Good morning, and welcome back to Shitbox Showdown! I’ve gotten a good night’s sleep, after spending most of the day yesterday ripping out soggy stinky carpet in my basement (which is even less fun than it sounds), and I’m ready to show you some cool old cars, far better than yesterday’s exhaustion-induced snooze-fest. Speaking of which:
Looks like you’re all going to keep on truckin’. Given that I already have a truck I like way better than this one, and I’m a well-known Mopar apologist, I have to swim against the stream on this one. That Cirrus is too good of a cream-puff to pass up.
Now, today, we’re looking at two sporty red coupes. Both have carbureted four-cylinder engines and manual transmissions, but apart from that, they don’t have a whole hell of a lot in common, except that I built model kits of both of them in my youth. Both of them are rare sights these days, but I still think they’re pretty cool. Do you agree? Let’s check them out and see.
1979 Ford Mustang Cobra – $4,999
Engine/drivetrain: Turbocharged 2.3 liter overhead cam inline 4, four-speed manual, RWD
Location: Woodland Hills, CA
Odometer reading: 76,000 miles
Runs/drives? Yep, and registration is current
Let me set the scene for you. It’s the 1979 Chicago Auto Show, at McCormick Place, and my dad is shopping for a new car to replace his aging, rusty VW Beetle. Ford’s captive-import Fiesta hatchback is on the short list, so he’s checking them out. Meanwhile, his six-year-old car-crazy son is gazing in rapt wonder at a sleek silver and black sports car on a rotating dais: the all-new Ford Mustang. It was love at first sight, and I’ve had a thing for the Fox-body Mustang ever since. I haven’t owned one yet, but there’s still time.
1979 was, of course, right smack in the middle of the doldrums of the malaise era, and as cool as the new Mustang looked, it was no performance car, no matter which engine you picked. This Cobra is equipped with the 2.3 liter “Lima” four-cylinder, with a turbocharger and a two-barrel Holley carburetor. Turbos and carbs don’t play well together generally, but this one runs well according to the seller, and it’s registered, so it must have passed a smog test. It spins the rear axle through a four-on-the-floor, like it should.
But the real star of the show here isn’t under the hood; it’s on it. Automakers replaced horsepower with graphics during this era, and while the Fox-body Cobra is toned down from the previous year’s Mustang II version, it’s still a sight to behold. It came in last in Jason’s big roundup of the Class of ’79’s hood graphics battle, but I still like it. Though now that I look at it again, it kind of looks like the snake has breasts – which is cool, too, I suppose.
Condition-wise, it’s not terrible. No cars from this era held up particularly well, but this one is at least intact. It has some questionable add-ons, namely tacky LED (or HID?) headlights, and that hideous steering wheel, but those are reversible. Its original three-spoke alloy wheels are gone, probably because they need expensive Michelin TRX tires. The late-’80s Mustang LX wheels it wears now look OK, but they aren’t quite right.
1984 Honda Prelude – $2,250
Engine/drivetrain: 1.8 liter overehad cam inline 4, five-speed manual, FWD
Location: Portland, OR
Odometer reading: 203,000 miles
Runs/drives? Runs great, they say
When someone mentions the Honda Prelude, this is the car I picture: the second-generation, in red. It’s my favorite era of Honda design, with sharp angles, low beltlines, slender window pillars, and the all-important pop-up headlights. I built an expensive Tamiya model kit of this car in my younger days, a rare splurge for me back then – most of my models were five-dollar Monogram, Revell, and MPC kits. You can still get them on eBay, but they’re not cheap now either. The real car, on the other hand, seems to be a bit of a bargain.
The second-generation Prelude had a couple of odd quirky features, namely twin side-draft carburetors instead of a single downdraft carb like the Accords with the same engine, and of course those weird seat-reclining levers. But it also has that pitch-perfect mid-1980s Honda driving experience, with great dynamics and easy ergonomics. This one runs and drives well, and everything works except for the air conditioning, though the seller is working on that.
It’s on Oregon “SP” specialty-vehicle registration, which is a permanent registration and sidesteps smog requirements, but it also doesn’t allow the car to be used regularly, only for “special events.” I see plenty of people daily-driving cars on SP plates, but if you get pulled over, the specialty registration could get revoked, and you’d have to get the car smog-tested and put regular plates on it. Personally, I’m not sure I would want to use a car like this every day anyway; it would get used up in short order. Better to save it for fun driving.
Many Hondas from this era and later ended up heavily, and sometimes questionably, modified, but this one is still mercifully stock. In fact, the seller actually did some work to return it to stock by tracking down the correct steering wheel, as shown above, in place of the 1986 Prelude wheel it came with.
