Welcome back! After yesterday‘s horrible hatchbacks, I thought you all might want to look at some things you’d actually consider buying. So I found a couple of cheap and cheerful beaters that I think might go over better.
But I have to say, I did enjoy the stories. Cheap, common cars like those are tailor-made for shenanigans, whether it’s donuts in a snowy parking lot in a Chevette or trying to do a J-turn in a Dodge Omni 024 on a gravel road. My brother’s first car was a Plymouth Turismo, which caught fire in traffic, so he replaced it with a Horizon. And I once left a party, three sheets to the wind, with a stunning girl who drove a black Chevette, and I wish I knew what happened after that. (Or maybe I don’t.)
Anyway, between these two, for me, it’s the Horizon, and it’s not even close. It’s enjoyably bad, like hair metal or a B-movie. The Chevette is just bad, like that diner in the next town over your grandpa always insisted on dragging you to.
All right. Let’s move on to some better choices. It’s T-tops or a truck; let’s see which one you prefer.
1993 Nissan NX1600 – $2,000
Engine/drivetrain: 1.6-liter dual overhead cam inline 4, four-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Long Beach, CA
Odometer reading: 206,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives great
Remember when every automaker sold not only a small car, but also a sporty small car? You had your VW Rabbit, but you also had the Scirocco. More or less the same car under the skin, but the styling made all the difference. Ford had the Escort and the EXP. Toyota had the Tercel and the Paseo. And Nissan had the Sentra and the Pulsar, which for some reason, by the time this car was built, stopped being the Pulsar and was simply known as the NX.
This is the base-model NX, the 1600, so named for its 1.6 liter engine. It was the same engine as the Sentra, tuned for fuel economy rather than for fun, but that was fine. The whole point of cars like these was to be able to drive an economy car that didn’t look like an economy car. Nissan kicked things up a notch by including T-tops on every NX, much like the preceding Pulsar, for some open-air fun. This NX is an automatic, but I imagine a lot of the 1600s were.
This is a one-owner car, north of 200,000 miles, but the seller says it runs and drives well. It does appear to have suffered under the California sun; there is something weird going on with the airbag cover. I’m not sure how much I trust a thirty-year-old airbag anyway. But I would never suggest that anyone remove it and install an aftermarket steering wheel, nor have I ever done such a thing to a Miata I owned a few years back.
Outside, it’s pretty sun-bleached as well, which calls into question the condition of the T-top seals. If the sun has been beating down on the paint, it’s been beating down on those seals as well. Might want to take it to a carwash for a “pre-purchase inspection.”
1994 Mazda B3000 SE – $2,500
Engine/drivetrain: 3.0-liter overhead valve V6, five-speed manual, RWD
Location: Brentwood, CA
Odometer reading: 205,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
A couple of days ago, we looked at a pair of Ford Rangers from other countries. One of them was really a Mazda with a Ford badge. What we have here is just the opposite: This is a Ford Ranger, built in St. Paul, Minnesota, with Mazda badges and some tweaks to the sheetmetal. And I don’t just mean that giant dent in the hood.
The Mazda B-series of this era offered the same three engines as the Ford Ranger: a 2.3 liter four, a 4.0 liter Cologne V6, and in the middle, the 3.0 liter Vulcan V6 from the Ford Taurus, which is what this one has. I haven’t heard great things about this engine in this application; I’ve heard it offers only a marginal boost in power over the 2.3, and returns only slightly better fuel economy than the big six. But it is reliable, as is the Mazda-built five-speed manual behind it.
This truck has also only had one owner, and is also just a little past 200,000 miles. It runs and drives great, and the air conditioning works, which is always a welcome bonus on a cheap vehicle. It’s in nice condition overall, with just some signs of wear inside.
Apart from the aforementioned boop in the nose, it looks good outside, too. It’s an SE, so it has snazzy alloy wheels and some stripes, and it’s green, which in my opinion is the best color for a truck, though I could be biased.
These two are nothing special, but they’re cheap, and they run well, and at this price that’s enough. They’ll get you around for a while, probably without much trouble. One’s a little more useful, and the other gets a little better mileage. So which one will it be?
(Image credits: Facebook Marketplace sellers)
In this case, stick beats slushbox. Why anyone ever bought an NX with an auto is an unsolvable mystery.
I’ll take the Mazda w/ a stick
I’ll take the truck. Even with 200k on the odometer, with today’s used truck prices, that’s a steal.
Normally I’d say the correct choice is to drop an SR20VE and RS5F32V in that NX. but that Mazda just looks like a lot of great utility for $2500 so that’s what I’m getting.
I dated someone who bought a 2000NX with the right transmission. I always thought it was a really nice looking car. Even better with her at the wheel.
But, alas, the B3000 is a better buy here today.
