Good morning! Welcome to another year of poor automotive choices. If you’ve made a resolution to take up a new hobby, and that hobby is fixing up old cars, then you’re in luck: Today we’re looking at two non-performance-oriented convertibles that both look good but need mechanical work. And neither of them is exactly a “collector’s car,” so it doesn’t really matter if you screw them up further.
On Friday, we ended the year with a bang, and looked at a pair of uncommon exotic dream rides. I’d go to great lengths to get some seat time in either one of them, but if I were to actually own one, I’d steer clear of the one that’s just too pretty for the likes of me. That Lancia is beautiful, and it won your vote hands-down, but I prefer my own cars a little less pristine and precious.
That Lotus is what the classic car market folks refer to as “driver condition.” It’s a number 3 or 4 on the typically-used classic car grading scale, a running car that won’t win any awards, but goes down the road just fine and has the desired effect on onlookers. And that’s just how I like ’em. My own MGB GT is in similar condition; though its paint may be shinier than that chalky Lotus, it’s still at best a “ten footer” that photographs well – as long as you don’t look under the hood. Cars like these shouldn’t sit around; they should be on the road, being enjoyed. I don’t do that enough with my car, and it’s one of my resolutions: Just drive the damn thing.
Actually, in a broader sense, that is my only real resolution this year: Do the things I enjoy whenever I can, instead of waiting for the “perfect” opportunity. If the last three or four years of chaos have taught me anything, it’s that you have to squeeze the good stuff into whatever cracks you find, because you never know what the universe is going to throw at you next.
Finding the time is tough; the great paradox of getting a chance to write about things you love is that it takes time away from actually doing those things. And since I still rely on a daily trip to the salt mines of a normal job for the bulk of my income, time is in even shorter supply. But I’m going to make a conscious effort this year to spend more time with tools or steering wheels in my hands. I’ve got plans. And if the stars align and I can actually pull them off, you’ll hear about them.
But for now, let’s focus on the business at hand, which is evaluating two old broken cars.
1983 Pontiac 2000 Sunbird – $2,000
Engine/drivetrain: 1.8 liter overhead cam inline 4, three-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Portland, OR
Odometer reading: 60,000 miles
Operational status: Starts and runs, but engine knocks
I’m tired of hearing the terms “apologist” and “guilty pleasures.” Both smack of elitism, with the implication being that you know certain cars or movies or music or whatever are “bad,” but it’s okay to like them as long as you’re in on the joke. It’s as if people feel the need to justify their place at the cool table by mocking things they actually like, in order to score points with strangers who are all doing the same thing. The madness must stop. We’re too old for that shit. I legitimately like first-generation GM J-bodies like this, and I don’t care what anyone else thinks.
This is actually a pretty rare car, it turns out, one of only 626 of its kind. It’s the first year for the convertible version, and the only year that the “Sunbird” name was only applied to the convertible. The rest of them were simply Pontiac 2000s. It was built by ASC, a California-based company famous for making convertibles from coupes, for all of the “Big Three” US automakers, as well as Nissan, Toyota, Mitsubishi, and even Porsche. Unfortunately, chopping the top off a unibody coupe renders it about as structurally stiff as a slice of Wonder Bread, but what’s a little cowl shake among friends? It’s powered by a 1.8 liter overhead cam four with throttle-body fuel injection, fancy enough stuff for 1983 that Pontiac saw fit to add those “OHC/FI” badges to the front fenders.
Unfortunately, this one is suffering. The seller says it has a bad connecting rod bearing, which is about as serious for a car as a ruptured aorta is for a person. The engine still runs, but it isn’t long for this world in its current state. It will need either a complete “bottom end” overhaul, or more likely, just a replacement. There was a time when any junkyard would have plenty of Sunbirds (or Buick Skyhawks) to donate an engine to the cause, but this car is now forty-one years old, and good engines are going to be tough to find. It might be possible to swap in a “122” overhead-valve engine from a Chevy Cavalier, which are more common. You could go nuts and try to drop in an Ecotec four-cylinder engine from a far more modern Chevy Cobalt, but that would probably be more trouble than it’s worth. Personally, I think overhauling the existing engine, if it’s saveable, would be the most rewarding option.
Whatever the new owner decides to do to save it, I hope they see fit to keep these glorious gold BBS-style basketweave wheels. They absolutely make the car.
2002 Chrysler Sebring Limited – $1,500
Engine/drivetrain: 2.7 liter dual overhead cam V6, four-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Vista, CA
Odometer reading: 93,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives, but fails smog, and “has some challenges”
Some cars seem destined for certain purposes. NA- and NB-generation Mazda Miatas were always meant to become the scruffy track-rats that so many of them are today. Buick LeSabres could have been designed in the parking lot of a buffet restaurant offering “Early Bird Specials.” And the Chrysler Sebring convertible only ever really made sense with a fob from Enterprise or Avis attached to its key. There are some who adore these things, but most of us remember them as not-very-noteworthy rental cars in sunny climates.
