On today’s Shitbox Showdown, we’re looking at two cars with lots of miles. How many? A hundred thousand? Two hundred? Nope. Our two contestants have covered more than seven hundred thousand miles between them. Have they got enough life left to give to be worth it? We’ll see in a minute.
First, let’s see how yesterday turned out.
Well, color me surprised. I honestly expected the little Civic to walk away with this one. I know I’d really rather have the Buick, but I didn’t expect most of you would agree. But there it is. Just barely.
Now: I’m no stranger to cars with high miles. My Toyota is just about to hit 260,000 miles, and my truck is sitting at 208,000. I’ve had a Miata that was over 250,000, and a Nissan Pathfinder whose odometer broke and was replaced with a junkyard unit, but was somewhere north of 360,000 when we gave up and sold it (but it still ran and drove). High mileage, to me, just means a car has been good at its job, so it has been asked to do it a lot.
But at some point, you have to start to question how many more trips around the world a car has got left in it. And it’s not just engines and drivetrains, or body rust: My Toyota’s high-beam headlight switch is worn out, and the driver’s seat has almost no padding left. I’ve had plenty of cars whose keys could be taken out of the ignition with it running. These things may “run forever” if you take care of them, but at some point they stop being nice enough to bother fixing. Are these two cars at that point? Let’s take a look and see what you think.
1996 Volvo 850 Wagon – $1,200
Engine/drivetrain: 2.4 liter DOHC inline 5, 5 speed manual, FWD
Location: Lakewood, CO
Odometer reading: 405,855 miles
Runs/drives? Yes, but runs rough and failed emissions
Volvos of a certain age have a reputation for durability. It’s not uncommon to see old 240s and 740s with a 2 or a 3 as the first digit of the odometer (when the odometer works). The old red-block engines just run and run, and the rest of the car wears like iron as well. I hadn’t heard the same reports of durability from the later front-wheel-drive 850 models, but it seems they are capable of racking up the miles as well.
Yep, that’s right: Four hundred thousand miles. And frankly, for that many miles, it looks pretty damn good. There isn’t much visible wear inside, and the exterior looks clean and rust-free. If it has been a Colorado car all along, that makes sense; Colorado doesn’t use road salt.
The seller says the car drives fine, but runs a bit rough. There is a list of recently-replaced parts in the ad, many of which should have cured rough running. But the one thing I don’t see listed is the catalytic converter. If the converter is plugged up, that could cause the rough running, and also make it fail emissions. New converters are available for around $400 from Rock Auto, which, if that cures the problem, makes this a pretty good bargain.
Of course, all those miles do take their toll on every part of the car. A good thorough inspection is a good idea, to uncover any hidden surprises. But it’s a cheap stickshift Volvo wagon, which is nearly universally a good thing.
1999 Ford F150 Lariat 4×4 – $1,400
Engine/drivetrain: 5.4 liter SOHC V8, 4 speed automatic, part-time 4WD
Location: Forest Lake, MN
Odometer reading: 303,838 miles
Runs/drives? Yes, but needs brake and front end work
Here it is, the best-selling vehicle in America since, what, the Civil War? Ford sells a couple thousand of these things per day, and has for years. This tenth-generation F150 was a major redesign after sixteen years, to a softer look and a smoother, more car-like ride, as well as a more car-like interior.
This is a 4 door truck, but the rear doors are “suicide” doors, opening at the front, with no center post between them and the front doors, similar to the Saturn Ion and SC coupes, and the Honda Element. These doors give a ton of access to the back seat, but are kind of a pain in the ass in parking lots, since the rear doors can’t be opened unless the fronts are open, so the doors themselves get in your way.
The Ford F-series has a good reputation for durability as well, as long as it has been well-maintained. This one has been in the same family since new, and has been worked hard, but well cared-for. The seller says it currently could use ball joints and brakes, but it runs and drives well as-is.
The “Minnesota weight reduction program” has been hard at work on this truck; the seller says the rocker panels are rusted away. But it’s cheap enough to not care about such things; you could use it as a winter beater with 4WD for a couple years yet.
Generally, I feel like high-mileage cars are a safer bet than low-mileage ones. Cars are meant to be driven, not left to sit around, and exercise is as good for them as it is for us. But at what point does “worn” become “worn out”? Both of these cars need a little work. Which one is more worth the effort?
(Image credits: Craigslist sellers)
I have a very similar silver ’94 850 wagon (automatic though, alas) sitting in my garage, in the middle of a taking-way-too-long engine replacement. Normally such things can be done in a few days, but this has been an uncle-nephew project and there have been… delays. A low-mileage replacement is ready to go in, but job changes, moves, back injuries, COVID have all conspired to make this a year-plus travail.
Despite this I still chose the Volvo. Perhaps through osmosis I’ve learned enough about these that I could fix whatever is ailing today’s example.
I don’t think enough of you have worked on late model Volvos before… I’d take the F-150 for simple wrenching any day
Actually a tough choice. I picked the truck but they both look great for beaters.
In 2008 when I was 21 I bought a 1996 Volvo 850 CD Auto with 157000kms – so just under 100,000 miles – for $6000 AUD. I had it 12 months. In that time, aside from servicing the odometer stopped working and needed to repaired and it needed a new ignition barrel a la Chevy Cobalt as the thing would randomly stop in traffic. The brakes were shit, it used on average 10.3litres per 100kms which is 22.84 US MPG, it was slow and very boring to drive. Expensive to service as well. Only good thing was great seats – very comfy car – and I really really liked the look of it. First car I bought with my own money. Do you know what I also considered on the day but decided it had too many kilometres? a 1993 Lexus LS400 with 181000kms (115 miles about?) for only a couple of grand more. I could have been rocking an LS400 at 21 and I suspect if I had I would probably still be doing so instead of now having had another 16 cars in that time. Fuck that Volvo. Including servicing repairs and the depreciation (I got 2500 in trade on a new 09 Fiesta manual) that car cost me 12500 bucks for a years motoring (not including fuel and insurance and registration). So one with 4x the mileage I would run screaming from.
