Straight Sixes And Slushboxes: 1984 BMW 325e vs 1977 AMC Hornet

Sbsd 1 22 2024
ADVERTISEMENT

Good morning! To start out this week, I’ve selected two different cars united by a common drivetrain configuration. And it’s a configuration you don’t see very often anymore: a straight six, an automatic transmission, and rear-wheel-drive. But that’s about the only thing these two have in common.

Before we get to those, however, let’s finish up with Friday’s low-mileage Nissan Stanzas. I’m disappointed in myself about Friday’s headline, because it just this minute occurred to me that it should have been “Poetry In Major Motion,” not just “Poetry In Motion.” Can’t believe I didn’t think of that earlier. It’s like when you come up with the perfect one-liner comeback to someone three days after the conversation happened. So annoying.

Anyway, I expected the stickshift wagon version to win, and it did. But really, I think they’re both decent choices. I hope they both make some new owners very happy, and each garner their own share of “wow, I haven’t seen one of those in forever!” comments.

Screenshot From 2024 01 21 15 38 17

Today we’re looking at cars in sunny Southern California. We’ve got a pair of slowpoke inline sixes with mushy automatics, both for the same price, both of which come from places known for their beer, coincidentally. But which bottle will you set on the roof on a hot day – Bitburger or Leinenkugel’s? Let’s check out the cars and see.

1984 BMW 325e – $2,500

00b0b 7olnoiflqa9 0ci0t2 1200x900

Engine/drivetrain: 2.7 liter overhead cam inline 6, four-speed automatic, RWD

Location: Los Angeles, CA

Odometer reading: stuck at 141,000 miles

Operational status: Runs and drives, but “needs a lot of work”

I’m about to commit automotive heresy. Ready? Here goes: I don’t understand the hero-worship of the BMW E30 platform. Yes, I have driven a few. Yes, they drive nicely. And yes, I could definitely see the appeal – back when you could buy a nice clean stickshift one for $2,500. This is the first running, driving E30 I’ve seen this cheap in a while, and it’s an undesirable spec, and frankly, a bit of a pile. Yet I fully expect it will sell for this price within a few days. Decent ones sell for three or four times this much, to start. I just don’t get it.

00p0p Ah82zcy6099 0t20ci 1200x900

What makes it undesirable, for the uninitiated, is the engine: a low-revving, economy-minded 2.7 liter version of BMW’s otherwise awesome M20 inline six. Built to boost BMW’s Corporate Average Fuel Economy numbers, this engine is about as malaise-y as BMW ever got, just as American engines were climbing out of the doldrums. To add insult to injury, this one is a junior-executive-special automatic transmission model, which is the BMW equivalent of the Fun Police. A manual 325e is OK – not great, but OK – but an automatic is just dull. It does run well, according to the seller, though it needs exhaust work and a new battery.

00n0n Luiqmxqerxj 0ci0t2 1200x900

Speaking of dull, there isn’t a flake of clearcoat left on this car. This sandy-gold color isn’t bad when it’s shiny, but I don’t think this one has been shiny since Bill Clinton was in office. At least it’s a two-door, and the sheetmetal looks straight. I suppose that’s the appeal here: a complete, straight body that can accept any number of more exciting drivetrain options.

00b0b 5efa3eqpxts 0ci0t2 1200x900

We don’t even get any photos of the interior. The seller describes it as “completely wasted,” and “you name it, it’s broken.” That’s as may be, but we’d still like to see it.

1977 AMC Hornet – $2,500

00505 Amrmrrbasak 0t20ci 1200x900

Engine/drivetrain: 258 cubic inch inline 6, three-speed automatic, RWD

Location: Chula Vista, CA

Odometer reading: 79,000 miles

Operational status: Runs and drives, but won’t pass smog

Now we go from the green hills of Bavaria to the green hills of Wisconsin, and turn our attention to another automaker known by three initials: AMC. Kenosha’s favorite son introduced the Hornet in 1970, as a replacement for the Rambler American. The basic design defined AMC’s models for a decade and a half, spawning the Gremlin, the Concord, and the Eagle 4×4 wagon. It was state-of-the-art when it was introduced, but quickly became outdated. By the time Chrysler took over AMC, the Eagle felt positively ancient.