That’s not to say it’s a bad car, by any means. Chrysler brought the convertible bodystyle back to the US market in 1982, and kept refining the formula through two generations of LeBarons and three generations of Sebrings. After some early hiccups, mostly due to hangover from the malaise era, Chrysler convertibles got to be pretty nice. This second-generation Sebring is the fancy Limited model, with all the power stuff you could want, and Chrysler’s oft-maligned 2.7 liter V6 and finally-sorted-out Ultradrive four-speed automatic under the hood.
The 2.7 is notorious for a number of failures, including oil sludge buildup, oil burning through the PCV valve, and the boneheaded water pump design, which places the pump deep inside the engine, driven by the timing chain, rather than externally-mounted and belt-driven like most engines. A water pump leak, not an uncommon failure on any car, means that coolant will mix with the oil, which can have catastrophic results. This one runs all right, but it won’t pass a smog test, which could be related to any of the above, or something else entirely. There’s no telling how deep the rabbit-hole of repairs needed goes.
It also has a few other non-engine-related items that need fixing, among them a broken interior door handle and a window that’s off-track. But those are easy puttering-around-on-a-Saturday projects.
Once upon a time, I had to rely on old junky cars for transportation. I didn’t learn to fix things for fun; I learned to fix things so I could get around. More times than I care to remember, I stayed up late, in the cold and the dark, mucking around with some $500 shitbox just so I could get to work in the morning. Those days, thankfully, are behind me – but the thing is, I learned a lot. The absolute best way to learn how to fix cars is to buy a cheap broken car and dive in, and find someone to answer your questions. And if you don’t need to finish it right away, and can let it sit when you encounter an obstacle or a setback, it can be a lot of fun. These two are definitely broken, and fairly cheap. Which one are you going to tear apart and fix?
(Image credits: Craigslist sellers)
Even in the post-Covid used car market, both less than desirable cars with big engine issues are too expensive. For this challenge, I voted for the Pontiac because it’s got a little more character if you have to fix one of them.
Aww, it’s hard not to fall in love with the Pontiac. To a young me at the dawn of the 80s, these looked like THE FUTURE compared to the 70s barges
Similar age, and you nailed it – when these came out, it was like we’d driven out of the ’70s cul de sac and gotten on to the road to tomorrow. Of course, I had no idea of what would come years later when the Taurus came out and instantly made all these look dated, but still…
I was (and remain) esp. enamored with the Chevy Cavalier Type 10. Domestic hatchbacks rule.
I didn’t read a thing. I owned a Sebring convertible, never again. Give me the Pontiac I don’t care what issues it has because it’s not a fucking Sebring.
Nope, I am not voting for either of them and you can’t make me. I can’t even justify purchasing either one with make believe money.
This, I believe, is the correct answer
Oh come on now! It’s kinda like the old show, Whose Line Is It Anyway?—Where Everything Is Made Up & The Points Don’t Matter! ヽ(͡◕ ͜ʖ ͡◕)ﾉ
As TOSSABL states, this is the correct answer. Having had the same year Sebring sedan as a company car, there is no way I’d pretend to buy the convertible version with even more things to break. The Pontiac 2000 was hardly a car to get excited about when new, and even less so when used. Hard, hard pass on both.
I like them both, and I really like your point about just liking the things you like instead of grousing about “guilty pleasures”. It is my dream that we collectively get past the hipster nonsense of “liking things ironically” whatever the hell that means.
From my I-don’t-know-Jack-about-fixing-cars-myself perspective, they both seem about equal when it comes to things wrong. But once you’ve dumped the sweat equity into one, the Pontiac would result in lots of reactions of: “Hey, the girl I had a crush on in high school drove one of those.” from Gen-X’ers while the Chrysler would get reactions of: “Hey, I got one of those as a rental on a business trip in Orlando once when I refused to take a minivan.”
For me, the Bird is the word… but it’s a close one.
J bodies are like Legos. That engine can come on out to shoehorn something a little spicier in there. OHV 2.2 would be a fine choice since they’re still available at the local U-Pull-It. No way for that Chrysler. Although my dad had one that looked a lot like that one but with more rust. The 2.7 didn’t give him any trouble. But my dad’s definition of no trouble is far different from mine. So J body convertible it is!
Just for grins I asked my wife about this, and she & I were in complete agreement. At least the Ponitac isn’t just a blah car without a roof. It’s a red blah car without a roof!
I currently live in a state without smog testing. Gimme the Sebring to drive until it dies. Property taxes and insurance would be dirt cheap on that thing. Cool? No. Daily driver for a couple years, saving me money for my other projects? Indeed.
OK, I’ll take the Sunbird. Rebuild the engine just or the wrenching experience, and have a red convertible which is always fun. I’ll just pick up some ear protection to fend off the cacophony of J-car rattles enhanced by chopping off the top.
