Welcome back! Today we’ve got a pair of cars that I’m betting some of you forgot even existed. But first, let’s finish up with yesterday’s pair that you only wish you could forget:
Clear win for the Suburban. I agree. It’s cheaper to buy, cheaper to fix, and more useful when it’s done. And yes, I messed up, and it does have a third row of seats. It happens.
Today, we’re going to look at a couple of cars that weren’t massively popular to begin with, and most of those that were sold have long since been recycled into toasters or washing machines or soup cans. And yet here they are, not only surviving but thriving, it seems. And both for sale, and reasonably priced! What more could you ask for? Okay, well, they are both automatics. Sorry; I do what I can.
1988 Dodge Colt wagon – $1,700
Engine/drivetrain: 1.5 liter SOHC inline 4, 3 speed automatic, FWD
Location: Lemon Grove, CA
Odometer reading: 65,000 miles
Runs/drives? Yep!
Chrysler Corporation made no secret about the Colt’s origins: one of the advertising slogans was “All the Japanese you need to know,” some of the advertisements actually included kanji characters, and a small badge on the back said “Imported For Dodge” (or Plymouth, as the case may be). Colts were good sellers, but the wagon version never was as common, especially after the introduction of the taller Colt Vista wagon.
I like the looks of it, with the little kick-up in the roofline and the nice clean lines. The wagon also got fuel injection in place of the nasty little feedback carburetor that the sedan and hatchback were stuck with. I doubt it added any power, but I bet it helped drivability a whole bunch.
And I had to include this photo, for Torch, but I think anyone can appreciate these taillights. I had forgotten about these until I saw this photo. Forty-five degree angles! They’re just so good. [Editor’s Note: Hell yeah, these have been a longtime favorite of mine. – JT]
This Colt is the very definition of a survivor, with only 65,000 miles on the clock. It has only a few little imperfections, and the hubcaps have gone AWOL. The inside looks remarkably clean as well, and wonderfully ’80s.
The seller says it runs well, has newer tires, and is current on registration. Yeah, with only 75 horsepower and a non-overdrive automatic, it’s not going to be a thrill ride, but what are you in such a hurry for anyway?
1987 Nissan Stanza hatchback – $1,600
Engine/drivetrain: 2.0 liter SOHC inline 4, 4 speed automatic, FWD
Location: Portland, OR
Odometer reading: 229,000 miles
Runs/drives? Sure does!
A little bigger than the Colt, and also overshadowed by a tall wagon variant, the Nissan Stanza is a rare sight these days, especially in five-door hatchback form like this. It’s sort of a gawky-looking car, really, with those giant bumpers and whatever that vent grille behind the rear wheels is. It wasn’t until Nissan replaced the Stanza with the Altima that they really cracked the code on mid-sized sedans, but I have heard good words about the Stanza, what few words I’ve heard of it at all.
The Stanza is powered by a two liter engine with two spark plugs per cylinder, similar to Nissan’s trucks at the time. In the Stanza, it’s fuel-injected, and in this case, backed by a four-speed automatic. The seller says it runs and drives well, and also has a newer battery and tires.
Condition-wise, this Stanza looks pretty good, especially for nearly 230,000 miles. The paint still looks good, the interior looks fantastic (and very very blue), and it just seems like a really well-kept old car.
If you remember the Stanza nameplate at all, it’s probably for the tall vannish wagon version, which had sliding rear doors on both sides and no B-pillars. The sedan and hatchback were sort of forgettable cars, but with the addition of time, the unremarkable becomes remarkable just by virtue of having survived.
Yes, I know; neither of these cars will “keep up” with modern traffic [Editor’s Note: Yes, they will. – JT] , and they’re both “deathtraps” with nary an airbag or electronic driver aid in sight. And yeah, you have to remember the boxy ’80s styling fondly to appreciate the shapes of them. And yes, they both should have manuals. But they’re what you’ve got to work with today. Which one will it be?
(Image credits: Craigslist sellers)
These are both pretty good. The Stanza has a strong argument with a 4-speed over a 3-speed, but I can’t say no to that wagony goodness!
