Good morning! Got a couple of rarities for you today. These are both cars that are getting thin on the ground in general, but are absolute unicorns with three pedals each. Only one of them is really anything special (as far as I can tell), but it’s cool to see them both alive and well after 33 years.
First, we’ll check the results from yesterday:
Huh. I’m actually a little surprised at that result. It’s my pick as well; I’d rather wrench all day on a good-looking non-running car than try to make something pretty, but I expected it to scare off most folks. I did hear some talk of fixing up the Bronco to flip it, but that isn’t necessary. Just fix it up and drive it, and eventually it’ll flip itself.
All righty then… For those of us old enough to remember when a three-pedal manual was called a “standard” transmission, the death of manual options stings every time another one is announced. I understand that Mitsubishi’s cheap-and-cheerful Mirage is the latest to fall from stickshift grace. This trend is a real shame, because – and I know I’m not the only one who does this – it will eventually render pointless one of my favorite walking-around-a-city games: peeking in the window of parked cars while walking past to see if they’re manual or automatic.
Today, both of our contestants would delight, and likely surprise, anyone playing that game. And one of them, in this particular model year, was only available with a manual, something almost unheard-of these days. Here they are.
1989 Pontiac Grand Am – $2,500
Engine/drivetrain: 2.5 liter inline 4, 5 speed manual, FWD
Location: St. Helens, OR
Odometer reading: 168,000 miles
Runs/drives? Yep, just fine
This car gives me the nostalgic warm fuzzies. My hometown’s mayor owned a Pontiac dealership, so nearly every official car, including all the high school’s driver’s ed cars, were Pontiacs. I spent a good deal of my sanctioned behind-the-wheel training in a Grand Am exactly like this. Same color, and same transmission; yes, in those days, some of the driver’s ed cars were sticks. You had to request to be assigned to one, but they existed.
I’ve always liked the looks of the first-generation GM N-body, especially the two door. It’s just a pleasing shape with good proportions. This one, with the facelifted front end and those “food-processor” wheels, is just about perfect. The only thing it’s missing is the “Quad 4” badge on the front fender. Without that, I can be reasonably sure that this car has our old clattery friend the “Iron Duke” four-cylinder under the hood; GM didn’t offer a V6 in the Grand Am in 1989, and the Sunbird’s 2.0 liter turbo four was reserved for the SE model.
But hey, I’ve got nothing against the Iron Duke personally. It’s a good honest motor, easy to work on, and relatively efficient. I’d certainly not say no to this one just because of the engine. I must say, however, that were this a Quad 4 car, I would have called the seller yesterday and been begging my wife to let me buy it. As it stands, with the 2.5, I can resist. Just.
This car is in remarkable shape. The only obvious flaws I can see are some flaking paint on the luggage rack (that’s what you get for painting stainless steel, dummies) and a little minor wear and tear on the inside. The seller says it has one window that likes to come off its track, but they’re manual windows (!) so you can probably fix it with a zip tie, or maybe a little JB Weld.
1989 Ford Taurus SHO – $2,500
Engine/drivetrain: 3.0 liter DOHC V6, 5 speed manual, FWD
Location: Wilsonville, OR
Odometer reading: 145,000 miles
Runs/drives? Yep!
I have some personal history with a Taurus SHO as well, but it was less sanctioned. My dad owned one, a facelifted ’92 model, and it remains to this day the car in which I have driven the fastest: 135 MPH indicated, on the Kansas Turnpike. (Yes, my dad was with me.) Ford set out to turn the Taurus into a world-class high-performance sports sedan with the SHO, and while I don’t know how world-class it is, I can vouch for the high-performance part. I gave up before it did.
For those who may not be familiar, what we have here is a first-generation Ford Taurus in name and appearance, but with heavy-duty suspension, four-wheel disc brakes, a five-speed manual (the only choice through 1992), and, most importantly, a special version of Ford’s “Vulcan” V6, built by Yamaha, with dual-overhead cams and 24 valves. This engine put out 220 horsepower compared to the standard Taurus’s 140, dropped 0-60 times into the mid 6-second range, and pushed the car’s top speed up over 140 miles per hour. That may not sound like much now, but in 1989, for a four-door sedan available at your Friendly Ford Dealer, it was the star of the show.
