Good morning! Today we’re looking at a couple of “fancy” versions of ordinary cars, nearly a decade apart in age, but very close in ideology, and that ideology is that you can have nice things, as long as you don’t expect them to be exciting as well. Grab a cup of coffee; you’ll need it to stay awake looking at these two.
Yesterday’s high-mileage battle ended with a win for the Mazda 3, though quite a few of you expressed a desire for a “Both” option. Many of you were concerned with the possibility of rust on both of them, but cars on the West Coast just don’t have that problem.
Don’t believe me? Check it out: That’s a photo of the left rear cab mount/cab corner/rocker panel of my own ’89 Chevy truck, a thirty-five-year-old ex-government fleet truck that spent its service life in eastern Washington state before retiring to Portland, without a lick of rust. It just isn’t an issue.
Oh, and speaking of which, my vote is for the Tundra. I like the flames, and the overall scruffiness of it. It’s one of the few trucks I’ve found that would make a suitable replacement for my Chevy, should anything ever happen to it.
Now then: American cars of the 1980s just weren’t very exciting, and I say that as someone who is terribly fond of them. It’s just hard to drum up enthusiasm for some ninety-horsepower sedan with an automatic. But, if equipped correctly, they can be quite nice cars – not flashy, not putting on airs like the Lincoln Versailles or the Cadillac Cimarron, just nice. Comfortable seats, good air conditioning, and a smooth, quiet ride can make up for a sixteen-second 0-60 time, with the right attitude. Not everything has to be hardcore all the time. Sometimes a little Christopher Cross is just the ticket. So instead of thinking of these cars as “lame” or “slow,” think of them as the automotive equivalent of yacht rock. Here they are.
1983 Chrysler E-Class – $3,000
Engine/drivetrain: 2.2-liter overhead cam inline 4, three-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Everett, WA
Odometer reading: 126,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives great
You have to hand it to Chrysler; they got a lot of mileage out of the K platform. Starting with one basic front-wheel-drive formula, the struggling automaker managed to put family sedans, station wagons, luxury coupes and sedans, and even sports coupes into showrooms, not to mention something that came to be known as a minivan. And right in the middle of the range was the Chrysler E-Class, a short-lived variant of the E platform, a K-car with a longer wheelbase.
Unusually for an E-Class, this car is powered by Chrysler’s own 2.2 liter four-cylinder engine instead of the optional Mitsubishi-supplied 2.6 liter that ended up in many cars in the early years. Even more unusually for an upscale model, it does not appear to be equipped with air conditioning. I can’t imagine ordering a car like this and not checking that box on the form, but somebody was trying to save a few bucks, I suppose. It runs and drives beautifully, the seller says, and has a new timing belt, alternator, and voltage regulator.
It may lack air conditioning, but it does have another well-known Chrysler option of the era: the Electronic Message Center. Yes, the talking thing. The ’83 Dodge 600 we had when I was young had this option, and it was amusing for the first month or two, but got a bit annoying after that. My mom got in the habit of fastening her seat belt before starting the car, so it wouldn’t tell her to do so. My ’84 Chrysler Laser had it too, but that car had a lot of weird electrical gremlins, so the Message Center would spit out random dire warnings now and again. I think there’s a reason why this gimmick never caught on.
It’s in remarkably good shape, with shiny paint, including the four body-matching hubcaps, a blatant ripoff of Mercedes-Benz. Comparing cars to Mercedes was all the rage for a while; Ford famously designed an entire advertising campaign around comparing its Granada to a Mercedes W116 S-Class. I doubt either ruse actually persuaded any buyers.
1992 Mercury Topaz GS – $1,800
Engine/drivetrain: 2.3-liter overhead valve inline 4, three-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Odometer reading: 55,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well, but needs exercise
Ford was the last of the Big Three to embrace front-wheel-drive; the imported Fiesta subcompact had been available since 1976, but it wasn’t until 1981 that a home-grown FWD Ford appeared in the form of the Escort, which replaced the RWD Pinto. In 1984, Ford enlarged the Escort’s basic design to create the Tempo and Mercury Topaz, a replacement for the Fox-based Fairmont. And as had become its custom, Mercury produced its own version of the same basic car with different trim: the Topaz, in this case.
I’ll never quite understand Ford’s thinking when it came to the engine in the Tempo and Topaz. It’s a 2.3-liter four, but not the one you’re thinking of. It would have made sense for Ford to use the Lima overhead-cam engine, or even an enlarged version of the Escort’s CVH four, but instead it developed a whole different engine, based on the ancient Falcon-style inline-six. I guess reusing the old tooling made it worth it? Anyway, this one runs fine, but it hasn’t been driven much, so it probably has some cobwebs that need to be blasted out. It also has a leaky valve cover, but a new gasket is included.
