the 302/305/307/318 range were dropped after 1980 (I know Ford's 351 persisted for awhile, but that may have been only for police cars). And the downsized cars with their under-sized, under-powered engines just weren't as capable, in many respects, than their mastodon forebears. They were adequate for most tasks. For instance, a 1983 Malibu could still hold 6 passengers, and actually a bit more luggage, than a 1977 could. But the biggest engine was a choked down 305 with maybe 145-150 hp, usually saddled with a ~2.41:1 axle, and maybe weighed about 3500 lb tops, if you got a fully-loaded wagon. I don't know that I would want to tow very much with something like that. Meanwhile, the '77's had been rated to tow up to 4,000 lb, and the spread between the curb weight and the GVWR was much greater. So, people started going with trucks, and SUVs, which had bigger engines, more payload/towing capacity, and more bulk and presense to them.

And even today, I think the sedan in general is being replaced by the crossover, because cars are getting even less versatile. Even the biggest sedans of today can really only hold four people in comfort. They just don't have the shoulder room for 3 across, and the way they shove the back seat further between the rear wheel housings, forces the outboard passengers to lean inward. The way they shape the doors seems to make them harder to get in and out of, and if you get a 15-16 cubic foot trunk, that's considered "generous" these days. So, for many people, it's easier to just get a crossover. You usually get easier entry/exit, better visibility, higher seats, better 4-person seating, and if you need more, the third row seat works for short distances. And there's more cargo space, and a larger trunk/hatch opening. And, these days there's usually not that big of a mileage penalty, going from a car to a roughly-equivalent sized crossover. Back in the day, if you went from, say, an '85 Caprice wagon to an '85 Suburban, there was a pretty big mileage hit. But these days, I guess the equivalent would be going from a 2019 Impala to a 2019 Traverse (or a 2020, if the Impala made it to this model year).

fintail

I have just a couple gas price memories. Christmas 98 was a low price point here, I swear PUG was around $1/gallon at cheap stations anyway. Summer of 96 might have been in the $1.50 range, I recall a road trip that year, and grousing about the prices. The fintail gets around 15 city/20 highway, so it has never been too harsh to refuel. Not sure what my local Costco is at now, but after the 4% reward, PUG should be under $3.

tjc78

I remember late 1998 early 1999 being very low for gas. I was driving the 79 Continental about 70 miles a day and remember filling it for $21 or so.

The 98 Olds 88 and 89 Town Car usually took less than $15

andre1969

One fond memory I have, is when I had my second job delivering pizzas. On a busy Saturday night, I could start with a full tank, in my '68 Dart, and have to refill at the end of the shift. But it would cost about $20 max to fill up, and I'd be walking out with around $120-160 in cash, on top of the ~$5.50 per hour I was making, depending on how good of a night it was. This was back in 1996-97, and that Dart got about 12-13 mpg.

I wonder, if those types of delivery jobs have kept up with inflation, pay-wise. Just to keep up with inflation, that $5.50/hr would have to be around $8.50-9.00 per hour. And that $120-160 would be around $190-260. Somehow, I have a feeling they haven't.

kyfdx

@andre1969 I think you are correct. Not as lucrative

Michaell

I delivered pizza for 8 years as a side gig. Rarely would I bring home over $100 in a shift, and only then on days where I would come in for the lunch shift and work through the dinner rush.

Overall, I averaged somewhere around $12-15/hour in tip money, on top of the hourly wage.

fintail

Definitely not as lucrative now. The base wage in many states hasn't changed much in the past decade, federally hasn't changed at all, while real cost of living factors (not just in official CPI) have often exploded.

I had a similar job for awhile when I was in my late teens. In the small town, there wasn't much volume - if I hit $50 in tips in a 6-8 hour shift, I was over the moon. Did most of that in the Tempo.

fintail

Took the old car out again today, cruised around with a friend who is also into old MBs. Here's me following him in his very nice 83 300CD in maybe the best color, a silvery blue. These cars were a sight following each other, something you don't see every day:

imidazol97

Nice.

fintail

Saw a pristine and obviously babied and/or restored 2nd gen Jetta on the road - with so many "working" from home and the nice weather, some unusual cars maybe out today.

uplanderguy

That is a great pic, fin. I've seen period M-B ads similar to that.