Part of the SHO’s appeal is that, at first glance, it does look an awful lot like a garden-variety Taurus. You could surprise BMW and Audi drivers with this car, if they didn’t know what to look for. Unfortunately, as a relatively inexpensive and quite fast car, a lot of SHOs met with some awful fates, either wrecked or simply abused to death, which makes this black first-year car all the more special. The seller says it runs and drives just fine, but the air conditioning is inoperative.
The outside of this car looks fantastic, and I like the SHO in black. It looks menacing. Inside, it’s harder to assess the condition, with those seat covers and dash cap, but it’s still nicer than any cheap SHO I’ve seen for quite a while. Frankly, this car is mighty tempting to me as well, but it’s far too nice to park in the part of town I have to park in regularly. I can only hope that someone buys it who appreciates its rarity and specialness.
Every once in a while, I manage to find two legitimately nice cars in this price range. I’d be proud to own either of these, frankly, and if I were in a position to buy, I’d have a hard time choosing between them. But I don’t have to; you do. Now.
(image credits: Craigslist sellers)
I went against the grain on this one. I had a Taurus and it had endless electrical gremlins. A nickel and dime machine. So I went for the Grand Am. I like the look of it, even though it has the original 4-banger to define all 4-bangers.
I will admit that my ’89 SHO had a slightly too short wiring harness to the stereo, so when they attached it to the frame it left no slack for the plug to go into the stereo without tension. If you went over a bump, the stereo would start to go out. Sometimes you could bang on the front and get signal back, but it was the plug coming out of the back of the thing. Oh for another half inch of wire on that loom!
Absolutely the grand am.
Neither one is fun to drive, and the pontiac is in way better condition cosmetically, and (probably) isn’t beat to crap quite as much mechanically.
Iron puke versus the Yamaha SHO V6 no contest!
I’ll be contrarian here and go with the Grand Am because it looks nicer. I wouldn’t be driving either of these cars for their performance capabilities.
too bad the Grand Am has the Iron Dukee. Otherwise, maybe it would have a chance if it had the Quad 4 or even the 122.
GM should’ve stopped making the Iron Duke as soon as the 122 came out. It’s a much better engine.
This is an absolutely ridiculous comparison.
A blah-mobile Vs a SHO? and not only that, but a SHO that looks pretty damn good? WTF?
Gimme dat Taurus.
I have “history” with both cars. Pontiac loaned me a Grand Am — with Quad 4 and a manual trans — and, before I even had a chance to give it some leg, the transmission mainshaft snapped like a carrot and I had to coast to an ignominious halt on my street. The replacement ran, but the interior was “meh,” the build quality was on the “hit-or-miss” side and I never warmed to it.
The SHOs I drove were loads o’ fun, but once again the interiors struck me as strictly utility-grade. But with a pretty decent chassis and that high-winding engine, who cared? The thing was amazingly adept at canyon-carving for a large-ish sedan.
So yeah, the SHO.
Though somewhat irrelevant to this discussion, everyone who reads this should have had a chance to drive Chuck Beck’s fantastic “Shogun,” a Ford Festiva with the SHO power package stuffed in the back. While I understand why Dearborn couldn’t/wouldn’t back it — one word: lawyers — that was the best possible home for the Yamaha V6. Always brings a big smile to my face remembering that one….
Well: here’s the deal. The Grand Am is clearly the winner in terms of reliability, parts availability, and condition. However: Iron Duke. If you are in no hurry and don’t mind having a poorly balanced boat anchor for motivation, the Iron Duke will never die so it’s got that going for it. On the other hand, the manual transmission in these was not so great – no pleasure to be found in rowing it. So combine a gutless engine that hates to be revved and shakes in anger when you do with a transmission that hates its job and does it grudgingly and you will soon begin to wish that The Duke was dead. The reason this car is in such nice shape it is that nobody like driving it…
The SHO? A typical Ford product of its time with a bunch of really nice performance parts strapped to it. It will fail you in some many ways that Ford could have prevented for an extra 50 ¢ when they built it.
You’d have to be a fool to buy it.
BUT – it’ll make you giggle every time you drive it, and when you eventually decide to reluctantly let it go because it’s become too sketchy even for your standards, there’re be a bigger fool just dying to buy it from you to fix up like you planned to do.
It’s a good case of splitting one’s vote. Grand Am for a cheap daily shitbox that should be good for another 100k, SHO for the budget enthusiast. Both are good deals.
