Good morning, Autopians! It’s time to look at some more used cars. This time, though, they’re not really what you’d call “shitboxes.” Today’s choices are actually nice cars that you – or any non-car-person you know in need of a car – could legitimately drive every day without much worry, and buy for a measly five grand.
Friday’s choices weren’t so robust. Sure, you could probably make a daily driver out of either of them, but you’d constantly be waiting for the other shoe to drop. Smog-era Slant Sixes were prone to vapor-lock, early GM HEI ignition modules often died suddenly and without warning, and both cars have approximately the same build quality as a dollar-store toy.
I knew going in that the Pontiac was by far the superior car, but I was curious to see if the Plymouth’s significantly cheaper price would win it some support. Apparently not; the wannabe Duster got absolutely creamed.
All right, so let’s move on to something you might actually be willing to own and drive. If you look at the prices of new cars, the numbers get really scary really quickly. The average new car is about forty-five grand – more than seven hundred bucks a month on average. For a car. I was 30 before I paid more than seven hundred bucks a month on rent. And you’ll be paying that amount for six years before you actually own the thing outright.
Or, you could sock away that amount for seven months, and buy something outright. But you don’t want something with a bazillion miles on it? No problem. It has to be reliable? Got you covered. Oh, and it can’t look like some crappy old beater? Sure thing. Thanks to the Underappreciated Survivors group on Facebook for bringing these two to my attention.
1995 Nissan 200SX SE – $5,000
Engine/drivetrain: 1.6 liter dual overhead cam inline 4, four-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Folsom, CA
Odometer reading: 59,000 miles
Runs/drives? Yep
First up, we have this sporty little economy number. Nissan revised the Sentra for 1995, and for the first time didn’t offer a two-door version. Instead, the role of both the two-door Sentra sedan and the NX fastback was filled by this car, called the 200SX. It’s no one’s idea of a sports car, with the same little 1.6 liter engine as the Sentra, but that also means it pulls in the same fuel economy numbers, just with a bit more style.
This 200SX is equipped with an overdrive automatic transmission, as so many small cars in the US were, even when this one was built. You can complain all you want about whether such a transmission “belongs” in a small car like this, but the decision was made twenty-eight years ago, and not by me. And the fact is that most cars like this equipped with manual transmissions were driven into the ground or modified to death ages ago. Automatics were far more likely to get babied like this one.
And from the looks of it, this car really has been babied. It doesn’t even have 60,000 miles on the clock yet, and it looks practically like new, both inside and out. The only cosmetic flaw noted by the seller (who is also the one and only owner) is some peeling clearcoat on the rear spoiler.
“But,” you might object, “this thing only has 115 horsepower. With that slushy automatic, it’ll barely keep up with traffic!” Balderdash, I say. Yes, plenty of cars can get to 60 mph twice as quickly as this one – but the fact is, most of them don’t. Even in a car like this, you’ll spend lots of time muttering “come on, move” at the back bumper of a slow-moving RAV4 trying to merge onto the freeway at 45.
1999 Mitsubishi Galant ES – $4,900
Engine/drivetrain: 3.0 liter overhead cam V6, four-speed automatic, FWD
Location: University Place, WA
Odometer reading: 62,000 miles
Runs/drives? Indeed
If the 200SX simply isn’t enough car for you, and you’re willing to sacrifice a little fuel economy for some comfort, might I interest you in an eighth-generation Mitsubishi Galant? This one is an ES model, with a 195 horsepower 3.0 liter V6 engine – only available with a four-speed automatic.
Like the Nissan, this car is in splendid condition, and has very low miles, only 62,000. It’s also a one-owner car. How do these cars end up owned by the same person for decades, and acquire so few miles? Your guess is as good as mine. And what suddenly makes them decide to sell? No clue on that either. But at least they should be able to provide all the service history.
The ad does say that it runs and drives well, everything works, and the engine doesn’t burn oil like so many of these Mitsubishi V6s do after a while. The low mileage can sometimes be off-putting, I know; if those 62,000 miles were all acquired early on, and then it sat for years, you would want to replace a bunch of rubber parts. But if it has been used regularly, but only occasionally, it should be able to be put into regular service.