Easiest choice ever… The Pulsar, and any cheap car, that doesn’t look pristine is flat out defective. A truck of virtually any type, that has some presentation faults, is genuine and has character. Oh, that dent in the hood? That’s where I whacked a would-be car jacker into the sheet metal and rendered him unconscious.
There has to be a catch with the Ranger. A good running, non rusty truck with cold A/C in my neck of the woods is $5000. Seeing that its in California I bet it doesnt pass emissions. Which Im sure doesnt phase Manuel, he was going to drive it over the border and give it to his cousin.
Or the person is going to have their phone blow up and take the listing after 15 minutes and realize their mistake. And put it back up for $5000obo
A 30yr old running, non collectable, manual transmission truck with peeling clearcoat, over 200K miles and a dent in the hood can definitely be had for under $3K in CA. It might sell for $5K obo but it would take longer than what the seller is willing to.
Maybe Im jaded from looking at so much junk but the ad says the registration is expired. Which means in CA it needs to be smog tested. Which read between the lines, means its not going to pass or else the seller would have had it smogged, on current plates and asking more $$$$
Passing a CA smog test can be a very expensive PITA. Like $1500 worth of cat converter that has an approved CARB stamp on it. Or you need a new EVAP canister cause it has a hairline crack but still works. Every junkyard one has the same hairline crack and the part isnt being made anymore. Yeah buddy of mine who lives in CA says to never buy a car that hasnt passed smog
This is a one of those days I’d take the “why not both?” option. I’ve had a soft spot for the later NX and they are rare nowadays. Even if this one is automatic the entry fee is low enough to enjoy it and when the auto goes out replace it with an SR20DE + 5 spd from a B13 or B14 Sentra.
If I only need to choose one, though, it would be the
RangerMazda. I owned a Ranger 2WD with this engine and the 5 spd and for a 90s truck the power was adequate. Back then the 2.3 Lima was down at least 25hp and 30 ft-lbs torque, which is not insignificant. The pushrod Cologne 4.0 was only 10 to 15hp more than the Vulcan (although torque was significantly better). Mine would still do a one wheel peel quite easily on 1st with the base 3.73 open axle it came with. Mine had 228K when I sold it and I still see it today.The Nissan is priced nicely, and it’s interesting, but not nearly as much as an older Pulsar. The Mazda is stalwart and hard to beat. Replace the hood, or don’t bother, since it wears battle damage well.
I already have a B4000 4×4, have to go for the NX
I loved my NX. Fun handling car even if it isn’t exactly spry with the 1600 engine. And I never had any issue with the t-tops. They usually had the digital dash and I don’t know why this one doesn’t. The analog gauges were reserved for the 2000 which was a heck of sleeper.
My Uncle Don bought that exact setup of the Mazda truck, put a bed rack on it and used it as his daily work truck. They’re solid as hell, and make this choice a no brainer.
Uncle Don passed a couple of years ago, but his brother is still driving that B3000 daily.
Speaking as a former owner of a 1983 Fox-Body Mercury Capri with T-tops, I can tell you from experience that T-tops absolutely SUCK!!! Avoid at all costs.
yeah, but Ford suxxxxxx. Nissan has no problems with theirs 🙂
T-Tops are fun. Stop the hate 😛
The truck is great dump runner and light duty.
Truck life baby!
The 3.0L in the Ranger/B3000 may have all of the power of the 2.3 and all of the fuel economy of a V8, but it will run forever, a 5.0 V8 swap is damned-near a bolt in with junkyard Explorer/Mountaineer parts (which, ironically, would improve both fuel economy and power), and they just look good, especially that relatively hard to find seafoam green.
I came to immediately vote Mazda, but the T-Tops sealed the deal for the Mazda. Gah, if I wanted water leaks, I’d buy a convertible. Or a Wrangler.
No contest. Apples and oranges. Plus the truck has a stick. Love jamming gears. Lots of parts for it at Pick and Pull.
I went Mazda Ranger this time. Good color, 5 spd and I could definitely use it. The Nissan isn’t bad Sun worn or not but it can’t beat a usable pickup truck in a nice color.
I already have a small, super-fun car to drive that gets good (enough for me) mileage.
I had a Mazda Navajo many years ago and I wish I still had it. I think Mazda’s styling actually looks better than Ford’s. So I’m all-in on another Japanese-styled Ford truck.
I’ve ridden in a few old Rangers, and while I don’t doubt their potential longevity, if I were buying a small used work truck to keep for the rest of my life, I’d rather it have a Toyota badge on the grill. With that said, this is a nice truck overall: I like the color, the manual transmission, roll-up windows, and decently-sized bed. Even the price is OK, and the bop on the nose simply provides street cred.
A comparable old Tacoma would likely cost almost twice as much too.
Reliability isn’t even on the same graph…that Not Ranger will run forever.