I went SHO, and then I went to see what was around locally that fit the criteria.
https://www.facebook.com/marketplace/item/482252213356785/
1984 Porsche 928. – $2500.
Engine/drivetrain: 4.5 liter SOHC V8, 5 speed manual, RWD
Location: Kansas City MO
Odometer reading: 159,000 miles
Runs/drives? Nope
I realize that this is a terrible option but man do I want to go buy it even thought I feel like I can smell it from the pictures.
And after researching it a little more, it turns out its a automatic… the accordion shift boot had me fooled.
I would normally go with the SHO but, 20+ years ago, I dated a woman with a black SHO of this vintage and it went like stink but ate clutches. At about 120,000 miles, it was on its fourth clutch. I met one other person with similar problems, so the early SHO is, unfortunately, off he list of cars that I would like to own.
I forgot about the clutch issues. Yeah, my dad ran into that too.
Also remember to check the bushing when the clutch is replaced. My shifter wasn’t as crisp after a clutch replacement, and it took years for me to figure out the problem. (This was pre-internet.)
I’m going to agree with the majority and go with the SHO. But there’s something I have vaguely wondered about those GMs ever since I first started visiting the US in about 1990 and came across them. Has anyone ever actually used that luggage rack to carry luggage? How would you tie stuff down on it?
I did, once! A friend’s Grand Am + a gigantic duffle bag.
As you’re insinuating, best we could do was ensure that it would remain attached to the car, if not in its original position. I have no idea if it made it home sitting on the actual rack or hanging off the decklid.
I don’t think they were used much, and I don’t think I’d trust them, but I think there’s holes where you could attach tie on’s or bungees.
I did happen on a picture of a Fiero with luggage strapped on.
No, never. They were purely cosmetic dress-up.
That SHO Taurus is a steal. It’s hard for me though because I drove a 1989 Grand Am in high school (it was older then, I’m not THAT old) and I loved that car. It had the Quad 4 engine but was an automatic sadly. I actually traded that car in for a 1993 Grand Am that had a manual and a High Output Quad 4 which I think made about 185HP. It was pretty sweet for a GM shitbox.
Having said that, the Taurus is worth fixing up cosmetically and making it a Radwood star. I love it and I want it, but I have absolutely ZERO room for it. I’m sure it will go to an enthusiast home though, most people still have no idea what these are and the manual will scare off most.
Jim
I owned a ’93 GT HO Quad4 5 speed, was a sweet car till I blew the head gasket, then it was starting to go again when I traded it in on a Nissan Pathfinder (also stick).
Ah yes, the Quad 4, the engine that required buying head gaskets in bulk.
I can’t believe this is even a question, and the poll results seem to back me up. That Yamaha block is legendary, that alone sells the car. Would love to see that thing with some boost.
“Would love to see that thing with some boost.”
Do you mean that you’d put a performance chip in it? It’s not turbo or supercharged, unlike what the 1993 Ford sales rep kept trying to tell my Mom when she was shopping for one.
(I do understand now that the multivalve, dual cam technology does bring on the HP at higher revs similar to an in-period turbocharged car, so I’ll cut just a little slack to a salesman whose job it is to understand their product.)
I used to ferry Taurus SHO for a rental company in the late 80’s and I had a GrandAM of the same gen. I am going to go against the current here and say I would love to rock that GrandAM. For some reason, I have a real softspot for the body style and really, honestly, I loved the switchgear.
I agree. I’ve seen the RCR SHO episodes and I agree with his conclusion that the shadow of the legend has eclipsed the car itself (holy smokes, how did I fit that many marques in one sentence?).
SHO all day! Hell, when the car finally reaches its end I’d pull that beautiful engine, put some glass on top and make it a coffee table. Easily one of the best looking engines ever made.
“Frankly, this car is mighty tempting to me as well, but it’s far too nice to park in the part of town I have to park in regularly.”
This makes me genuinely curious what types of cars are parked in this neighborhood if a 34 year old Taurus would stand out as “far too nice”.
One of my coworkers had a homeless person pee on his tire. I can’t walk my dog around the block without watching for broken glass and/or needles on the sidewalk. One of many reasons I desperately need a new day job.
Yikes, hope you can find something quick!
Portland problems. There are a few parts of town where I’ll only go in the daytime and I won’t leave my car parked there for more than an hour or so. Inner Southeast seems to have improved a bit, but I still avoid NoPo and basically anything east of 82nd.
The curse of much of the west coast. What you need are at least a few days of the year that get to -30 C.