Here again I’ll invoke the voice of the naysayer: “But what about safety? I mean, sure, it’s got airbags and stuff, but isn’t it a deathtrap compared to a new car?” Well, no. I mean, it’s not a rolling fortress like some newer cars are, but relying on crash survivability for your “safety” is a bit like relying on antivenom to protect you from a snakebite. It’s a lot more important to focus on not being bitten by the damn thing in the first place. Drive defensively, and it’s fine.
I know a lot of people see a car payment as a necessary evil, but personally, I haven’t made one since 2007. Yeah, I’m a lot more willing to turn wrenches than most folks are. But if you choose the right car, you shouldn’t have to do much to it. I mean, if you really want a new car, go right ahead. But don’t feel like you need to. Either of these should be perfectly reliable cars, for at least as long as a typical new-car loan term. Which one are you choosing?
(Image credits: Craigslist sellers)
Both good options. Nissan is probably the better bet durability wise, but I’ll take the comfort of the handsome blue Galant (and some markets had a handsome wagon in the Legnum). Has the premium package so a moonroof and side airbags too which is nice. I believe still a timing belt though, so that might be worth a change if the owner went by mileage rather than age. Nissan was largely chain in most engines by this point.
Galant. There is nothing unique features wise about either of these mechanically, so it comes down to which one you’d want to actually use every day as a daily driver. And the Galant wins. Better interior, bigger interior, bigger trunk and nearly the same gas mileage.
Yeah, you really don’t want a transverse V6. They are impossible to work on. If it had the four, the Galant would’ve been my choice.
So I voted for the 200SX. They even used the Batman song in their commercials 😀
*laugh-cries in 1MZ-FE valve cover gaskets*
?
It was a comment on the difficulty of that particular repair.
Not even a competition. The late 90s soap bar Toyotas and Nissans are some of the most bland things ever put on wheels, I’d take the mitsu any day
I love the styling on the 200SX, but MAN, give me a little more torque. I’d like to be going faster than a skateboard when I merge onto the 405.
Nissan, mainly because it has the proper door count for me. Personally, I find both of these a little too spendy for comfort, even with low mileage.
If the Galant was the VR-4 version, it’d get a no-contest win from me. But that would either be way too expensive or roached out. Still, a rockin’ sockin’ little car.
I agree both are expensive, even considering the mileage and condition. The Nissan particularly seems overpriced. It is in great condition, but it is still a nearly 30 year old economy car. These weren’t desirable cars when they were new. This is at most a $2,000 car. The Galant is newer and was a nicer car when it was new, but it is still nearly 25 years old. $3000 is a reasonable price for that vehicle. All cars have a reasonable life span (years or mileage), and both of these vehicles are well past it. They might be reliable, but I wouldn’t count on it, and I certainly wouldn’t bet $5,000 on it.
I am generally not a fan of taking out loans for cars, but someone with $5,000 would be much better served by taking a $5,000 loan and buying a $10,000 car. That will get you a 10-12 year old Accord, an 8-10 year old Civic, or one of many other vehicles with modern performance, reliability, and safety. There is something in between a $50,000 new car and a 30 year old shitbox.
Both are very good cars. I voted Nissan out of nostalgia for the one I had years ago that I thoroughly enjoyed and only got rid of because I got tired of getting a baby seat in and out of the back and needed a 4-door.
Of course, the B14 200SX I had was at the opposite end of the fun range from this one, it was an SE-R with the SR20DE and a 5-speed. So I’m guessing this one would be a very different experience.
I am biased since I knew 3 people who bought nice, moderate mileage used Galants that all broke within a year of purchase (all 3 needed new engines; two had transmission problems as well). I can’t vote for a Galant, although I am aware that they generally aren’t bad cars and the owners I knew were unlucky. I’ll go with the Nissan.
I’ll take the Nissan, but that’s only because I generally prefer coupes. Normal people would probably want the practicality of the 4-door Mitsubishi.
