Good morning! To start the week off, we’re looking at two little trucks I know quite well, having owned trucks very similar to both of them in the past. They both treated me pretty well, and they both seem like fair deals (at least, these days; I paid considerably less for both of mine). Which one will you pick? We’ll see.
On Friday, you had your choice of all eight vehicles from the week. I figured either the Acura Legend or the Lexus LS400 would come out on top, and I was right. Despite a salvage title on the Acura, and some seriously hinky inconsistencies in the LS400’s ad, the Japanese luxury liners took home a 1-2 finish.
I’m with you on the Acura, but I’d want to know the story behind the title. The Lexus just doesn’t interest me, but hey, that means I won’t be fighting any of you for the next one that comes up for sale. It’s all yours. There’s still something about that Cavalier convertible that really appeals to me, though; maybe just because it has been convertible weather around here for the past few days.
Of all the vehicle types that have gone extinct over the past couple of decades, I think I miss cheap little pickup trucks the most. (And no, the Maverick doesn’t count; too many doors, too many gadgets, and not enough pedals.) It bothers me that I can’t walk into a dealership and drive out in something like a basic little Ranger or Mighty Max anymore. I feel like I should have bought one new while I had the chance.
I have had a few used compact pickups over the years, however, including an ’84 Mazda, and an ’88 Toyota. Both of them got sold in favor of something “nicer,” and in both cases, I still sort of feel like that was a mistake. Rectifying that mistake now would cost me, though; I paid $600 for my Mazda and $1,000 for my Toyota. Apparently they aren’t that cheap anymore. Which one of these is worth the new price? Let’s take a look.
1984 Mazda B2000 SE-5 – $3,300
Engine/drivetrain: 2.0-liter overhead cam inline 4, five-speed manual, RWD
Location: Anderson, SC
Odometer reading: 166,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives great
If you’re old enough, one look at this truck will bring to mind a jingle. You know the one I mean. Mazda’s selling point with its trucks in the ’80s was value; more features for less money than the competition. A few different trim packages were offered; the one I had was a “Sundowner,” which had more chrome trim, and plain steel wheels with dog-dish hubcaps. This one is an SE-5, the “sporty” model, with blacked-out trim, stripes, and white spoked wheels. But apart from the trim, it’s exactly the same as the one I had, right down to the silver paint and blue interior.
The B2000, regardless of trim, is powered by a 2.0 liter single overhead cam four. Nearly all of them came with a manual transmission; you could get an automatic, but no one did. How times have changed. This one has a five-speed stick, with brand-new clutch hydraulics, and runs and drives great. The seller has also replaced the carb, the starter, and the fuel pump.
It looks pretty clean, but definitely well-used. This truck was nobody’s baby; the bed shows the scars of untold toolboxes, piles of lumber, and bags of mulch casually tossed in. But that’s all right; it’s what trucks are for. The seller says a topper is included as well, but it isn’t shown in the photos. If you put a topper on it, though, you can’t use those awesome rope hooks on the sides of the bed.
It isn’t all that rusty, but then, neither was mine, and that was in Minnesota. In fact, the only trouble I ever had with rust was the fuel pickup tube inside the fuel tank; it rusted off halfway up. Took me ages to figure out why it kept stalling when the tank was half empty.
1986 Toyota Pickup – $3,000
Engine/drivetrain: 2.4-liter overhead cam inline 4, four-speed manual, RWD
Location: San Fernando, CA
Odometer reading: 224,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives fine, but won’t pass smog
Toyota’s small trucks have long been seen as the gold standard, and for a good reason. They’re as tough as nails, give or take a little rust, and a timing chain guide or two. Top Gear tried to destroy one and failed, and millions of tradespeople haven’t had any better luck. A quarter-million miles on the odometer is the norm; half a million or more isn’t unheard-of. The one I had didn’t run particularly well, but it always started, and never let me down.
The secret to the Toyota truck’s success is the 20R/22R engine, a simple overhead-cam four-cylinder that doesn’t put out a whole lot of power, but seems to run forever. It has two weaknesses, and mine suffered from both of them: its feedback carburetor is notoriously finicky, and its plastic timing chain guides are prone to wear, causing a terrible rattle on startup. If the chain gets loose enough, it can throw off the valve timing and make it run like crap. I worry that this one may be suffering from a loose timing chain. The seller says it runs all right, but backfires on deceleration, and failed emissions. The carb, distributor, plugs, and wires are all new; it ought to run like a top.
This is a really basic truck, with vinyl seats, rubber floors, and only a four-speed manual transmission. It looks nice inside; the seller recently re-did the upholstery and door panels. It has a nice camper-style topper with some built-ins; it could be used as a teeny-tiny RV for one or two people, if you were so inclined.
Apart from the emissions issues, the biggest problem is this body damage on the driver’s side. This truck got hammered by something. The cab itself looks like it took the worst of it; that’s a problem, because that’s not something that can be easily removed and replaced. The seller says the door still opens and closes fine, but I have my doubts.
The bad news is that nobody makes these little trucks anymore. The good news is that a bunch of companies made them by the millions for at least a couple of decades, so there are still plenty of them to go around. You have to go outside the rust belt to find them, like these two, but they’re out there. You’ve got your choice between a legendary Toyota that needs a little fixing up, and a slightly-less-legendary Mazda that looks a little tired, but still willing. Which one are you taking?
(Image credits: sellers)
Mazda for the nostalgia.