The Pontiac has enough potential Radwood cred I’d take the plunge on it. See if I can figure out how to rebuild an engine, and consider a manual transmission swap while we’re at it.
My first car should have been a 91 sunbird convertible, but my dad wouldn’t take me to go look at it because he didn’t like them. It was the 3.1, but still with a 3 speed auto and bright red too. This was back in 2005 when $500 could get you a decent car if you looked hard enough. I did, but then couldn’t get it in the end. It sold the next day. I voted for this sunbird just because I’ve never been able to own one, and I did have a Sebring very similar to this one. It was good but awful at the same time.
I don’t really want either of them but if I had to choose, it would be the Pontiac. Once I fix the engine, I’d have a car that’s at least interesting.
Just seeing a convertible J-car in 2024 makes me irrationally happy. I’ll figure out the engine stuff…
Simple plan. Buy the Pontiac. Drop in the easiest replacement engine I can find. Sell the Pontiac and make a few bucks on the deal.
I call it “Flipping the Bird.”
These are too expensive for floppy convertible variants with engine problems, and neither car is one I’d want to invest any additional time or money into.
If you held me at gunpoint I’d pick the Pontiac, simply because the cosmetics are more appealing and it’s not the Chrysler on offer.
2.7 V6? Not just no, but hell no.
Not saying I’d rather have a ruptured aorta, but you’d have to pay me to take the thing.
I used to think that, until I flipped 2 of them. Drove both for a few months to make sure they were good, and I actually quite like the engine. It’s not fast, but it’s smooth and the reliability concerns seem to be overblown. I made good money on both, and the buyer of the second one, who bought it for their 16 year old daughter, actually texted me 2 years later asking if I had anything else as their son was turning 16 and needed a cheap car and the Sebring had been flawless for them for the 2 years so they wanted to buy something else from me. Unfortunately I had moved 1500 miles away and wasn’t flipping cars at the time so that didn’t work out, still made me happy to hear they had such good luck with it!
I was a service writer for about 2-3 years. The amount of them that I saw with problems… No.
Both our situations are anecdotes, but I probably saw two or three dozen of them and each of them caused someone in the shop to groan when they saw the car pull up.
Yeah I know most people hate them, and you have much more broad experience than I do. I probably wouldn’t play with fire a third time though.
The biggest problem with the 2.7L was the typical, cheapskate Chrysler owner who neglected the hell out of the car. If maintained reasonably well, the 2.7L was a pretty decent engine.
Yeah agreed. I did a lot of work to mine and then made sure the new owner knew to maintain it well and they were great.
I can’t believe we’re at a point now where rods & mains, rings and a gasket set for a Brazilian 1.8 are not readily available, but that just shows how old I am now.
No matter, I’ll find them somehow, somewhere. I’ll take the Pontiac, and it’s not even close.
Bearings & gaskets are on RockAuto.
‘Just drive the damn thing’
Hear, hear!
My guilty pleasure would be seeing these irredeemably flawed vehicles removed from the automotive genepool. A former 80s workmate had one of these Sunbirds. It sucked almost as bad as my Dodge Daytona. My retiree parents have a clone of this Sebring. Despite very low miles, it has given them (and me) nothing but trouble.
You can improve the rigidity of Wonder Bread by toasting it. Would this work on the Sunbird? I wanna try.
Finally a use for Elon’s Not-A-Flamethrower!
https://www.boringcompany.com/not-a-flamethrower
Toasted convertibles are more of a Chrysler thing: https://images.app.goo.gl/FGesYsLuxvi5gWzk9
If they were both running, I’d take the Poncho in a heartbeat. But where exactly are you going to find one of those not-very-good-to-begin-with 1.8s? That engine is pretty much unobtainium now. Can a Series II 3800 fit into a first-gen J-body? Or maybe the 60-degree 3500/3900?
The Sebring is no prize pony either. That engine sucks hard, and I’d want to know about the water pump. I’d also bring a scanner to find out what’s up with the emission controls.
At least you can get parts for the Sebring. So, reluctantly, Sebring.
With a big enough hammer and a torch you can fit any engine in anywhere.
Ditto.
60 degree 3.5/3.9 should fit, it’s not much different externally than the 2.8/3.1 that came in that chassis. The later 3.5 made ~220hp, not bad for it’s size & weight.
Talking about starting the new year with a *BANG* *BANG* *BANG*
I want that Sunbird so bad.. those wheels!! Wow! An engine knock isn’t hard to fix you don’t need to replace the engine. If you wanted to though you could replace it with a H.O. Quad 4 of the era.. not that I thought about this..
The only person who would wilfully go for the Sebring would be Michael Scott. Sunbird all day everyday for me.
If they’re both terrible and in need of engines, I’ll take the Sunbird, at least it has some style and character to it. That Sebring looks like the default pick for background set dressing in an episode of CSI