Geez! I’m in Beaverton, it’s not that bad out here yet aside from the 5 AM train wakeup call. But I used to commute from Happy Valley to Hillsboro, and that kinda trip can wreck a person’s soul. Best of luck to you!
So I hear there’s this new automotive website searching for full-time writers who can write about cars with technical acumen, relentless wit, and genuine honestly…
I can guarantee that the SHO front seats are split to heck, and I don’t know if a cat peed on the rear package tray or what, but the SHO will give you more smiles per mile! The air conditioner and oil drip situation is standard after 5 years after manufacture.
I CAN’T BELIEVE how rust-free that thing is! At 10 years old, my midwest,’89 SHO was bubbling between every panel joint from saltwater getting trapped in the winter. This thing is structurally a museum piece compared to mine when I parted with it at ~180,000 miles. (Or was it 160,000? It was a LONG time ago!)
And when you are finished with it, you can pop that Yamaha V6 into a Lotus Esprit!
I quite like that Grand Am, and that’s a good price for a good car. That said, I can’t say no to a SHO that isn’t a completely clapped out rust bucked for that price.
To me, this looks like a set up, but I’m game.
I’m going with the Pontiac and I’ll tell you why. First, the condition is an easy 8.5-9/10. The interior is laid bare before us, so let’s have a moment of silence and reflective awe. That Iron Duke will run as long as you want to drive it and…THOSE SEATS (Mr. Regular huffing grunt, exhale). Parts are plentiful and cheapish, so true cost of ownership should be reasonable. PLUS…plus, slow car fast.
Why not the SHO? Because I don’t have faith in its longevity (at Ford, quality is Job #5) and parts aren’t getting any easier to find. Ain’t nobody got time for that. Good luck finding those, much less ones that aren’t counterfeit. I also believe, although I can’t prove it, that it’s a higher theft risk. Lastly, just imagine all of the tire kicker bros you’ll have to deal with whenever you’ve had enough and want to sell it. They’ll try to trade you vape pens, a pack of Monster Energy, and some winning scratch offs along with whatever is in their pocket for it.
Your point about the seats is very well-taken…those GM seats were wonderful for what they were.
I had a Beretta with them, and was always impressed by how they really hit a sweet spot between comfortable and laterally supportive. Pretty cool for a that-era domestic build I thought.
The insurance is a hell of a lot more on the SHO, I can tell you that. It’s the reason I didn’t buy my dad’s SHO when he sold it. My insurance would have doubled.
It’s sad, the stuff young auto enthusiasts have to put up with. That brass ring, so close, yet out of reach.
I thought both were kind of nice, but voted SHO. You convinced me that I voted poorly.
SHO, by a landslide. It’s an objectively cooler car as it’s a cult classic. I also like the look of the N body cars and something about the little luggage rack over the trunk is deeply nostalgic for me, but V6 beats Iron Duke all day…and the SHO’s performance, somewhat remarkably, holds up.
This car is faster than the current gen Civic SI/Integra that so many automotive journalists continue to try to shove down our throats….and it’s a vital piece of sports sedan history. Who knows if we’d have the wealth of affordable performance sedans and hatchbacks in the 30-40k range today without it…fortunately we won’t ever have to find out, so give me the SHO that needs some TLC 10/10 times.
“Just fix it up and drive it, and eventually it’ll flip itself.”
*Slow clap*
Well done! That brought a chuckle out of me.
In the early 90s when I bought my ’87 325is, the same dealer also had a 1st gen SHO. Drove it first, then the BMW. I found that SHO quite underwhelming – not astounding performance, and it rattled like a spray paint can over every bump. Sure wish I had kept that e30…
That Grand Am is pretty sweet (and b/c Autopian, wonderful taillights), but a running SHO for the same price? No question.
I know others here like the front end of the ’90s Tauruses better, but I actually prefer the big headlights on the ’80s ones myself.
Also, these are my favorite modern Ford wheels. My Focus rides on then-contemporary version of them, and they’re easily my favorite part of the outside.
I am not sure here. The Grand Am appears to be in much better shape, but the Taurus (with some TLC) could be a far more interesting project and/or Radwood car.
But I went with the SHO. Cheaper, but more potential….for the right person with time and space to work on it.
Both are fine cars. I drove my cousin’s grand am stick and owned a SHO.
Based on experience, I would buy another SHO. At the same time both would make me happy as a winter/spare car.