First, we’ll check the results from yesterday:
Huh. I’m actually a little surprised at that result. It’s my pick as well; I’d rather wrench all day on a good-looking non-running car than try to make something pretty, but I expected it to scare off most folks. I did hear some talk of fixing up the Bronco to flip it, but that isn’t necessary. Just fix it up and drive it, and eventually it’ll flip itself. All righty then… For those of us old enough to remember when a three-pedal manual was called a “standard” transmission, the death of manual options stings every time another one is announced. I understand that Mitsubishi’s cheap-and-cheerful Mirage is the latest to fall from stickshift grace. This trend is a real shame, because – and I know I’m not the only one who does this – it will eventually render pointless one of my favorite walking-around-a-city games: peeking in the window of parked cars while walking past to see if they’re manual or automatic. Today, both of our contestants would delight, and likely surprise, anyone playing that game. And one of them, in this particular model year, was only available with a manual, something almost unheard-of these days. Here they are.
1989 Pontiac Grand Am – $2,500
Engine/drivetrain: 2.5 liter inline 4, 5 speed manual, FWD Location: St. Helens, OR Odometer reading: 168,000 miles Runs/drives? Yep, just fine This car gives me the nostalgic warm fuzzies. My hometown’s mayor owned a Pontiac dealership, so nearly every official car, including all the high school’s driver’s ed cars, were Pontiacs. I spent a good deal of my sanctioned behind-the-wheel training in a Grand Am exactly like this. Same color, and same transmission; yes, in those days, some of the driver’s ed cars were sticks. You had to request to be assigned to one, but they existed.
I’ve always liked the looks of the first-generation GM N-body, especially the two door. It’s just a pleasing shape with good proportions. This one, with the facelifted front end and those “food-processor” wheels, is just about perfect. The only thing it’s missing is the “Quad 4” badge on the front fender. Without that, I can be reasonably sure that this car has our old clattery friend the “Iron Duke” four-cylinder under the hood; GM didn’t offer a V6 in the Grand Am in 1989, and the Sunbird’s 2.0 liter turbo four was reserved for the SE model.
But hey, I’ve got nothing against the Iron Duke personally. It’s a good honest motor, easy to work on, and relatively efficient. I’d certainly not say no to this one just because of the engine. I must say, however, that were this a Quad 4 car, I would have called the seller yesterday and been begging my wife to let me buy it. As it stands, with the 2.5, I can resist. Just.
This car is in remarkable shape. The only obvious flaws I can see are some flaking paint on the luggage rack (that’s what you get for painting stainless steel, dummies) and a little minor wear and tear on the inside. The seller says it has one window that likes to come off its track, but they’re manual windows (!) so you can probably fix it with a zip tie, or maybe a little JB Weld.
1989 Ford Taurus SHO – $2,500
Engine/drivetrain: 3.0 liter DOHC V6, 5 speed manual, FWD Location: Wilsonville, OR Odometer reading: 145,000 miles Runs/drives? Yep! I have some personal history with a Taurus SHO as well, but it was less sanctioned. My dad owned one, a facelifted ’92 model, and it remains to this day the car in which I have driven the fastest: 135 MPH indicated, on the Kansas Turnpike. (Yes, my dad was with me.) Ford set out to turn the Taurus into a world-class high-performance sports sedan with the SHO, and while I don’t know how world-class it is, I can vouch for the high-performance part. I gave up before it did.
For those who may not be familiar, what we have here is a first-generation Ford Taurus in name and appearance, but with heavy-duty suspension, four-wheel disc brakes, a five-speed manual (the only choice through 1992), and, most importantly, a special version of Ford’s “Vulcan” V6, built by Yamaha, with dual-overhead cams and 24 valves. This engine put out 220 horsepower compared to the standard Taurus’s 140, dropped 0-60 times into the mid 6-second range, and pushed the car’s top speed up over 140 miles per hour. That may not sound like much now, but in 1989, for a four-door sedan available at your Friendly Ford Dealer, it was the star of the show.
Part of the SHO’s appeal is that, at first glance, it does look an awful lot like a garden-variety Taurus. You could surprise BMW and Audi drivers with this car, if they didn’t know what to look for. Unfortunately, as a relatively inexpensive and quite fast car, a lot of SHOs met with some awful fates, either wrecked or simply abused to death, which makes this black first-year car all the more special. The seller says it runs and drives just fine, but the air conditioning is inoperative.
The outside of this car looks fantastic, and I like the SHO in black. It looks menacing. Inside, it’s harder to assess the condition, with those seat covers and dash cap, but it’s still nicer than any cheap SHO I’ve seen for quite a while. Frankly, this car is mighty tempting to me as well, but it’s far too nice to park in the part of town I have to park in regularly. I can only hope that someone buys it who appreciates its rarity and specialness. Every once in a while, I manage to find two legitimately nice cars in this price range. I’d be proud to own either of these, frankly, and if I were in a position to buy, I’d have a hard time choosing between them. But I don’t have to; you do. Now. QuizMaker (image credits: Craigslist sellers) “BIIIIG” “NJOY THE” “RDY 4 THE” The SHO is not an apples to apples comparison and thus is the winner by default, but I would honestly take both for those prices at those miles. As well, that engine qualifies in the “I would open the hood just to look at it” category. Check extra instructions by visiting following web….. https://paymentroot258.pages.dev/