Inside, it’s as clean as you would expect for having so few miles on it. The Tempo and Topaz never got airbags; they staggered along through their last four or five years of production meeting the passive-restraint mandate using motorized shoulder belts. The build quality of these is a little hit-or-miss; the seller says this one has a little trouble with the driver’s side power window, and some of the door lock/unlock buttons don’t work.
Outside, it’s reasonably clean and shiny, but it does have a little bit of hail damage. On a car this age, and for this price, there are worse problems to have. Being a Mercury, it also has that bar of lights across the grille opening, and I’m willing to bet that it has one bulb burned out. They all seem to, and it always ends up looking like a missing tooth.
It should come as no surprise to hear that I have actually owned cars very similar to both of these. I had a 1985 Plymouth Caravelle for a winter beater one year, and a 1992 Ford Tempo coupe was actually the first car I ever made payments on. I honestly have no preference between them; they were both just fine, plenty comfortable, and more or less reliable. Exciting? No, of course not. But they were nice. Don’t take my word for it, though; go take one of these for a nice leisurely spin.
(Image credits: Facebook Marketplace sellers)
Since it’s imaginary Internet money, I’m voting for the Chrysler. I don’t think it’s worth $3k, but I’d drive it unironically if someone handed me the keys. If the Topaz had been half as expensive, it’d be an acceptable “I just need a car” option.
I’ve owned 2 K cars, and a Tempo so this one is tricky. I guess it’ll be the Topaz, since it’s cheaper and has a/c, and way lower mileage.
It’s stuck in my mind from reading Consumer Reports in the ’90s that the Tempo and Topaz were rated *the worst* used car you could buy at the time.
Also, ’83 was before any significant climate change, so if the original owner was in a northern state, A/C might not have been needed. Either that, or they were like my parents – after owning an ’80 Dasher with terribly unreliable A/C, their next three cars were specifically ordered without it.
I live in Phoenix, though. It’s going to be 112 today, so A/C is a must. I voted for the K car anyway, but neither is the correct option.
K car for the Reagan/Bush ’84 sticker and no auto seat belts.
I’d rather have the E-Class if it had air conditioning but had to vote Topaz. How hard could it be to add air conditioning to a 41 year old Chrysler?
“Being a Mercury, it also has that bar of lights across the grille opening . . .” IIRC, that plastic bar was just for show, no lights behind it on the Topaz as there were on the Sable. As to which gets my vote, I’d go for the Chrysler. We rented a Dodge 600 on a trip to Maine back in the day and it was surprisingly nice for a malaise era K-car derivative.
Sometimes a little Christopher Cross is just the ticket
As Deep Purple learned when Richie Blackmore was unavailable.
https://www.rhino.com/article/august-1970-the-night-christopher-cross-rocked-with-deep-purple
I want the Topaz…it’s even only an hour away, but a K car saved my life in March 92 in an accident so if there is one up, I’m voting it.
Last night a K Car saved my life
Last night a K Car saved my life from a broken ride
Last night a K Car saved my life
Last night a K Car saved my life with a drive
Hey listen up to Lee Iacocca today
You better hear what he’s got to say
There’s not a problem that Lee can’t fix
Whether down in the city or out in the sticks
And if a Topaz gives you trouble
Just you trade it in on the double
And you don’t let it trouble your heart
‘Cause away go the troubles
With those Ford parts
I said away go the troubles
With those Ford parts
Well all right
If you can find a better car — buy it
Go out and buy it, buy it, buy it
*applause* Well played sir
So.
Boring.
Voted for the E class for the bumper sticker.
Had a ’90 Topaz in high school (only a two year old car!) and it was perfectly adequate. Did everything it needed to do, got decent mileage, was a great cruiser with my friends, and just “worked”. The motorized mouse belts were dumb, and there was a backlight issue with the stock cassette deck, but beyond that it was a decent car and as reliable as the sun for 90k miles. Dad traded it in on a ’93 Taurus which was also a “nice” car.
HOW ABOUT NO
The fake Reagan/Bush bumper sticker is the most charming thing about that Chrysler, and I have absolutely no nostalgia for that pair of mofos.
Tempo/Topaz never got *standard* airbags. They were an option for several years, one that was not frequently chosen.
Yup, one of the first American cars to have it available.