I love seeing my lazy S-in-circle hood ornament on my Studebaker from the seat--but it's backwards when you're in the driver's position! Coincidentally, the last Studebaker was built this date in 1966 in Hamilton, Ontario. It's the same model and color as mine--Cruiser in Timberline Turquoise. The Studebaker National Museum has it. Amazingly, it was given to a Stude exec in South Bend to drive and he drove it for 19K miles until 1969, when it was given to the City of South Bend. Pretty well-equipped, comparatively--A/C, vinyl top, disc brakes, transistorized ignition, 50/50 split cloth seats with reclining feature.

I know this isn't the right thread, but I see C8 Corvettes are beginning to ship to dealers now. Saw a pic of a truckload of them.

Of course I had not a single thing to do with it, but I have a bit of American/GM pride in that car being built, LOL

uplanderguy

This guy isn't worried about coronavirus! Got his Schlitz, the beach, his Capri pants, and his '61 Impala Sport Sedan:


I used to see '61 Chevy Impalas with the spear in contrasting colors, but in hindsight I wonder if owners/dealers/bodyshops didn't take that upon themselves.

kyfdx

Looks like some social distancing. Plus, out in the sunshine and warm weather. He is good!

uplanderguy

Not nearly as dramatic, but here's my "S" hood ornament from inside the car. This was my wife's first ride in it, a year-and-a-half after I got it, LOL. My friend's old '64 Gran Turismo Hawk had the same ornament on a way-swoopier hood with the big dip between headlights and the raised center.

uplanderguy

fin mentioned a second-gen Jetta...not sure if that's what this is or not, but I always thought these cars had the oddest styling. The small wheel openings; the weird rear-door shape. I know, I know, it's got Teutonic build quality and interior, blah, blah, LOL--but rather than bad styling, I'd say it has 'lack of styling':

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Volkswagen_Jetta_CL_1996_Plata_Tornasol.jpg

texases

That's a Mk 3 Jetta. I agree, not the best look. And 'Teutonic build quality' wasn't so great, I think those had quite a few engine problems, coil packs in particular. Or was that the Mk 4?

uplanderguy

RE.: Gas--I paid $1.78 for BP today ("Top Tier" according to GM).

The lowest I remember gas ever being was 35.9 cents.

andre, re.: brochures, etc.--I always go right to the chart/spreadsheet of engines/transmissions usually in the back of the brochure. They definitely use "puffing" as it was called when I took a Marketing class in college, in the earlier, text of the brochures!

fintail

Fun pic. Yeah, I like driving behind the three pointed star, and having the ornament was a big factor in choosing my modern car, as they are seen on far fewer new MBs than in the past, as the brand tries to pretend to be sporty.

Regarding the Jetta, the one you posted is that Mk 3, and like texases says, those weren't so hot. When I was a student, my roomate had one, and it was problematic - then still a late model under warranty car. I recall giving him rides in the fintail back and forth to the dealer to pick it up. For some reason I remember it had constant wheel bearing issues along with electrical quirks. IIRC most of that gen were built in Mexico, and there might have been teething issues.

The one I saw was like this:



And it looked brand new. Those debuted here for MY 1985, and I think they too could be quirky. I really liked the Mk 2 when new, I still remember that year I knew my mom was looking for another car, and I encouraged my parents to look at the Jetta. My mom ended up in a Tempo, which actually was probably more reliable in the long run (and no doubt a bit cheaper).

uplanderguy said:

Not nearly as dramatic, but here's my "S" hood ornament from inside the car. This was my wife's first ride in it, a year-and-a-half after I got it, LOL. My friend's old '64 Gran Turismo Hawk had the same ornament on a way-swoopier hood with the big dip between headlights and the raised center.

ab348

My 1990 GTI was a Mk 2 and I seem to recall it was Hecho en Mexico. No problems with it worth noting other than a power steering belt that liked to squeal a bit.

kyfdx

uplanderguy said:

RE.: Gas--I paid $1.78 for BP today ("Top Tier" according to GM).

The lowest I remember gas ever being was 35.9 cents.

andre, re.: brochures, etc.--I always go right to the chart/spreadsheet of engines/transmissions usually in the back of the brochure. They definitely use "puffing" as it was called when I took a Marketing class in college, in the earlier, text of the brochures!

I saw $1.89 at BP.

