Welcome back! It’s been a while since we really scraped the bottom of the used car market barrel, so today we’re doing just that. I found two really sketchy cars for sale in Cincinnati that both just say “Runs and drives.” That’s all you need, right?
I thought that old Ford truck yesterday would give some of you the warm fuzzies. It’s a friendly truck, from a good era for Ford trucks. The Chevy isn’t as nostalgic, but it’s anvil-reliable and has a lot fewer miles. The stage was set for a close vote, and that’s what we got, with the big beige Ford taking a narrow victory.
Personally, I’m not sure which way I would go. If I were shopping for a cheap truck, it would mean that some terrible fate had befallen my beloved Forest Service truck, and there’s no replacing that thing. We already have a GMT800 Yukon, so I could go Chevy and only have to remember one oil filter number, but that Ford just seems like a more affable companion.
All right, let’s look at some garbage. As someone who has more than once had to buy whatever cheap piece of crap car I could find, and then wait for my next paycheck to go to the DMV and register it, I’ve gotten good at separating the wheat from the chaff when it comes to the low end of the market. Back when I was doing it, the ads were printed in the Tradin’ Times, and the descriptions were terse. I had to figure out which cars were worth a phone call and a trip across town to look at from a few lines of text and often no photos.
These two have a few bad photos, but just about as little text description as those days. And neither one is a particularly desirable used car. Is that what makes them cheap? Or is there some other reason not to pick up the phone? That’s what we’re going to try to find out.
2003 Volkswagen Jetta – $1,450
Engine/drivetrain: 2.0-liter overhead cam inline 4, four-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Blanchester, OH
Odometer reading: 235,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives
You probably saw Thomas’s article yesterday about Volkswagen charging sixty grand and up for its new electric ID Buzz van. He didn’t seem to think it was unreasonable; many commenters, including me, disagreed. Volkswagen has always been good at cheap mass-market cars; it’s literally right there in the name: “People’s Car.” When the brand’s overseers remember this, you get the Beetle, and the Golf, and a cute little car sold in Europe called the Up! (yes, with the exclamation point). When they get too big for their britches, you get the Phaeton. The fourth-generation Jetta could have been a car of the people, but VW tried to get fancy and went all Phaeton on it.
This era of Jetta was available with a few different engines, but the default option was a 2.0 liter four, an updated version of the same basic engine VW had been stuffing into Rabbits and Jettas and Sciroccos since the ’70s. It’s not powerful – its nickname among the VW tuner crowd is the “two-point-slow” – but it is reliable and durable, and that might be this car’s saving grace as a beater. The seller does mention the engine just had a timing belt change, and has a new water pump. I’d rather see it attached to a five-speed manual, as VW’s automatics have never been great, but if it made it to 235,000 miles, someone must have taken care of it.
It’s the interior of the fourth-generation Jettas that really lets them down. It’s supposed to feel upscale, but instead it’s just a mishmash of soft-touch plastics that wear like shit, complicated electric and electronic crap that fails constantly, and a pervasive waxy smell on hot days. This one looks OK in the couple of photos that we get, but I’m sure it has its issues.
Outside, it’s green, which is a good thing. A disturbing number of these Jettas were painted silver, and black ones were so common someone even wrote a song about them. The green is a welcome sight. Less welcome is that rust hole in the front fender; I’d poke around with a screwdriver under the edge of the rocker panels and make sure they’re still there.
2013 Dodge Avenger – $1,695
Engine/drivetrain: 2.4-liter dual overhead cam inline 4, four-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Hamilton, OH
Odometer reading: 231,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives
Volkswagen lost the plot when it came to affordable cars in the 2000s; Chrysler just couldn’t seem to write a decent sequel. It followed up the lovable Neon with a watered-down second generation and then replaced it altogether with the unforgivable Caliber. Its midsized cars after the first-generation cloud cars were a game of musical nameplates that left buyers, and parts-counter clerks, trying to figure out which ones were actually Mitsubishis.
The Avenger sedan replaced the Stratus in 2008, with styling that aped the popular LX-platform Charger sedan. The styling came across as a caricature of the Charger rather than a smaller sibling. This is the basic SE model, as far as I can tell, powered by a 2.4 liter four-cylinder engine and Chrysler’s minivan-tastic Ultradrive four-speed automatic. You’ve probably rented one at some point, though you may not have noticed. It runs and drives, but that’s all we know.
The interior is decidedly low-rent on these, with lots of hard plastic and cheap fabric. It has held up well, though, from the looks of it. One photo shows the instrument panel with the car running; the check engine light isn’t on, but the ABS, traction control, and low-tire warning lights are. It may be nothing but a bad sensor or two, or it could be more serious. Either way, you’re not likely to see paradise by those dashboard lights.