Stanza all day. This is the kind of car that I love running into when I’m in Portland. Who cares about the mileage? And it’s a hatchback. Anonymous-looking in a cool, ’80s, minor-league-car kind of way.
The vents on the rear fenders are cabin vents.
I NEVER-NISSAN a lot, but the one Nissan I owned was a 1988 Stanza (with 8 plugs). It wasn’t horrible. I don’t recall why it died, but it wasn’t horrible. When I got it, the distributor was shot. So, I had to find one in a junkyard (which I did) before it would run again.
As such, I chose this Nissan. Probably the only one I will ever vote for. Bonus for notchback, for sure.
My parents had a later Colt hatchback when I was young, but my memories of it are minimal. However, I have a real fondness for not-black-or-grey interiors. So the Stanza’s blue gets my vote.
Way to go with another captive import, and a Colt to boot! I always liked the honest badging on these – “Imported for Dodge”. I love the stepped roof, too. It gives off a cool wannabe Vista Cruiser vibe. However, I am bit torn on the mileage. Hopefully they have put a few thousand on it in the last couple years instead of it covering 65k and being stuffed in a shed for the last 20 years. Either way, this is a honest, practical little car at a decent price. I’ll roll the dice at this price, assuming I can find the soft parts that it undoubtedly needs.
Henchman 24 from the Venture Bros. would pick the Stanza. He still hasn’t paid Doug for the one that got totaled.
While I wanted to chose neither, I will walk, in the spirit of the poll I chose the Stanza just on looks.
These were bad choices when new, have not gotten better with age (IMHO).
As a former Dodge Colt owner, the obvious choice is clear: Nissan Stanza! The Colt was fine-ish for the first few months (brand new!). It was pretty immediately awful after that. I’ve never had any car come apart as quickly on me as that Colt. I loved it at first, but was super relieved to see it go after three years.
(Side note: The only car I’ve been happier to get rid of was my wife’s late-90’s Grand Cherokee. That thing spent more time at the dealership getting repaired than it did in our garage. It even just randomly stopped working one day, mid-intersection, mid-thunderstorm in rush hour traffic when my wife was 8 months pregnant. Weirdly, she’s still annoyed I didn’t let her keep it longer.)
Additional thought: I’ve already seen one other previous Colt owner voting for the Stanza. I’m betting it’s 90/10 for the Stanza among old Colt owners.
Vigorously seconding the editor’s note: “Yes, I know; neither of these cars will “keep up” with modern traffic [Editor’s Note: Yes, they will. – JT]”
Such a pet peeve about people thinking they need triple-digit horsepower to get from point A to point B. Geez. Even when saddled with those miserable 80s automatic transmissions those cars will do just fine in modern traffic. With many if not most automatics if one wants to get moving quickly (at least relatively speaking, ha) one can just mash down on the accelerator pedal to induce kickdown where the transmission will shift down to a lower gear & give one a little more oomph in alacrity. Those cars were never meant to win drag races, as that wasn’t the point of such cars, but they’re still quite adequate for today’s traffic. We ain’t talkin’ about Model Ts here after all.
I agree completely. But it’s the sort of comments we get all the time when I post cars like these, so I wanted to say it first before anyone else did. 75 horsepower is sufficient for that Colt; I’m less enthusiastic about the lack of overdrive, but it’s probably fine unless you’re road tripping across Montana or something.
I’ve long loved all things Dodge (and Plymouth) Colt- I’d still love to have a turbo Colt with that awesome twin-stick manual- so it would be the Colt wagon for me. Not knocking the Stanza at all- I was a young adult in the 80’s and remember the Stanza well, even beyond the tall wagon, but I still sort of burn at the thought of my bride refusing to allow me to bring home a Colt in ’82 with the twin-stick (sadly not turbo, as that wasn’t available until ’84), rather we bought a ’82 Omni Miser, with the “regular” 4sp manual and the VW-sourced 1.7L. Not a bad car, but man, I wanted that Colt!
At least she allowed the purchase of the ’82 Plymouth Sapporo later, 5MT and 2.6L I-4. That was a fun car.