00y0y 9pcyk23lkzb 0t20ci 1200x900

The Hornet is powered by AMC’s venerable inline six, in this case displacing 258 cubic inches, or 4.2 liters, if you prefer. It powers the rear axle through a three-speed “Torque Command” automatic, AMC’s name for the Chrysler Torqueflite transmission. This one runs, but it failed its smog test. Apparently all the smog equipment was removed or plugged up at some point, and needs to be reinstalled or reconnected. I can’t imagine who would yank all that stuff in California, knowing it will be needed to make it legal. The good news is it’s all included, but reassembling everything and getting it past a smog check will be the new owner’s responsibility.

00n0n 5gjceyofdcw 0t20ci 1200x900

My favorite thing about AMC cars has always been their interiors, and this one is a good example. The bullseye air vents, the plaid upholstery, that weirdly-shaped steering wheel – it’s all so distinctive, and, from what I remember, quite comfortable. That modern stereo below the “Weather Eye” climate controls looks out of place, but it probably sounds a lot better than the original AM/FM/8-track.

00c0c Ijpuiinxhyh 0t20ci 1200x900

Apart from the stereo, it looks very original, right down to the hubcaps.  It’s a good looking car; I’m not sure why AMC insisted on all the chrome and landau top nonsense of the later Concords. Oh, and by the way, while a six-cylinder automatic Hornet may not be anyone’s idea of a high-performance machine, it bears remembering that this is the car that pulled off one of the greatest movie stunts of all time.

Both of these cars are going to be pretty pokey. They both clock in at a little over a hundred horsepower, and both are geared for economy rather than acceleration. But speed isn’t everything, as we all know.  These are both interesting cars, and $2500 is cheap for an interesting car these days. You just have to choose between Germany and Wisconsin.

(Image credits: Craigslist sellers)

About the Author

View All My Posts

79 thoughts on “Straight Sixes And Slushboxes: 1984 BMW 325e vs 1977 AMC Hornet

  1. Anyone else using this column to find their next daily? Just me?

    Need to see some options like this closer to the Midwest though. California is a bit too far. I would daily that Hornet, no problem.

    1. I keep trying to spread it out geographically, but it’s tough to do in the winter. Everything for sale in the midwest right now is a Chevy Impala or a truck. I’ll work on it, though.

  2. I have a similarly heretical disinterest toward BMWs in general, and a completely trashed interior on a configuration that’s not even terribly desirable by BMW enthusiasts pretty much condemns the Bimmer to becoming a parts car.

    The Hornet has the benefit of everlasting AMC six, and I don’t (and won’t) live anywhere with rigorous smog testing — so I’ll go to plaid on this one. 🙂

      1. I would probably do a 4.0 HO and a 5 speed out of a Jeep in that thing. I really like the early 2 door Hornets, but less so for the 4 doors from the end times. that little feller is pretty much perfect the way it is, and people would expect something extreme like an LS swap to make it reliable again. The 4.0 is an easy swap and would wake up the little sleeper enough to make it daily driver capable.

    1. eh, not many purists in the e30 community; and even the one’s who, themselves, stick with the OE look, are usually pretty cool with custom stuff.

      also, ls swap has been done a million times to the e30 chassis, with numerous diy parts, services, and turn-key package shops specializing in the conversion – nothing we haven’t seen before.

      imo, build something because *you* enjoy it, not to piss-off a practically non-existent demographic.

        1. ‘Sallrite: she took me to Chapel Hill yesterday to that meet—in traffic going stupid speeds. I pretty much smiled, giggled & chortled for near 7 hours: I’ll pay a grand for a day like that 🙂

          1. That’s an excellent way to look at it. And a good reminder to spend some time amd money getting my ‘classic’ car going (74″ MG B GT).
            When I DD vws I used to budget $1k for repairs per year. I didn’t always spend it, but it was a good rule of thumb.

        2. Exactly. It’s not a quality or design issue. It’s a costly replacement part issue.

          There are exceptions to the rule, of course, and it’s not just German cars that can cost an arm and a leg to keep up. But, taking on an ’84 BMW that’s obviously been ridden hard is a recipe for misery.

  3. That’s some primo plaid inside the Hornet. It’s in remarkably good condition for the age. The BMW ad says the interior is trashed and they aren’t even willing to photos of it. Message received, loud and clear. I’ll take a clean interior over a crime scene every single time. Sting me, baby.

