Weirdly Similar For Being Completely Different: 1988 Ford Mustang vs 1993 Olds Cutlass

Good morning! Today we have two cars that have a lot in common: price, color, style, conditition, but they’re not two cars you would think of as being comparable. When has that ever stopped us, though?

Yesterday I played a little bit dirty, just to see what it would take to get you all to vote for a K-car. As it turns out, a derelict Lincoln will do the trick, if it’s rough and overpriced enough. You not only preferred a grandma-spec Plymouth Reliant; you preferred it by more than three to one. Maybe I could get the dealership selling the Lincoln to change that banner from “I Buy Old Project Cars” to “Mission Accomplished.” (On second thought, maybe not.)

It goes without saying, I suppose, that I would take the Reliant here in a heartbeat. There are K variants I’d rather have than a gray four-door Reliant, but I could find a way to have fun with this. The question is, what to do with the other $997,000? Build a tree fort, I suppose.

Now then: Finding cars to feature here is more art than science. I have to reject a lot of ads, including many found by others, that would otherwise be great choices, because of bad photos, or not enough photos. Sometimes I skip something because there’s just not enough information about it, and every time I assume something about a car, I end up making a mistake – and boy do I hear about it.

But what really takes some time is finding the second car. Often I’ll find one thing I really want to write about, and then struggle to find it a mate. I found today’s Mustang a few days ago, but I had no idea what to put up against it, until the perfect car practically fell in my lap. They’re so closely matched, they could be mirror images of each other, except that they’re completely different sorts of cars. Let’s see which approach you prefer.

1988 Ford Mustang LX – $2,500

Engine/drivetrain: 2.3 liter overhead cam inline 4, four-speed automatic, RWD

Location: Antioch, IL

Odometer reading: 91,000 miles

Operational status: Runs and drives well

In the beginning, cars had no tops. This is largely because most wagons had no tops, and early automakers pretty much copied wagon designs. And it was good – until it rained. So some clever folks added a folding roof to keep the rain out. Later, even after cars gained permanent roofs, some buyers longed for the days when you could fold down the roof and let the sunshine in, so automakers sold convertible versions of hardtop cars. And it was good again – until a bunch of regulators proposed a bunch of new rules that would have killed convertibles, so automakers stopped making them. Then, in 1982, a guy named Lee thought, “You know what, those rules never came to pass. There’s no reason we can’t go back to making convertibles again.” So he did, and before long, so did everyone else. And, once again, it was good.

Ford wasted no time in bringing back a convertible Mustang after Chrysler broke the seal. Starting in 1983, the Mustang was available as a drop-top again, made from a notchback coupe by famed car-beheader ASC. This Mustang is from the second refresh of the third-generation Fox-body, which was only available with either a 2.3 liter inline four, or a 302 V8. This one has the four, which doesn’t have the power to back up the Mustang’s reputation, but it will run until the end of time. It’s backed by a four-speed automatic, which slows down progress even further. The seller says it runs fine, but suggests the car is a good candidate for an engine swap. Personally, I’d leave it alone, but I’m not as power-hungry as a lot of car folks.

Convertibles are great, when the weather is just right, and convertible owners tend to make the most of those days when the temperature is perfect and the sun is shining. Despite being in northern Illinois, it looks like this car has seen a lot of those days; its red upholstery is faded to a dusky pink. It’s in good condition otherwise, though. The top is in acceptable shape, and works, and the seller notes that the left rear quarter window won’t roll back up any more. Luckily, replacement window motors are cheap.

The body is clean and rust-free; this car must have been someone’s summer-only toy. It has newer Mustang GT wheels, which look good on it. It’s missing a piece of trim, but other than that, it looks nice.

1993 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme – $2,500

Engine/drivetrain: 3.1 liter overhead valve V6, four-speed automatic, FWD

Location: Omaha, NE

Odometer reading: 93,000 miles

Operational status: Runs and drives well

Replacing a beloved model, especially with a radically different car, is always a tricky business. Ford tried replacing the Fox-body Mustang with the Probe, of course, and got smacked down by the fans. GM’s fabled A-body platform, a fan favorite since 1964, lost its chassis designation to a front-wheel-drive car in 1982, becoming the G-body, and was then replaced altogether in 1988 by the FWD W-body – but not before going out with a bang, of course. To cushion the blow, GM made sure that the W-body had some cool special variants, including this car: the Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme convertible.

The W-body cars were originally only available as two-doors, probably because the final few years of G-body cars were also only two-doors. Part of the original design was a vertical door handle embedded in the B-pillar, a feature not shared with the later four-door variants. The convertible carries over the cool door handles, because it still has B-pillars, and a “basket-handle” roll bar. This probably keeps it a little bit less floppy than a typical unibody-based convertible. No other GM division got a convertible W-body, which means that there really was a special feel in this particular Oldsmobile. Apart from being a convertible, though, it’s a standard W-body, with the same 3.1 liter corporate V6 and overdrive automatic that most of them had. It runs and drives well, the seller says, and has no warning lights on the dash – a good sign.

You wouldn’t expect a convertible to be a base model, and this one isn’t – it’s got leather seats and all kinds of power stuff. It looks nice inside too, except for some gaudy aftermarket speakers in the rear, but you can probably get some less tacky grilles to hide them a little better. The top of the dash on the passenger’s side looks a little wonky, like it was taken apart and not reassembled right. It probably just needs to be snapped back into place.

It’s got a pretty good boop on the nose, but it looks like the hood still closes all right. It’s also missing a side-marker light, which you’d probably need to source from a junkyard. But it’s not rusty, and the top looks like it will last you a while yet.

So there you have it: two white convertibles with red interiors that approach the same place from different paths. Either one will give you plenty of fresh air on nice days, though. And with those, I leave you all for a week; my wife and I are headed to Tahiti for a bucket-list dream vacation. Fear not, however; I’m leaving you in the capable hands of Griffin Riley, who has a whole garden of crappy automotive delights in store for you. See you all next week!

(Image credits: sellers)