I’ll second the ‘Sapporo was a fun car’. I’ve never actually met anyone else who had owned one. Mine was golden brown, and, to me, looked like an Asian reimagined’79 Mustang. Loved all the kitschy buttons & compartments. Car was an absolute blast in the snow: light and willing. Handled well until the tin worm started taking out suspension mounting-points. Really wish I’d had the knowledge, money, and space to fix it, but I doubled my money when I sold it to a guy who needed the motor (for his minivan, iIrc)
Tl;dr. : Sapporo fist-bump
Mine was light blue with dark blue-nearly black interior. The only issue I ever had with mine was it ate one of the MCA-Jet valve tulips, but that managed to pass through the exhaust valve without causing any damage, amazingly. Oh- and the old-school Challenger owners who wanted to hate on the car because they thought it was a badge-engineered Challenger.
I was about to jump in with a vote for the Stanza, but upon closer inspection the Colt is in really good shape, and at the end of the day it is the difference between 65,000 miles and 229,000 miles for almost the same price… Colt it is.
I like both hatchbacks and wagons, but lean toward the former. In this case I have to go with the Colt because of the mileage, and it looks like it’s been well preserved.
I voted for the Colt because I want to buy it just to put spats on the rear wheel wells. I think it’d look choice.
My parents got a brand-new Stanza when I was a kid. It was maroon with a maroon interior. That’s all I remember about it. I’m sure it was… fine.
The colt would be a pretty stellar first car for my daughter. just fast enough to get to school, not cool enough to take when going out with friends, has all he room rquired to bring back her entire closet from College, though that rip might be dangerous if she had to try current freeway speeds.
You must hate your daughter (just kidding). As a previous Colt owner, I highly recommend pretty much anything else.
“Yes, I know; neither of these cars will “keep up” with modern traffic [Editor’s Note: Yes, they will. – JT]”
Says the man who. IIRC, drives a Changli and a Pao. 🙂
Yeah, Torch has never used any stop-sign freeway entrance ramps, such as the one near me. (possibly the only one) It’s a 2-way ramp and is on the back side of a curve and a bridge with cars entering the freeway from the far side of the bridge. Some cars actually go the 65mph posted speed. Most are coming in faster.
I wouldn’t take either of these cars on that ramp.
I’ll throw my saddle over that little horse.
I really like wagons, and this is would make a nice local jobmaster.
The design of the Stanza just looks 5-10 years newer than the Colt. I’ll take the used-up slightly interesting Stanza over the Colt that everyone obviously found far too boring to drive, taillights excepted.
I chose the Stanza, thinking that after this many years the extra miles may not mean as much. Plus, from the looks of it, it’s been kept up and the rotten rubber bits may have been taken care of a few times.
The 4 speed slush in the stanza is bad enough. That 3 speed in the dodgy colt….the engine whine will be enough to shatter glass at anything approaching moderate speed. Plus blue is better than white.
California wagon with low miles vs. northwest potential rust car with 200k+ miles. I vote for the Colt. It’s a clean around town runabout with space. It also comes with a box of extra parts.
Have no clue which one’s easier to fix so assuming the same I voted for the Dart.
If it has 200K miles and still drives, that means it’s not a rust car.
I went with the Stanza, but only by virtue of the hubcaps.
Every time I see the cheap (even if undesirable cars) in non rustbelt states it makes me happy/sad and want to move. Anyway, Dodgubishi it is.
This was a tough one, but it’s the Colt by the width of a taillight lens. Honestly, the miles on the Stanza aren’t much of a turnoff; most old-school Asian cars will run forever.
Tough one today with a slight nostalgia hit with that Colt. My parents had an ’86 colt sedan (traded in the ’74 bronze Camaro for it) and it was the first car we took family vacations in (imagine family of 4 from Nebraska to South Padre and back in the middle of summer in one…). Surprisingly they got nearly what they paid for it 5 years later on trade for a 1st gen Town&Country.
Anyway, I voted Stanza…yes the miles are almost quadruple of the Colt, but I think it has the durability to make it another 100k vs the Colt.
With that much of a difference in odometer readings, the choice here is crystal clear.