I can remember $0.27/gallon in the early/mid '60s

fintail

I think VWs of that era were maybe like some domestics, hit and miss. I've seen huge mileage ones at auction, but heard horror stories from others. Kind of like my mom's Tempo - many were awful, some were OK, ours left the family with 190K on the clock and never had a powertrain issue.

xwesx

Tom Taylor's Tempo (of RockAuto) seems to be a good example as well. I forget the mileage he noted in his last piece on it, but it is up there in miles as well as age.

fintail

Maybe 1:500 made it as far as ours, and we probably took better care of it than many, but it actually kept running without huge issue.

Makes me think what I would do if I found a pristine 100% identical car (as the actual car was scrapped years ago, I suspect). There probably isn't one left, as few were preserved. My mom might get a sentimental kick out of it, she liked the thing and was sad to part with it, as we had it for a long time.

sda

I think I’ve shared this story before. In 1990 mom’s 78 Olds Regency coupe, fully loaded with leather, astroroof, 403 V8 was showing its age. It had been a good car and at 170k dad thought it was time to buy mom a newer car. Mom wasn’t that enthused, but her main requirement was it had to have a sunroof, she used hers all the time and still does. i found a like new top of the line 87 Taurus LX with 13k, moonroof, upgraded stereo, etc. Dad and I brought the car home to see if mom liked it and she did. Back to the dealer, traded the 98 and brought the Taurus home. Once home, mom came out and asked where was her 98? When she learned the Taurus was hers, she was truly sad and remarked, I didn’t get to say goodbye to my girl (98). She drove the Taurus for 10 years, lesson learned, made sure she could say goodbye when the Taurus was traded for her ‘98 Aurora, one of her favorites, that she drove for 12 yrs.

fintail

I remember the story about the 98, yeah. It's amusing to me to see people bond with cars, makes me feel less crazy. The Tempo was in our family until 1999. I was a student and away at school when she let it go, I wouldn't have been too sentimental then, but I imagine she was. She said she was sad to see her 93 Taurus go as well, she had it for less time than the Tempo, but apparently was comfortable with it (head gasket, her mechanic told her to cut her losses). She's had her Camry for over 10 years now, and I know she likes it a lot, but lately she's kind of handed it over to my brother, as she thinks it is safer and more economical for his commute than his old truck, and she's either not driving or away from home much of the time. I think eventually she'll replace it and give the Camry to him, and there's a 98% chance she'll get a Camry, Corolla, or RAV4.

uplanderguy

RE.: Your mom's Tempo--common-sense maintenance does a lot to make an inexpensive car go a long way. I always did oil changes before the recommendation, and still do AT service (drain and fill, not flush, which I know doesn't get all of it) at around 50-60K. Coolant around then too. If something doesn't feel or sound right, I'd get it in quickly, especially under warranty. As a result, I had not one of my 18 Chevys (15 new, three used) even approach what I would consider being not reliable.

The PT Cruiser, at 137K miles, has a penchant for control arm bushings which I find annoying...but then my daughter's first apartment complex literally had about twenty speed bumps back to her place. She told me she never slowed down for any of them. We've driven the car for almost three years now--wife's idea--and I do like having a car we don't care about. It starts all the time, shifts properly, and had cold A/C as of last summer, anyway. I did just last week have a left wheel bearing replaced. But purchased at $6,900 almost ten years ago, I don't have much to complain about, other than it's a PT, LOL.

It is the first car I've ever owned that had a timing belt that needs replacing. I hate that. I guess if you've owned Asian makes for years, you're used to that. I found a place to do it for $700-something. I know people who have paid up to $1,600 at their Honda dealer, or wherever. Those are the folks who'd say, if you had a domestic that had that expensive of a repair, "damn American crap", LOL.

tjc78

I can only remember my mom getting attached to one car. It was her 96 Thunderbird. She had it about ten years and only put about 50k on it. To this day she still talks about it. A 2007 Camry SE replaced it.

uplanderguy

In my daily cars, I most-miss my first new car, an '81 Monte Carlo in two-tone light jade over dark jade and matching cloth interior, V8, no air, positraction, intermittent wipers. I was so proud of it, buying it at age 22 1/2. My college roommate bought a new Firebird (of course) about the same time.

My Monte Carlo was stolen in Oct. '82 and never recovered. I replaced it with my hometown dealer's '82 Monte Carlo V6 demo, which I never liked as much.