It was in a 2200 that my daughter aimed at the backyard creek while I was teaching her about clutches. It was a good little truck, but I can’t remember where I got it, nor why I sold it
Flood damage?
Nah: I was ready, grabbed the wheel, and she did her first donut.
Good thing it was Krispy Kreme not Dunkin’.
Right?
-especially given the size of the snapping turtle that cruised up & down it!
I had an 81 Toyo P/U and an ex-GF had an early 90’s B-series. They both took a shitload of abuse and kept running.
In this case, the Mazda is >>> the Toyota. Extra gear, better condition, and less mileage vs. bigger engine but non-trivial body damage.
The lack of a/c here in Central Texas would be less than enjoyable, but EGF’s Mazda was also sans a/c and we survived when she drove. Just need a 24-32 oz Yeti filled with ice water and a couple of towels.
Normally I’d pick the Toyota, but not with that body damage. Mazda all the way.
I’ve had variations on both of these (the B2600i in the case of the Mazda, but the exact same Toyota with the exception that mine was 4×4).
In this case, Mazda all the way, with two caveats.
I didn’t see any hint of AC on the Mazda dash. If you live in the southwest, this may be a point of consideration.
Second, the Toyota would probably be a great starting point for a built crawler or the like- if it had 4×4.
But for drive-it-and-go, Mazda all the way. These weren’t as ubiquitous as Toyotas here in the states, but in a lot of salty places (Caribbean), you’ll still see some of them rattling around.
On the contrary, I’d want to start with a 2WD truck and add my own divorced TC. But this is for a big, stupid truggy, not a basic tin bender on leafs.
That’s a good point. Other than maybe the option of using the stock selector lever, there isn’t much point in starting with a 4×4 if you’re just going to replace everything single part of the drivetrain…
Mazda for me. Less mileage, looks to be in better condition and it looks like it’s more likely that you can register/use it without major repairs.
I’m guessing with the Toyota, it could just ‘need a tune’ to pass smog. OR it could be burning oil due to the engine being worn out which is an engine swap or engine rebuilt.
Plus with the dent and other stuff I see, the Mazda looks like the better deal.
The interior on the Toyota is nice, but the boxiness of the Mazda gives me Jeep Comanche vibes. With the lower mileage, it gets my vote.
Timing on a 22R is quite easy, but the truck is done with that significant body damage.
I’ll take the Mazda
Even if the Toyota wasn’t banged and running lousy I would have picked the Mazda. 5 speed for the win!
In the early 90s I wanted to buy a mid 80s Toyota like that but they were already rusting out. Ended up with a Ranger that served me well.
The Mazda is in better shape, so it wins my vote
I’d want the Mazda, but something can’t be right for that asking price.
No damage, no issues, no duh. Mazda all the way.
That Mazda is the perfect “old guy” truck and I’m am the perfect old guy. Well … one out of two ain’t bad.
Every single Toyota truck I’ve had the misfortune to be associated with from this era has left me stranded by the side of the road. I know, not a typical experience, but there it is. None of my dad’s Mazdas, truck or hatchback, ever let us down. B3000 it is!
Giant Dent or no Giant Dent that Toyota will run and haul forever, and that’s all I would need. Gimme the unloved Toyota.
Sakes alive! That ’80s jingle lives in my brain alongside “Dodge trucks are ram tough,” “Datsun, we are driven,” and “Have you driven a Ford lately.”
Having endured a later Toyota pick-’em-up dying the death of Terminal Frame Rot, I just can’t imagine driving another. The Mazda looks as if it will endure, even if neither vehicle is exactly pristine.
I don’t particularly want a two-seater with a loadbed in back, but little ones are okay by me. They’re certainly different from today’s Brodozers….
The Mazda is cool, but the Toyota does something for me, maybe it’s Back To The Future’s fault that these trucks just scream cool in my head. Then I saw the driver’s side. That won’t buff out, add to that the engine troubles and the Mazda is definitely the buy even for an extra $300.
Check out that 4×4!
Mazda, please!
This is exactly what I want in a small truck: simplicity, reliability, and a LOW LOAD HEIGHT. I wouldn’t need the topper, necessarily (esp because we don’t get to see it in the ad) and I don’t care about the tailgate being pushed in as long as it works. The tie-down cleats are fantastic and it looks like someone added a few more to the rear bumper.
I appreciate the serape-style seat cover and that fact that the seller refreshed the white paint on the wheels, even if that meant painting over the wheel weights. 🙂
As a former Taco owner I came in fully intending to vote Toyota but the stumbling engine and destroyed body work is just too much for what they’re asking. Mazda it is.
Yup, I was all “Yota, duh!” until I scrolled to that last pic.
Gonna have that Mazda jingle in my head all day now, but I voted for it anyway. Clean and more gears wins.
I think Mazda had a special on the new ’86 model: $5,995.
Sweet Mama, that Mazda!!
The topper and the storage things in the bed of the Toyota significantly hamper its usefullness,and that was pushing me towards the Mazda before I saw the body damage. That is maybe worth half the asking price, and I love those Mazdas. No surprise that when I voted it was 90% for the Mazda. I am a bit worried about those two folks who think the Toyota is the better deal though.
Even if the Toyota didn’t have concerning body damage, I’d still vote for the Mazda because white wheels and cool stripes.
Dad bought a new Ford Courier XLT in 81 or 82.
It was a great little truck – dead reliable.
This one is in much better condition than the Toyota
And the Mazda isn’t munched.