True, the airbag option was listed on my dad’s 86 Tempo user manual. Unfortunately as it was still kind of an early development it was expensive and it deprived the car from a few features including cruise control and tilt steering wheel
Oh wow, that early! I didn’t realize that. I just remember driving one of my college’s fleet Tempos (like a ’92 or ’93) that had the airbag option and it might be the first and only one I’ve ever seen with my own eyes.
Either one would get a lot of attention at the local RAD-era meet or even just Cars & Coffee, but the E-Class is just a little more special IMHO. The exterior condition, particularly the wheel covers, makes it stand out.
I’d rock it as a tribute to my late grandmother, who spent the later years of her career as a realtor in a couple tarted-up K models, including a Dodge 600 convertible. This was after she finally got rid of her gold ’76 Dart around the time today’s E-Class was made.
Mercury for me since it’s a lot cheaper. The Chrysler is overpriced by at least $1000.
If I was just going to use it for Radwood or Cars & Coffee, I’d take the K, because honestly the Regan/Bush bumper sticker is *chef’s kiss* on this thing.
If I was going to be using it for actual driving, I’d take the Topaz. I actually drove one of these things a long time ago and got used to how it operated (read: slowly, plan your merge). It’s fine, the seats are pretty comfortable, it goes well in snow (as long as the snow is less than 5″) and it’s reasonably well equipped. Mine also had a leaky valve cover gasket, so there’s nostalga there. I’m also willing to bet the AC still works.
Yuck. Neither? I’m voting for the cheaper price tag. Not for a vehicle I would ever want to spend time in.
After yesterday needing a both option, today needs a “I’ll take the bus” option. I went Topaz just because it’s cheaper, the E class is more interesting and probably the better option, but you just can’t get an old fancy car without AC, so I had to go the other way.
Had a Topaz as a rental in Canada many years ago.
Driving it was – fine.
I always thought it was weird that the post-facelift Topaz – such as this – had the mini-Continental roofline with the Sable-derived light bar, while the Tempo got the Sable-esque “floating” roofline.
I’ll take the Topaz. My mom had an earlier model (86 maybe) when I was a kid and it was a decent little car. Hers was a manual, though. It wasn’t inspiring in any way but it went where it was pointed and really that’s all it was supposed to do.
No. Just say no. A k car with no ac in camry beige or a topaz that’s infested with sat too long gremlins and a weird engine. The topaz is cheaper and might break even when you part it out after losing to the gremlins. So flawed gemstone it is. Yay.
Topaz only because it is cheaper.
Do you have to be “of a certain age” to notice that sticker?! Because holy cow, what a period piece. I think my heart is with the Mercury though, because A/C and because I passed on a clean $1900 Contour last year like an absolute idiot. Fuck-it money for a functional vehicle!
… I’m still upset about the Contour. Remind yourself, there is always a place to park it.
You made the right choice passing on the Contour. Recovering Craptour owner here, don’t buy into the “world car” hype. I had a Topaz and a Craptour and the Topaz was light years better in build quality and reliability. The Craptour broke the night we took it home (it was brand new) and was never not broken for the next four years until I won my lemon law case and waved good bye to its sorry ass.
So you’re saying I’d be better off in a $1900 B-class?
https://www.kijijiautos.ca/cars/mercedes-benz/b-class/#vip=32614142
I can only imagine what horrors await. You pick your poison at this end of the market 🙂
Ooh, that’s a conundrum. The B-class would be unique around here and you could claim you drove a Benz, but what nightmares lie under the shiny blue paint? Are YOU brave enough to find out??
LOL, they even called it an E-Class. That gets my vote for being impressively brown.
I’m not usually one to kink shame, but I think it’s time to put the K-Car to bed for a while. While I don’t have hard numbers, the proportion of them showing up here is disproportionate to the number of survivors left on the road.
Where I live a 16 second 0-60 means you’ll get killed on the freeway by a swarm of speeding Charger/Challenger/Durango/Mustangs going double the speed limit.
So, I’m not playing today.
The Chrysler lets you say “I drove here in my E-class”, but that’s exactly who you do NOT want to be. Also, it is spectacularly awful. The interior looks nice for what it is.
The Topaz is slightly less so, at least on the outside. But it is cheaper, so there’s that.
The Topaz is worse to drive than the Chrysler, if you can even imagine that…..
Oh, dear.
I’ve never driven any of those, call me lucky.
Hey now. My grandma had a shiny red tempo. I learned to drive stick in that thing! It was… No, actually you’re right. It was pretty darn terrible to drive.