I know I keep bemoaning the lack of simple two-door coupes available today, but dammit, why can’t we still have cars like these? They’re easygoing, charming, affordable, and fun. Somewhere along the line we forgot that those were supposed to be virtues. Thank goodness a few of these old relics are still floating around, and are still affordable. Yeah, in either case you have to deal with carburetor hassles, but they both run fine now, so don’t sweat it. So what’ll it be – the gaudy fun Mustang, or the crisp and clean Prelude?
(Image credits: Craigslist sellers)
As the former owner of a 1981 Ford Mustang Cobra (in high school) and a 1984 Honda Prelude SI (in College) back in the 90s, I feel uniquely qualified to add some depth here…
My Mustang was proper black with no hood graphics, but had power everything and a sweet fake hood scoop. It had the same awful 2.3L four-banger as this red car, but at least it had T-tops (AWESOME!!!!!) and classy louvers on the hatch. It looked fast stopped, and handled well (wide tires), but accelerated slower than growing grass, achieved (maybe) mid-20s for mileage and never ran right a day in its life. (But it always ran!) It was a victim of the half-baked implementation of early-80s emissions regulations, so this 1979 example may have been better in that respect.
Unlike the Prelude example in this showdown, my 1984 Prelude SI was fuel-injected, so it was dead reliable, got easy mid-30s for mileage, and accelerated like a scalded spider monkey on cocaine. Only thing I ever did to it was oil changes, brakes, a CV joint, a thermostat, and a clutch. I bought it with 130,000 miles on it and sold it at a quarter-million miles and the thing still ran like new. I loved that car.
No contest: the Honda wins hands down.
The Mustang has a Pinto engine in it. My ex-brother-in-law had one. He was such an $%&#@!& that any Mustang Cobra reminds me of his arrogance and how slow his turbocharged Mustang actually was. (He was making many years of payments on it.)
The Honda is light-years ahead in comfort, reliability, handling, economy, practicality and performance, even with 200K miles. A seat needs reupholstering, big deal. It’s probably faster than the Mustang, in case that matters at all.
A friend in high school had a 1st gen Prelude and I was insanely jealous of him for that! I still think the 3rd Gen Prelude is one of the best looking cars ever mass produced. Near perfection.
> No cars from this era held up particularly well,
Mercedes Benz: “Am I a joke to you?”
Even if they were the same price, I’d take the Prelude. Looks like it was very well taken care of. Besides I like the styling much better. Also I’d rather have FWD. And while Fox bodies are everywhere, this straight original Prelude would be a real looker at Radwood.
Normally I’d take the American make just for parts availability and repairs. But the Fox body doesn’t really tickle my fancy. Something of a closer comparison, like say a mid 80s Escort GT, now we’re talking.
Prelude for sure…this was so easy…earlier in the day voted seeing headline w/o even reading…now read about them and of course Prelude! I can’t even explain how much I love these cars along w/ 3rd gen Accords which I’ve had 2…also 4th gens- one of family cars was a 91 Accord- lasted to 240K & was still going (of course) when sold (even got stolen at one point) Also love the CRX! Which is one of many dream cars along w/ the Prelude
I don’t care the Honda has about 200,000 more miles it is less than half the price, was better when new, is still better now, and will run better for at least twice the miles and that mustang isn’t and never will be a cobra.
The only reason to choose the Mustang over the Prelude is if your mullet grew roots into your brain. On its own, the Mustang isn’t bad. It’s got some good, cheesy Malaise Era fun behind it, but the Prelude is better in almost every way and half the cost.
I unexpectedly (for myself) chose the Mustang. The Prelude would be a GREAT car to drive around daily, but the Mustang would make a good weekend fun toy I wouldn’t have to care about. No one would care if you engine swapped it or anything, so… Why not?
How would it be a fun car to drive? Frankly if marks dad wasn’t driving a vw beetle the Mustang would be a step down from anything else including a Rascal Scooter or a moped.
You would have to engine swap it and, for that money, just look for the right thing to start. A bunch of people had Fox Mustangs when I was growing up, but only one was dumb enough to buy one with a 2.3 like this one, though a little newer, in spite of my advice. They weren’t great cars in the first place, but the 5.0 was entertaining. Now, put an underpowered and uninspiring (even for what it was) economy car engine in it and the decal is the only thing of slight interest, which does nothing to enhance the feel or dynamics (and repros can be had for about $200 and applied to anything you want). My ’83 Subaru gave these Mustang-shaped Pintos a run for their money and had way more character and all-weather capability. The Prelude is cheaper, rarer, and even the Accord from this time was a more engaging driving experience (didn’t drive the Prelude version, which should be a better drive, if anything). If it means anything, after the third major breakdown of his 2.3 Mustang, my friend had it towed straight to the junk yard and bought a “real sports car” . . . a Del Sol (face in palm). Oi, but the point is he went from 2.3 Mustang to Honda (which was a much better car, if not what he thought it was).