Welcome to another Shitbox Showdown! Okay, so we’ve done two major projects this week, and two minor fixer-uppers yesterday; how about today we look at two nice reliable cars you could jump in and drive across the country in tomorrow for under 2 grand each? The hell, you say? Well, you be the judge.
Yesterday’s vote was a close one. I don’t know if that’s because the vehicles were evenly matched, or because you all just flipped a coin and let the law of averages do its thing. The Caravan won by a mere twelve votes, and I think that’s the one I would choose. I’m more convinced than some of you seemed to be that the Mitsubishi’s problem is a minor one, but 120,000 fewer miles means a lot.
Oh, and about that intermittently-working speedometer on the Caravan: No, the odometer should still read correctly. It’s digital in these vans, and both the odometer and speedometer pick up a signal from the vehicle speed sensor on the transmission. The speedometer is just an electrical gauge; it isn’t like the old cars with a cable that drives a mechanism. Unless the vehicle speed sensor goes bad (which triggers a code, turns on the “Check Engine” light, and causes all sorts of other problems like wonky shifting), the odometer should be displaying the correct miles, no matter what the speedometer needle is or isn’t doing.
You’ll have no such worries with today’s choices. Just hop in, turn the key, and go – at least, if the sellers are to be believed. It does help that both of these vehicles are known to be reliable and durable anyway. Let’s check them out.
1996 Toyota Avalon XL – $1,700
Engine/drivetrain: 3.0 liter dual overhead cam V6, four-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Beaverton, OR
Odometer reading: 252,000 miles
Operational status: “Runs and drives great”
When the Toyota Avalon came out, I didn’t really give it a second thought – but then, a 22-year-old guy who drove a beat-up Chevy Nova wasn’t exactly Toyota’s target demographic. I serviced plenty of them at the garage, but they barely registered as anything more than a “big Camry.” But now, all these years later, this first-gen Avalon seems like one of the greatest used car bargains of all time.
I mean, it’s not a dream car or anything, but it’s comfy, reliable, and somehow often cheaper than similar Camrys. It’s basically a Buick LeSabre, only it’s a Toyota. Only one engine/transmission combination was available: a 1MZ-FE six cylinder driving a four-speed automatic, not far off from the Buick’s 3800/4T60E combo. Some early Avalons even came with a bench seat and a column-mounted shifter. Toyota was really gunning for the golf-course set with this thing.
But even a die-hard American car guy like me has to admit that this looks better than damn near any Buick that’s north of a quarter million miles. It’s clean, straight, and hardly shows any wear. The seller hasn’t had it long, so I don’t know how much history they can provide, but they do say it just passed a smog inspection, which is something. Not even a Toyota lasts forever, of course, but you could probably get another couple years out of this thing without much trouble.
That does, of course, mean that you have to spend a couple years driving a beige Toyota Avalon. But at only seventeen hundred bucks for something this nice, it feels like a sacrifice worth making.
1996 Mazda B3000 SE – $1,750
Engine/drivetrain: 3.0 liter overhead valve V6, five-speed manual, RWD
Location: Newberg, OR
Odometer reading: 162,000 miles
Operational status: “Ready to use”
Mazda and Ford’s small truck history crossed paths more than once. The Ford Courier sold in the 1970s was a badge-engineered Mazda B-series truck. In 1982, when Ford’s own Ranger compact pickup was introduced, Mazda contined to sell the B-series as a competitor. A decade later, the roles reversed, and the B-series truck in North America became the fraternal twin of the Ranger. This is a Ford, built in St. Paul, Minnesota; it just wears Mazda badges, and some slightly different (and to me, better-looking) sheetmetal and trim.
Mazda B-series model names reflect the engine displacement. This is a B3000, meaning it is powered by Ford’s “Vulcan” three-liter V6, the same engine as millions of Tauruses and Aerostars. It’s a really good durable engine, and it gives a nice bump in power and torque over the four-cylinder, without being nearly as thirsty as the Cologne 4.0 liter V6. I guess you could say the Vulcan is the logical choice here. This one is backed by Mazda’s own M5OD five-speed manual, which is a good durable unit as well.
The ad for this truck is maddeningly terse, saying only that it “runs fine” and has “no major issues.” It’s a little banged-up outside, but the interior looks nice, and any good truck worth its salt should have a few dents. It goes with the territory. A good pre-purchase inspection would tell you everything you need to know, but at this price, a quick test-drive and poke around under the hood should suffice.
And if that weren’t enough, it’s an extended cab model, so you have a little more room to spread out, and a place to keep groceries dry. It’s tough, economical, decent-looking, and a stickshift; what more do you want?
New cars are too damn expensive; we know that. You can save a ton of money by driving cheap old clunkers, but the trick is to find the right one. Start with something with a good reputation, look for a nice clean example, and you’re ahead of the game. These two would do nicely. All you have to do is choose between the cushy old-man car and the happy little truck.
(Image credits: Craigslist sellers)
The truck, but only because the Toyota seller has annoyingly avoided posting better pictures of the front quarter damage, or the “minor dent” as they called it. Assuming the driver’s door still opens ok, the Toyota looks like a great choice as well.