  4. I’d rather get stung by a Hornet than a BMW. Even the headliner is in good condition in the Hornet. I don’t have smog testing in my area, so I’ll take the Hornet

  5. Same old refrain here: if the Hornet was a Sportabout (or even a hatchback), I’d be singing “On Wisconsin.” Alas, it’s not, but a decent shitbox (oxymoron, I know) should have relatively functional interior and the BMW does not, so the Kenosha grandma grocery getter wins today.

  6. I am a Californian, and if not for the smog issues it would be the Hornet, all day every day. The problem is, speaking as the owner of an 80s vintage classic getting the thing through the smog test every two years has become a ridiculous exercise, and that is with a car that runs incredibly clean and passes with flying colors. The real problem is even finding shops that have the equipment and are willing to do the test. Trying to add the problems of bringing the car back up to spec just compounds the misery.

    Likewise, the BMW is really just a rolling platform for a more interesting build (i.e. better engine and manual trans because restoring the car as is and that’s not going to work out very well in California, either.

    So, if you live in a more old car friendly state and can transport to your location both could be okay but In California it will be a lot less fun. For purposes of voting I’ll pick the Hornet because I love AMCs.

    1. I don’t get why Cali chases after individual old cars. Illinois knows that old cars are less than 1/10 of 1% of cars on the road, and don’t make enough miles to do any environmental damage.
      Illinois’ requirement is that your OBD-II car needs to go in every two years. They hook up to the dash port and check “readiness” and trouble codes. If the tests are “ready” and no codes, you pass and can renew your tags. If the tests are “not ready” (for example, the evap test hasn’t happened because the tank isn’t at the right level), then you fail. No resetting while in line, it won’t work!

      1. PA does this too, but only requires 4 of the 5 ready codes, because that last one requires 1/4 tank of gas or less and a specific highway cruise at a specific slow speed. It’s annoying.

  7. Today was a good “none of the above” day. I wanted to go with the BMW but “needs a lot of work” and “completely wasted” are not confidence inspiring ad lines. I don’t have smog testing so went with the plaid interior runner.

  8. I sold my old E30 for more than that and it had accident damage. Granted, it was newer and had a much more desirable trim, but still.

    A cheap, straight body is worth $2,500. Everything else is out there – including engine swaps.

    Or heck, if the interior is seriously ratty crap, make a racecar.

  9. I’ll take the Hornet, my state doesn’t enforce full CARB standards on something that old, would just have to pass a basic tailpipe emissions and gas cap integrity test, which it probably/might? be able to do? Worth a shot anyway

  10. It’s crazy to see the difference between interior design comparing the E30 to the Hornet. The E30 while obviously dated, seems far more modern than a 7 model year difference would suggest, while the Hornet looks so extremely 60s in comparison. All that said, I’d take the E30 since at that price its a great engine/trans swap candidate, and you really don’t see many E30s at this price anymore

      1. Oh yeah that’s all true, I just find it really interesting to see the sort of overlap in automotive design and technology on sale at very near or identical times. Especially the 80’s and 90’s where design and tech was moving incredibly fast, and yet you had cars like the C3 Corvette that stretches from ’68 all the way until ’82. Compared to today at least where even the most outdated cars are mostly similar in appearance and technology to brand new models.

        1. It was a huge transition period, automakers in the ’70s and ’80s used to proudly refer to certain models as being “classic style” to refer to the chrome bumpers, upright chrome grilles, square rigged styling, and plush interiors with chrome, faux wood, and cushy seats. Even new, they clearly belonged to another era. The market was split in two – older generations, the WWII and Korean War vets – were still around in large numbers and were still buying large amounts of new cars and wanted traditional styling – but the younger Baby Boomers were getting into middle age and wanted more modern design (and preferably with an import brand name on it). Both groups were big enough and profitable enough that domestic automakers didn’t want to alienate one by going all-in on catering to the other, so you had a weird mix of both types of products going into the early ’90s

  11. I like how the Hornet has towels over the license plates for privacy reasons and the BMW has a towel over the driver-side mirror…for privacy reasons.

    Anyways, the Hornet’s interior alone is enough to win today’s vote.

Leave a Reply