Although I am skeptical that either of these cars actually exist because I keep being told that: “Cheap cars don’t exist anymore, and I need to take out a 144-month loan on a $60k crossover, blah blah blah…”
Galant for sure. Now I’m going to be sad about what Mitsubishi has become for the rest of the day…
I went Galant, because I remember how I felt about them when I first saw one and thought “BMW, but less $ and more reliable”. Maybe part of that thought was correct, maybe not, but I digress.
Overall what struck me most about these two cars was how I felt about the manufacturers both then and now (or shortly after these were built, honestly). As these are very clean examples, it’s easy to evaluate them in terms of what they were when new. Very tidy, clean design, well engineered and solid build quality. That’s what these companies used to make. It’s rather sad to see how far they have both fallen since.
I’m torn. I love the light, frisky looks of the little Nissan from the good days. I also remember really liking the looks of the this generation Gallant when they were new, seemed very sharp and modern. Rented a 4 cyl/auto version of this car in Florida in 2003 and was underwhelmed by the performance/economy equation.
We had a ‘99 Galant ES with the 4 cylinder back in the early 2000s. It was a rather good looking sedan for the time, and the exterior isn’t terrible even by today’s standards.
It developed a tick that two dealerships and two independent mechanics couldn’t figure out, even after pretty much tearing the engine apart. Eventually one of the connecting rods decided to take a vacation through the side of the block while I was driving to work one morning. Sold it to some kid at the dealership for a couple hundred just so I wouldn’t have to deal with it anymore. I assume he dropped a new engine in and was on his way to stancing that car out by the next weekend.
I’d rather have a small coupe with an automatic rather than a Galant.
Both are FWD and automatic, so I’m more inclined to choose something small and with a 4 cylinder over a bit bigger and with 6 cylinders.
I’ve always thought that those Galants were really nice looking cars but I’d imagine that parts must be getting pretty hard to come by for most older Mitsubishis in America these days.
I’ll pick the Nissan. Growing up, my mom had the generation of Sentra after that one and while it was kind of a shitbox, it was reliable and was decent enough. I’m sure that 200SX will be just as ok and parts are likely way easier to come by.
The Nissan is more interesting so it go my vote. But honestly, I think both are pretty decent cars. That Galant was a pretty decent looking car, this was not long before Mitsubishi began phoning it in.
You and I seem to have different understandings of what makes something “interesting!”
Ha, fair. I have a soft spot for 90’s economy cars.
Maybe the 200SX is only interesting through the lens of 2023, in that there’s nothing even close to it being sold today. I think it’s a nice looking two-door economy car. If this segment hadn’t all but vanished maybe this car wouldn’t interest me all that much.
As do I. I had an ’89 Pontiac Sunbird coupe. Bulletproof(!) over the 155,000 miles I owned it and looked nice for what it was. Shook and rattled from day 1 and calling the upholstery “mouse fur” is an insult to mice. But I loved it. Still a POS, though…
Since the first time I saw one when they were new I’ve felt that the Gen 6 and Gen 8 Galants were fantastic looking sedans.
Both are in really great shape, but I drive on highways, dammit. I need wheelbase and six cylinders.
“ How do these cars end up owned by the same person for decades, and acquire so few miles?”
The “little old lady who drives it to church and the grocery store” is a real thing. My Dad’s uncle had a farm in Georgia, and after WW2, he decided it was time to get one of them newfangled automobiles. He bought a new 1948 Chevy (iirc) and they drove it to church on Sundays and that’s pretty much it. He took meticulous care of it and when I last saw it in the late 80’s, it had about 30,000 original miles, and his daughter was still driving it regularly.
Where I live, openly reselling cars donated to charities requires a dealer license, which the vast majority of charities don’t have. The “loophole” is that the charities can sell the cars to a wrecking yard, which can then do whatever they want with it. This works out well as most of the cars being donated are super clapped out, and head straight to the yard for parting. Occasionally they get something absolutely cherry and resell it as a rebuilder. Don’t worry, this story has a point.