It looks all right outside, too, at least for this price. I don’t know how prone to rust these cars are, but it is in Ohio, so it’s worth a peek underneath.
You don’t generally look at cars like these unless you really need a car. But if you need a car in this price range, you need it to be something decent. Both of these have sort of shaky reputations, but the sheer number of miles on both of them speaks in their favor. Somebody kept them up, or they wouldn’t have lasted this long. Which one of them seems worth a look?
(Image credits: Craigslist sellers)
Oy vey.
“Quality Auto Center” – can’t be bothered to wash the car or take decent pictures.
Since mileage is a wash and they’re both in the salt belt, age matters most. The drivetrains on both are unexceptional but both reasonably baked if they’ve made it 230,000 miles. Even the lame Chrysler 41TE had most of its demons purged by the 2010s.
If it was the 2.7L V6 in that Avenger, I’d run screaming in the other direction after briefly contemplating how it even made it that far. I don’t know enough about VW drivetrains to really judge there, but I don’t recall any scarlet letter against the 2.0L and automatic combo.
Something’s going to break. It’s how much rust I have to suffer through to fix it. That’s the deal-breaker. I’ll chance the 10-year newer vehicle there.
Oil sludge was pretty much eliminated from the 2.7L long before this Dodge Avenger was ever built. Additionally, the 2.7L itself was discontinued in favor of the Pentastar in 2011, so a 2013 Avenger would never have a 2.7L V6 in the first place.
Regarding the 2.7L V6, between 2002 and 2004, crankcase ventilation was improved significantly, and the gasket between the engine and the water pump was revised to a more conventional type that didn’t use a metal plate and sheet of silicone-like material. The 2.7L V6 kept the bad reputation throughout its run, but I don’t fear any built after 2004.
If THIS Avenger had the V6, it would’ve been a 283HP Pentastar, and the obvious choice in this showdown. That version is actually rather fun to hoon around in, because it definitely scoots.
I voted for the VW, but in reality I want neither. I have way too many miles logged in a 4-banger/automatic Avenger/200 of that generation to have any illusion that it is a car worth owning, but at the same time I have fixed too many Jettas of this gen to aspire to anything other than a diesel/5-speed one. Both are bad, but the Avenger loses because it is more bad.
Jetta.
I would much prefer the drive to the break down lane that they both inevitably will end up in.
I have to vote Jetta even with the VW issues of that era. It would at least be more fun to drive until it broke and it wouldn’t feel like I was driving a bottom basement rental like the Avenger would and always did when Avis or Budget handed me the keys to one of those godforsaken things.
This one was a tough choice. In real life, I’d avoid both of these cars. I went with the Anenger just because I’m imagining parts would be easier to source at the local You Pull It junkyard. I could be totally wrong about that though.
VW for me. I’m familiar with them, and it sounds like that one had some important service items done. And it’s the 2.slow, not the more problem-prone 1.8T. That, and I’ve never liked the Avenger.
Despite my general aversion to Chrysler due to bad experiences of family and friends the people I know with VWs of that era had even worse experiences. Add in that it is 10 years newer I went Dodge on this one. Would I probably hate driving it? Yes. But my gut says at least it probably wouldn’t leave me horribly stranded.
the avenger had better styling, and the 2.4 is at least the better engine over the much maligned optional 2.7 V6. Though I am not sure how it made it hat many miles. Still it looks better than the go to car for young ladies just coming out of college.
By 2013, the optional V6 in the Avenger was the 283HP Pentastar V6.
They really should have refreshed the car when that was offered; it was a huge improvement that very few people even knew happened!
That generation is my least favorite Golf/Jetta, but I would take one any day over a JS.
If something goes wrong in a week, I think it’d be easier to offload the VW to someone. I’m not anti-Avenger, but would really need the V6 in it to sway me that way. Actually, if these were both equipped with their respective 6 cylinders, I’d then go Dodge – don’t want to mess around with the VR6 for a beater.
Glutton for punishment I see. both V6’s in these respective cars had plenty of longevity issues.
Earlier Avengers got the 2.7L with the bad rep as their option. The 2013 Avenger got the 3.6L Pentastar as the V6 option, and that one has been a very solid runner.
I did not realize that, I agree like the Journey, and the chrysler 200, the 3.6 pentastar was the more reliable and better performing option.
If I had $2k in my pocket and had to choose one to get me to work the next day, my vote goes to the Avenger. The Dodge may be poor quality, but I’ve never had an easy fix on a VW made since 90s.
First off, my condolences to anyone one who has to make a choice between these two vehicles. I sincerely hope things start looking up for you.