I will say, when I trade a car in, I have flashbacks of all the things I've done and places I've been, in it, and have a little sense of wistfulness when I'm cleaning it out, LOL.

andre1969

Thinking back on Tempos, my stepdad had an '84 coupe. I hated that car as a kid, partly because I thought it was ugly as sin, but also, I didn't have the best relationship with my stepdad at the time, and I associated that car with him! I do remember it being a bit troublesome in its early years, but it was never anything horribly expensive...one advantage of being a cheap, simple car, I guess. My Mom and stepdad moved to southern MD in 1989, and suddenly had a huge commute. They'd ride to work together, my stepdad would drop Mom off at work, and then go to the office himself. Then, pick her up on the way home. It was about 130 miles per day, round trip. By the time they traded the Tempo for a '91 Stanza, it had about 160,000 miles on it.

They both retired in 2011, so they put up with that 130 mile commute for 22 years! I don't think I could do it! My commute had only been about 5 miles round trip, from 2010-2018, 8 miles from 2003-2010, and at its worst was around 30, from 1999-2003. But, now that I've moved, it's about 45 miles round trip, and traffic has gotten a lot worse over the years. I tend to whine about that commute, but I put up with it because I'm hoping to retire within the next few years. I don't know if I would have been able to put up with it for my whole career, though! Still, I guess you do learn to adapt.

Anyway, my Mom and stepdad only took that Stanza up to around 90,000 miles, because its transmission started to go, and it was getting other issues. They started using her '86 Monte Carlo a lot to commute as well. It wasn't as efficient, but more comfortable, and, well, gas was cheap in those days. Mom gave me the Monte with 179,000 miles on it, in early 1998. I was still delivering pizzas back then, and racked up another 13,000 in 3 months, before getting t-boned by a teenager who ran a stop sign in, ironically, a Tempo!

After they gave me the Monte, I think they started taking their chances using mostly the Stanza. They also had a '98 Expedition, so they might have used that some, as well. They finally got a '99 Altima, and I think they took that one up to around 330,000 miles. They bought an '08 Altima, but ended up holding onto the '99 for a bit longer. They still have the '08, which now has around 90,000 miles I think. It was spared a destiny of high miles, because of them retiring. They've been talking about trying to sell it for several years now, but for some reason never get around to it. These days Mom has a new-ish Altima (forget the year, but it's not the most recent design), and my stepdad went the nerdy route and bought a Prius. They've tried to push that '08 Altima off on me, but I don't really care for it. It's actually a pretty nice car...4-cyl, but well equipped with leather and a sunroof, and a nice shade of light green, like what you might see on a '68 Chevy. But, I find it hard to get in and out of, and it just sits too low for my tastes. It also has, in my opinion, compact car seats. Even though it's a midsize, it just feels to me like they pulled the seats out of a Sentra or something else small. Either that, or I just got used to those Lazy-boy chairs they stuffed in my old man's '03 Regal!

uplanderguy

RE.: Tempo and Topaz--I always thought it was funny how they redesigned the sedan at some point--an improvement I think--but the coupes remained with that chubby styling with the smallish wheel openings. I do remember Ford advertising the coupes around here at what struck me as super-low prices (I can't remember comparable Chevys selling for that low, new), so there was method to their madness apparently.

tjc78

I only truly miss one car I’ve owned and that’s the 89 Town Car. If I wasn’t a dope and sold it, you would see gratuitous pics every few weeks when I got to drive it.

I do miss my 06 Avalon to an extent but that’s mainly because it’s the car I had when I met my wife and we took several trips in it.

kyfdx

Two cars I miss.

'82 Accord hatch. Bought new, drove for 12 years. Used it completely up, so no regrets.

'84 Porsche 911 Targa. Owned it from '90 to '94. I loved that car, but loved my wife and new son, more..

stickguy

I do miss my 1991 Mazda 626 LX 5 door. Perfect size and body style.

fintail

The coupes remained til the end, as well - 11 model years with only mild updates mostly front/rear lights and dash. I remember looking at some of the last of the 94 Tempos when they were new - dealer was giving them away, but they also cost nothing to build by then, no doubt.

uplanderguy said:

RE.: Tempo and Topaz--I always thought it was funny how they redesigned the sedan at some point--an improvement I think--but the coupes remained with that chubby styling with the smallish wheel openings. I do remember Ford advertising the coupes around here at what struck me as super-low prices (I can't remember comparable Chevys selling for that low, new), so there was method to their madness apparently.

fintail

Funny, although I remember the Tempo getting regular oil changes, I don't have much memory of it receiving much else. Maybe a coolant flush or transmission service a couple times in its life. I also recall it puked up a couple computer components, and eventually needed some suspension parts, likely due to normal wear. It always fired up on the first turn of the key, although when the computer bits acted it up, it would run weird.