Toyota makes the best cars, but the 1MZ is fucking scary to work on.
Also, a manual truck is awesome, and nice red color too 🙂
So, I voted for the Ford. Yes, I’d rather have a real Mazda than a rebadged Ford, but whatever LOL.
Based on personal experience, Toyota wins again.
My Brother had the same model year Avalon. They are…. indestructible. He didn’t take care of it at all. As in- the oil only got changed when he came over and I asked how long it had been, pulled out the dipstick covered in oil that was close to turning to tar and then changed it for him due to my insistence. The transmission fluid never got changed. The coolant after 250,000. We changed the timing belt- the original one- at close to 300,000 miles. It still ran just fine. Towards the end the suspension was so worn out it was bottoming out in curves. He sold it to a neighbor who also treated it like crap but it still ran
If that truck was shipped to upstate NY, you could ask 3x the listed price. Assuming its rust free or minimal rust, than its a certifiable bargain.
Both of these are screaming deals, but that Mazda speaks to me. That’s a nice little truck.
Looking at the pictures of the 1996 truck vs my 2009 Ford Ranger, they look the same. I bet Ford made a good profit all these years on them. They are cheap to fix, parts even at your local grocery store, the good old years from Ford before ecoboost everything.
maybe, but even a massive % mark-up wasn’t a lot of profit in actual dollars. My ’97 ranger was stickered at $10,995 i think, and i paid $8K so the dealer could get it off the lot (they had a consignment of 20 bone-stock rangers for “model year closeout”, and still had six left in November 97 when i pulled the trigger). Even if they moved most between 9k and 10k, that’s not much profit to Ford per unit.
Not sure i used “bone-stock” properly there. Just meant, 2.3L, manual, no power anything, including steering. no radio, no mats, vinyl bench, standard cab. Is that the right use of “bone-stock”, or am i making up terms in my head? “Fleet Special” maybe is the right description?
I voted for the Mazda only because it is a better value but the truth is I want both of them.
There’s no wrong answer here, it all depends on what you need. I don’t need a truck right now, so the Toyota Buick it is.
Such a clean Avalon with that real good Toyota fabric upholstery? Sign me up.
That’s a nice Ranger, but… it’s a Ranger, a cheap, rough little workhorse.
The Toy-Sabre looks like it has been well cared-for. And those late-90’s mouse-fur seats will annihilate miles on the Interstate. The only question is the timing drive, but at this price I might try doing it myself.
I’m going Avalon. Those things are excellent vehicles, even at high miles. I had a friend with a nearly identical Avalon that I helped replace the head unit in for one with Bluetooth. The interior was in such great shape that I thought the car had maybe 50,000 miles on it, but nope, it had well north of 300,000 miles. It ran great, drove great, and the only issue that betrayed the mileage was the rust developing on the suspension pieces from living in the salt-heavy upper Midwest.
The Mazda would be more interesting to me with either the four cylinder or the 4.0L – I have bad history with the 3.0L Vulcan in a ’93 Ranger, and that has tainted my views of the 3.0L severely.
As much as I want the small manual truck, the Avalon looks super comfortable and would be my long distance car so I would finally feel safe getting a BEV as my main ride.
I had a Highlander for years with that engine and gave it to my brother-in-law with over 200k miles on it. He’s still driving the sucker.
Seems like you managed to find the two best used car deals in the country.
I personally would love a cheap truck that isn’t a rust bucket. But that Avalon would be a great deal too.
Track! Truck! Truck! Truck! (Psssst. I’ll take the truck)
Mazda for me but this is really a “both” day. I can’t remember the last time there were two options this good on Shitbox Showdown.
I want that Mazda. Small ’80s and ’90s pickups are cool. I would prefer a regular cab (extend cabs are more useful, but I think regular cab trucks look better), but it would be hard to pass up a truck like this for this price.
Mazda just does red right, every time. Add in a manual transmission, and this is a super easy choice!
Mazda, please!
This is exactly what I want for doing truck things. The price is fantastic and overall it looks very solid. I think it’s been treated well.
There are two drawbacks: it’s really far away, and according to a VIN decoder it does not have AC. 🙁
If that Mazda was near Michigan I’m pretty sure I would buy it. Both are good deals, but the truck would have more usability with a lot less miles IMHO and I need a cheap commuter right now.
Another good one for a “both” choice. If I needed a reliable daily, it would be the Avalon. Since I have more use for trucky things right now, I went with the Ranger.
For one day only, this column is renamed Sweet Deal Showdown.
That’s a couple of good-looking cockroaches. I went Fozda because I haul more stuff than people.
I went Mazda because small manual truck, but really I’d like “all of the above.”
Manual, FTW. Both are gonna last a billion miles, so that’s all there is to this one.
Pretty much. I’m an absolute sucker for a Japanese luxobarge, but rwd and manual swung it for me too.
Either one is a free vehicle. You could put 100,000 miles on them and easily sell them for what you paid
I suspect you could sell the truck for considerably more than you paid in a few years. Pickups are very popular as classic vehicles. The Mazda is at an age where it is just another old truck, but that will change in another 5-10 years. This is a truck to buy now while it is still cheap.