I’d take both, really, if I needed a roughly $3K 2-car garage. Volvo for 3 seasons, F-150 for winter and occasional off-road (but not too dirty/muddy) excursions.
Neither is the best example of their line, but the prices are both relatively reasonable in the current market. You could spend twice as much and have worse examples or ones even less road-worthy/dependable. Oddly enough, major parts for the F-150 might be more expensive than for the Volvo.
I will take the volvo we already have a couple high mileage jelly beans, also how many plugs has that F-150 spit out.
The Volvo is just getting broken in.
Manual wagon always wins
I’m sure this is on my end, but I still can’t see the poll controls. I’m running a few McAfee extensions. I’ve tried disabling some of them for this site to no effect. Any advice? Other than tedious trial and error?
Note, I’ve been in IT for 40 years, so I get the process. I’m just getting too tired of adjusting for what I see as BS compatability issues (it’s all Chromium now FFS). And, yes, I’m getting lazy and catankerous in my middle-age (yes, I said middle, you damn whipper-snappers).
“Colorado doesn’t use road salt”.
Because it would be an exercise in futility?
I’ve only spent a little time in the fall in Golden. Went to see the Aspens turn on my way back from Vegas (and had to pray to the Coors Gods back in the day), so wouldn’t know.
Truck, without looking.
The Honda lost by 8 votes? I don’t believe it. Mark, Marky, Markarooskie. Look, I need you to find 9 votes for me. Just 9 votes. I’ve got lawyers and you’ll be a hero. Everyone will love you!
Also, Volvo for the win.
That Volvo is across town from me. I voted for it. Gotta love Colorado dry air for lack of rust. Even if the emissions issue is something more than “just a catalytic converter” you still have a generally cheap to fix winter beater. Even an engine swap from a junkyard should be pretty easy if you can find one…or hoon the heck out of it and make a sleeper.
Give me the Volvo and let me live out my BTCC fantasies on an ATM swipe.
Oh absolutely. Just basically remove the suspension, put some huuuuge wheels on it and you’re there.
In case there’s anyone who doesn’t know what we’re talking about:
https://www.media.volvocars.com/image/low/90278/9_1/10
Here’s a working link:
https://www.media.volvocars.com/global/en-gb/media/pressreleases/143336/twenty-years-since-volvo-made-its-debut-in-the-btcc-with-the-850-estate
The F-150 all day long. Despite the divisive looks this generation of F-150 are great and durable trucks. Sure it’s got some rust (honestly looks pretty clean for a 300k MN truck, I’ve seen much worse with far less miles) but it’s $1400, maybe $400 worth of front end work and that would be one hell of a winter beater. I really miss my ’99, I’m tempted to pick this one up myself.
Goddammit, I wish that Volvo wasn’t over halfway across the country. It’s exactly what I’m looking for in a winter beater this year — comfortable, good on snow, not rusted out to the point I’d have to register the color as “orange,” can haul large amounts of lighting equipment in the hatch — and falls within my state’s diesel emissions exemption.
Stupid geography.
Wait, how does an old gasoline-powered car fall within a diesel exemption?
Colorado does use road salt (Magnesium Chloride and salt brine) as well as traction grit sand. Not as aggressively as other places but still enough to rust cars. The real reason there isn’t that much rust here is the low humidity and lots or sunshine dry things out quickly. The minimal rust on that 26 year old Volvo with 400,000miles suggests it was very well cared for.
My initial reaction was take the Ford, until I read rusty rocker panels. Sorry car cancer is a no go.
In hindsight, have to agree.
as a minnesotan, I’d bet your mom’s tater tot hotdish that the frame and everything else under that f150 is as rotted as those rockers. 23 years is a long time for anything to last up here; I’m currently looking for a winter beater because my 2000 Tundra with its 2019 frame courtesy of the recall is too fucking clean to drive all winter.
This one was easy, that gen F150 is hideous and I won’t abide.. I can’t stand looking at these on the road, I never have it in my garage.. That’s too much to ask of me. Volvo all the way
Failed emissions? Don’t care on a ’96, my state only asks OBD-II cars if the emissions crap works. Slo-vo all the way.
I had a manual ’94 850 wagon with lower mileage but rust creeping in from a poorly-repaired accident (I didn’t catch the extent of it, since I bought in Maine, at night, in January…) One of the best shifters I’ve ever rowed at ~220k and a clutch that felt great… unfortunately, I bought it thinking it just needed the PCV system sorted but the dipstick froth turned out to be indicative of coolant in the oil, so long story short, off it went, traded for a ’93 244 that shattered its clutch into dust the next day.
I’d have the Volvo, because of the Ford’s rust, and because I don’t always learn very well.
I think that is what happened to the 850 I’m replacing the engine in now. That, or the heater core went, the engine overheated and it popped a head gasket. I can’t wait to do the postmortem.
I’ll take the Volvo, because manual wagon and because I already own a low mileage and rust free 10th generation F150.
I guess the votes are still coming in from yesterday. The buick is ahead by 8 votes, even though you have the civic as winning.
Might have to just call this one a Tie.
I’d take the F-150 if it had the higher miles of the Volvo but wasn’t rusted out. I will have to just say no to the rust and take the Volvo instead.