Regarding a $700 or $1600 bill, those with aging German cars look at that, shrug our shoulders, and say "you gotta pay to play"

uplanderguy said:

RE.: Your mom's Tempo--common-sense maintenance does a lot to make an inexpensive car go a long way. I always did oil changes before the recommendation, and still do AT service (drain and fill, not flush, which I know doesn't get all of it) at around 50-60K.

It is the first car I've ever owned that had a timing belt that needs replacing. I hate that. I guess if you've owned Asian makes for years, you're used to that. I found a place to do it for $700-something. I know people who have paid up to $1,600 at their Honda dealer, or wherever. Those are the folks who'd say, if you had a domestic that had that expensive of a repair, "damn American crap", LOL.

fintail

I can think and miss all of the cars I've parted with. But the strongest would be the W126 300SE, and the E55 AMG. The former just seemed slow for my still 20-something self and needed a little work I wasn't committed to, and the latter went when I had the new car itch and was a little scared of running costs for an aging AMG.

andre1969

I used to think of a Tempo as basically an equivalent to a Chevy Cavalier, or an Aries/Reliant, although if you want to get picky, the Cavalier sort of replaced the Monza, whereas the Citation was GM's "proper" compact. And then that gave way to the Corsica/Beretta. But, the Cavalier always seemed a bit more of a small-ish compact, than a subcompact to me...besides, that's what the Chevette was for, to go up against the Escort/Lynx and Omni/Horizon.

But, I guess the Tempo/Topaz did keep in line with Ford's heritage of the Fairmont, Maverick, and Falcon before them...cheap, simple, no-frills transportation. While I'd rate a Tempo below a Citation or Reliant in terms of "niceness", if you go back to the 70's, I'd say a Maverick was definitely a step below a Nova, Dart, or Valiant. Same for the 60's, with the Falcon. The Falcon really only had a few years in there, maybe '63-65, as a "nice" compact, but then they dropped the better trim levels to clear more room for the Mustang.

I was always a bit curious about the later V-6 Tempos. Seems to me the 3.0 Vulcan would turn the Tempo into something of a little musclecar, by the standards of the time. But, I don't think they were any great shakes, and ended up being kinda fuel-thirsty, to boot.

fintail

I thought of the Tempo as equivalent to a Cavalier or K-Car, too, in the market rather than by size. Tempo seems to have replaced the Fairmont in the lineup, but maybe not in the market, due to size. Fairmont migrated up to the Fox LTD, perhaps. There were also huge equipment ranges, not seen on modern cars. Our Tempo was a loaded GLX with power everything, relatively nice velour, wheels, etc. In high school I knew a kid with a basic Tempo L - vinyl interior, hubcaps, non-metallic paint, 5-speed, no power equipment. He kept it spotless, and I recall he was all over our Tempo when I'd drive it to school, due to the options and similarly clean condition (my detailing OCD was honed on that car).

I imagine the V6 Tempo would be a torque steer machine, heck, I remember getting torque steer even out of the less than hot rod HSC 2.3 in our car. For Tempo oddities, I'd seek an AWD model or a diesel. I recall seeing a diesel in the local junkyard in 1994 or 1995. I vividly recall it, a grey 1986 5-speed car. It was very clean and had an indicated 99K on the clock, I surmised it was actual miles due to the condition of the car, and I wondered what brought it there at that age. I remember I took the stereo out of it, as the tape player in ours stopped working. I learned a lesson there, as the junkyard one stopped working within a few months, just replace with aftermarket.

roadburner

My mom had a Topaz coupe. What a steaming pile/

fintail

I remember looking at a high option Topaz coupe with my dad, before we got the Tempo. He remarked something similar to "it's like a small T-Bird". Even as a kid, I didn't quite buy that one. It was plush anyway.