(first posted 8/6/2013) As styling went aero in the Eighties, Nissan went the other way with its sharply drawn Pulsar NX coupe. Based on the sleepy but very popular 1st-gen Sentra, it didn’t set any performance records. Road & Track said it was “proof that you can build a thoroughly mediocre car and people will still buy it.” The NX had excellent fuel economy, and its distinctive look struck a certain number of drivers the right way.
The Nissan Sentra appeared in the US in ’82, a front-drive lightweight econobox that replaced the rear-drive Datsun 210. (Sentra is an export name for Nissan’s Sunny.) Its MPG version had the best EPA mileage available that year, 43 mpg city, 58 mpg highway. (That was before the 1996 and 1984 reality adjustments.) Stripping down to 1875 pounds was a big part of its efficiency, along with a new electronic fuel metering unit. (CC here.)
Our Pulsar NX is a sports coupe based on the Sentra/Sunny. Outside North America the Pulsar NX was known as the Pulsar EXA, in Europe as the Cherry and it also appeared in Japan as the Langley or the Liberta Villa. (What’s with all the names???) Like its contemporary, the third-gen Toyota Celica (CC here), Pulsar’s hidden headlights give its front end a distinct resemblance to a dual-drive stereo cassette deck. In 1983 that was the style.
photos from datsun1200.com
Like most sports coupes of its time, the Pulsar NX could be had with a meek econo-engine, this vanilla 70 hp carbureted 1.6 liter E16S, or serious guts, Nissan’s turbocharged, fuel-injected 113 hp 1.5 liter E15T. Mounted sideways driving the front wheels of course. That was the difference between a sports coupe and a sports car.
That 1.5 liter turbo was also available back home in the Sunny LePrix Turbo!!!
Also like its contemporaries, Pulsar NX had a nice sporty but practical interior, with gauges in a driver’s cockpit and the 5-speed easily reached. That fuzzy cloth they all used held up pretty well.
Celicas came in notchback or fastback form, but this notchy notchback was the predominant Pulsar NX body style. (As Paul discovered, we got a few hatchbacks with much less character in ’83 only.) Rear glass more vertical than the windshield: is this a first in a popular car? It looks sharp, emphasizes the simple clean body lines, and makes room for a proper trunk lid, not the more usual mail slot. Look how the C-pillar’s lines frame the full rear wheel well. I like it.
Here’s the shot I cropped the clue from. Eighties functional, well done. Sport coupes were never built for grown-up rear passengers, but with pop-out rear quarter windows at least your kids won’t suffocate.
Even though none of us have spotted the ’87 Pulsar NX generation in the wild (yet), I must show you how clever it was. A mild restyle of the ’83, you could easily mix the two up. But it commonly came as a curious hatchback-with-a-rear-deck, as you see here.
Or, you could get a Nissan NX Sportbak! A good-sized cargo compartment, a sporty little two-door wagon*. And the best part is, you could swap the lids to make your hatchback a Sportbak, or vice-versa! Like roadsters with removable hardtops, you could hang one in the garage while using the other.
*Post-posting, I’m asking myself, “How can it be a wagon without a tailgate?”
Some say Japanese dealers had lids you could rent if you lacked a garage. Though why you’d want to is beyond my understanding. What can a hatchback do that a Sportbak cannot? Weird! But kudos to Nissan for being creative.
It came in T-top form too. Even seen a T-top wagon? I can’t think of one. But I can imagine a T-topped Camaro Sportbak, why not?
Anyway, here our notchback 1st-gen Nissan Pulsar comes to a handsome end. As does its CC.
Having earned my driver’s license at the time that these cars came out, and reading a lot of R&T at the time, I thought of the Pulsar as the quintessential chick car — small and sporty-looking, but without any attempt at performance, and therefore not worth any attention. I remember reading an article stating that a full two-thirds of Pulsar buyers were women, which seemed to correspond to what I saw on the street. The Mustang, Camaro/Firebird, Celica and Integra were what young men (and boys) wanted.
Now, not having seen a surviving Pulsar in at least a decade, and with the entire Japanese sports coupe class from my teenage years long since extinct, it is hard not to feel nostalgic about the Pulsar and the others. Thanks for the reminder!
I wouldn’t say NO performance, the turbo model wasn’t any worse than other turbo models out at the time, like the Colt turbo. They were all slow, but there was potential there too. But it was definitely a chick car, the later refreshed model with t-tops and the removable hatch were very popular when I was growing up in Florida as a great beach cruiser car, and most girls didn’t get the performance model. IIRC the NX2000 had an SR20 just like the Sentra SE-R it was based on. It was heavier and softer but still had good performance, and performance potential, in a cooler looking package.
For its time, the Sentra was one of the fastest cars in its class. The Pulsar undoubtedly had equal performance. All these little coupes were a body style variation, and in their basic configuration not intended to be performance cars.
Think of them as the six-cylinder and base V8 Camaros of their time.
I remember reading a Popular Mechanic from 1986 when I was a kid, where they had a comparison test between all of the econoboxes of the time, Chevette, Mirage/Colt twins, Tercel, Civic, Yugo, etc. They didn’t put the 0 to 60 times of the different cars but did put the 1/4 mile times. The Sentra was the fastest with a 18.21 seconds time and the slowest was the Yugo with a 20 or 21.something seconds.
I also remember that when my dad’s Sentra became my first car and after installing a header and a free flow muffler, giving it this interesting sound like a mixture between a trimmer and a RX-7, I could make the car go up to 100MPH in 4th. If I shifted to 5th, it would slow down to 90, 95. It was an “interesting” experience doing that in the highway in such a lightweight car.
Omgosh! I had one of these . Nightmare of a car. Problems always but good times running around Dallas in mid 80’s!!