I’ve now purchased a couple verifiable “old lady” cars from local junkyards. Neither the owners nor the yards seem to be all that fastidious about clearing out old paperwork from these beasties, and you can sometimes find out a lot about them before picking them up if you do a little detective work. Every car I’ve bought from a yard I have been able to piece together at least some of its history without direct paperwork. One car I found ALL of its service records dating back to original purchase stashed under the driver’s seat, missed by the yard during the clean out process. It was most definitely an old lady’s car. a ’91 Chevy Lumina that, when I picked it up in 2020, had about 80k miles on it, and the records confirmed it was indeed consistently driven about 3k miles a year.
I’m usually in the “Nissan is Never the Answer” camp but I actually like that 200SX and I don’t like working on transverse mounted V6s. 90s Japanese cars had some great dashboards, simple, nice layout, easy HVAC controls, like my 94 Accord.
The Galant was my starter car in Gran Turismo 4, so on nostalgia alone I’d buy it. GIven that it’s comfier, the V6 is a pretty reliable unit, and it looks better too certainly helps.
Cars in Gran Turismo don’t rust or burn oil, and there’s no problem getting parts for them.
The guy with an Alfa logo on his profile is telling ME about rust, oil consumption, and rust?
Truly poetic.
Toućhe – but it ain’t no Mitsubishi….
The only good Mitsubishi is the one that keeps your house cool or flies you somewhere.
I say this with respect, but this take is wrong. My wife is alive and able to walk today because she was driving a modern car and not a 90s shitbox when another driver ran a red light on a 60 mph highway.
By all means, if you want to spend your free time turning a wrench and your money on non-car things, you can get by in an older vehicle. But to brush off the very real difference in safety (not to mention the other benefits of a newer car) is a mistake. One I won’t be making in the future.
I’m glad your wife survived.
But there’s a line of demarcation when it comes to crashworthiness. There was a design revolution in the early 90’s in regards to side impact protection, energy absorption, and rollover survivability. Airbags, ABS, safer interiors, safer glass, better seat belts, etc.
I’d say all cars took a huge leap in survivability throughout the 90’s. Is a 2024 safer than a 2004? Yes, but not by leaps and bounds.
I don’t agree that there’s a fixed line of demarcation. Certainly cars of the 90s are safer than those of the 80s or earlier.
But those 90s cars had at most two airbags, no stability control or advanced safety features, less advanced crumple zones, and were not even tested in side impact crashes.
The other driver who hit my wife was in a 2007 vehicle (my wife’s was a 2016) and suffered much worse injuries. Part of that was due to the nature of the impact itself. Part of it (per the paramedics on the scene) was the difference in safety equipment between the two cars.
I was in a head-on collision in the mid 90’s. My 86 Honda was hit by a 94 Fiat. The other driver ran round to check if I was OK, I was not. He was fine, apart from having to go to court for dangerous driving, I was lifted out of my car an hour later with a fractured spine and a hand that never healed properly.
Cars get incrementally safer all the time. However I mostly ignore this and choose cars based handling and performance. My latest Lotus does at least have ABS and a couple of airbags.
I agree with your take
Look at the damn last generation 2015-2020 Caravan vs 2015+ mustang. They get really safer with time.
https://jalopnik.com/florida-man-stole-mustang-kills-three-injures-two-1851089491
Had a friend with this generation of Galant which had completely rusted apart before it hit 150k miles, and this was 6+ years ago. Given that and its PA residency, I’m taking the CA Nissan for peace of mind.
Got excited (and a bit confused) when you mentioned PA residency (hmmm, close to me?), but double check confirmed what I’d thought I’d read – Washington State residency. Ah, well, maybe next time. Really liked the cut of the Galant’s jib of that era.
Ugh. Neither? Especially for $5k? Ugh.
I guess gimme the one that’s half a decade newer.
Big time can’t go wrong here. I would probably trust the Nissan more, but the sedan is more practical and to the eyes of this beholder, the Galant is the better looking car. Both would be good though