As for my choice? The coin came up tails for the Dodge. Whatever.
Both are total shit and likely to need something repaired every other week so I’ll go with the Avenger which is at least easier to wrench on. I love VWs but at this mileage and my age its a big nope. I’m just too old for that many bloody knuckles working on a Mark IV.
Thanks Mark!
Appreciate the Meat reference as well. One of the best songs ever on one of the best LPs ever.
These two turds today though?
Given the choice, I would probably call my girlfriend and just ask to borrow her car.
I’m going to let the Notorious SWG be my guide and buy the Avenger.
Who’s with me?!?
I think the group is missing the point. We’re talking utterly basic mobility here, at its lowest level of cost going forward. Dodge FTW
Key point being “mobility”. I’m not much of a VW fan, but I have more faith it will stay running.
Don’t have a lot of experience with VW, do you?
Just one. I was riding shotgun in my college roommate’s Beetle when somebody driving a ’72 Skylark decided to use it as a braking system for the Bug by executing a left hand turn into the side of the car while we were going through an intersection at 30 mph. It worked – the Bug broke. The Buick’s bumper slid along the driver side door then proceeded to cave in the back seat area immediately behind the door about 14″. I was largely unscathed by the ordeal, but it totaled the Bug, and the roommate’s arm was in a sling for a couple of months.
Even though Stellantis has been on a tear discontinuing a bunch of parts for them (like the wiper arms that no one makes in the aftermarket from what I can tell), I’ll trust that 2.4 and that 4 speed before a VW, particularly at that price point.
I will pay $245 more for a functional cupholder eight days a week. I was getting agitated just looking at that Rube Goldberg contraption in the VW.
VW all day. I’d buy one for the hell of it, but when you put it up against an Avenger there’s no contest. I had a red one with a 5 speed. I loved that car. It was simply good, comfortable transportation. It even towed a uhaul that probably weighed too much from upstate NY to FL. I think it’s quite handsome, too.
It did try to light my ass on fire once when the seat heater malfunctioned, but it was fixed under a recall so I forgive it <3.
Jetta. Always found that generation a very handsome car, even though they’re drizzle to drive (though I’d like to try the VR5 and VR6 versions).
In the Avenger’s favour though I do think they look pretty neat, does the condensed-Charger thing well. Just a shame everything about them is so phoned-in.
I’d pay twice the asking price for the Avenger before taking the VW for free.
Nothing and I mean nothing I’ve ever experienced in my automotive life is as hateful as a Mk IV VW.
I LOVED my Mk IV Golf TDI. I picked it up with 185,000 miles when I started a job with an hour-long commute and added 100,000 miles over the next four years…and still got good $$$ when I sold it. Aside from the rust-through front fenders, it treated me well!
The Jetta. I can’t believe anyone bought an Avenger. As soon as you sit in anything else, you don’t buy an Avenger. I had a roommate in college who had one and he was a bit upset when he found out that cars of that size and engine power should see over 30 mpg on the highway, he never saw more than 25.
Dodge could have had something if it had actually been a smaller Charger. RWD with 4 and 6 cylinder options would have at least made it unique in its class.
There aren’t too many cars that would have me clicking yes on a MKIV Jetta. But the Avenger is definitely one of those cars. The Jetta being a green 2.slow also helps give me the vibes that it may actually last a year or two. Meanwhile a year or two in an Avenger sounds like rock bottom to me. I love cheapo cars, but the Avenger is about as cynical as cost cutting gets.
I mean, if you park this Jetta in your office you will come as a broke-ass dude/dudette who’s trying to do better in some aspects of his/her life. If you park this Avenger, only the meth heads next doors will talk to you.
Jetta — the Mk IV Jetta/Golf had issues with water getting trapped under the front fender lip…as did the Passat, Audi TT, etc. It’s common and sucks but not a dealbreaker.
Jetta every time. It might not be a great vehicle, but at least it isn’t a Dodge Avenger, a vehicle so devoid of passion, refinement, quality, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and F**k’s to give, that I’ll gladly chose the older but cheaper VW.
seriously, the Avenger is the most meh vehicle made by the Detroit three this century.
I don’t think it’s Meh. It’s spectacularly bad, such a horrible contraption that deserves a spotlight in the Museum of Abominable Shit. A memorable, class-beating piece of shit.
It’s a subject of scientific study and philosophical rumination.
As if they TRIED to make it that bad? That IS something…
It is incredibly difficult to judge others’ intentions, especially so of a collective body like the one that envisaged this piece of crap and made it happen in the real world. But they knew what they were doing. Maybe, they were even bent-on punishing the middle-class because of some obscure conspiracy theory. The result is clear.