I just found a 1986 1st generation Pulsar nx ,146,000 KMs. Never winter driven and one owner mint condition.. I had a 1984 model and been kicking myself since I sold it in 1988. I looked for years and finally found a survivor..
was this one in quebec? At Belvedere Nissan
I have a 1983 Nissan Pulsar NX, automatic I am the only owner , it’s not in bad condition it’s in fair condition runs, got about 155,000 miles on it . Do you know anybody who’s interested in buying it? I really want to sell it to somebody who will fix it up and take care of it.
In 1984 I was looking at cars like the Fiero, EXP, and some others. My girlfriend bought a white PulsarNX, and it was so fun and practical (no one has mentioned the fold-down rear seats that connected to the trunk space), I had to get an all black ”84 Pulsar. Its the first and only car I bought new. I drove that car between Milwaukee and Ann Arbor many times in the snow through which it pulled powerfully. I drove it to San Francisco for a summer clerkship and back to Ann Arbor afterward. It made it up the mountains to Tahoe without a problem, With the removable moon roof, it was almost a convertible. I had a few women who wanted to buy it and after a couple of years, I sold it and regretted it. Then, years later, I had a client who had one that I got in lieu of fees. It didn’t last long, but I would gladly purchase another one in good shape.
Teresa, If you still have yours I’d be interested. Especially if you are anywhere near the San Francisco Bay Area.
My first one looked like this with different wheel covers.
I had a post here that seems to have vanished when I posted the picture of my black ’84 Pulsar, below. I bought it new in 1984 and loved it and its sporty practicality. No one else has mentioned fold-down separate rear seats that connected the trunk to the interior. Also, the detachable moon roof made it feel almost like a convertible. It also pulled really strong in the midwestern snow accumulation. There were several women who wanted to buy it after a couple of years before it was paid off. I regretted selling it. I came across a gray-silver one 20 years later, so I had to get it. This one was a little more beat up and only lasted a couple of years, sadly.
So, Teresa, If you are still trying to sell yours, I’d be interested. Especially, if you are anywhere near the San Francisco Bay Area, where I live, or near Milwaukee, Wisconsin, where my sister lives. Please Reply if its still for sale.
Is it still available?
Any pictures
What are you asking for it?
What are u asking for it. I’m interested? And What state are you in?
If you ever want to sell the nissan nx I’m buyer cing-un-quatre-huit-deux-zero-un-six-zero-deux. I had one as first car and looking to buy one as I’M nostalgic. I’d like to see pics of it 🙂 Thx , ALAIN
When my grandparents owed a house on the Cape (Cape Cod that is to non MA-people), someone who lived around the corner owned a light blue Pulsar ’87 generation Sportback. It was such a cool looking car. Before I knew about these, I had always thought it was some custom accessory, not a factory roof option.
That is funny you mention cape cod and a blue pulsar with wagon back. I owned a blue one and live on cape. I still own a red pulsar and painted the wagon black. I doubt many folks will read this, but I still wanted to share.
The odd looking offspring of a Fiero, MR2 and Fiat X19 3 way. Only a paternity test will reveal who the father is..on the next Maury Povich.
I just bought an 83 Pulsar that runs…okay (it likes to scream at me). But the point of this comment is that Maury Povich, and his wife, come in to the restaurant I work at in Bigfork, MT all the time.
I just purchased a 88 silver nissan pulsar nx.
Such a unique car.
I’m tryna to find a sportbak lid.
Supposedly the NX Turbo was ridiculously slow off the line…til that turbo finally kicked in! And then it was Katy-bar-the-door. 😛 Yes, a chick car. Trying to think if I knew any girls who owned one.
I knew a young lady from church who had one (we dated briefly)… she high-centered it on one of those concrete tire stops in a mall parking lot (pulled forward instead of backing out). Took four guys to lift it off…
I use some archaic terms myself, but I have never heard of Katy bar the door until now so I just had to find out what it meant. Thanks for exposing me to this phrase.
Haven’t heard that one in a long time! I do the same thing when looking at stuff from a different decade….I start talking like it is the 80’s. Weird but glad I am not the only person.
Robert’s knowledge backs up my experience. The only two people I ever knew who bought one of these were female. The car did not make it onto my radar when I was shopping new cars at that time. That was my impression – cute little Japanese coupe, but no real performance cred.
Like the rest of you, I have not seen one of these in eons. They all seemed to be either red or black.
BTW, excellent (and timely) writeup.
Thanks!
About a month ago while coming back home from picking up my wife from work I spotted a yellow wedge far in front of me. I thought it was a x1/9 with fresh paint but as I got closer I t didnt look lije an x1/9. It pulled off the road and into a driveway and I noticed it was a pulsar nx with a very nice paint job. Before seeing that one I hadnt seen one since the mid ninties, and that one was owned bya friends wife and ready for the scrap heap.
“Rear glass more vertical than the windshield: is this a first in a popular car?”
The 1978 GM midsize coupes – Monte Carlo, Cutlass, et al – come to mind.
Thanks, I was about to post the same thing, I think the profile of the Pulsar even looks like shrunken version of an 81-87 Buick Regal.
“Rear glass more vertical than the windshield: is this a first in a popular car?”
1977 GM B/C bodies and the 76 Seville too!
I knew there were earlier examples, but I couldn’t recall any of them. Thanks!
And now that my ‘car brain’ has been engaged, the 1974 Aston Martin Lagonda used this trick, too, although you could hardly call it ‘popular.’
For that matter… so did the 1974 Mustang II notchback!
83-97 Mercury Cougar too
Memory brings back the comment on this car from Consumer’s Reports: “The perfect first sports car.”
Which, to me, only further showed that, when it came to cars, CR didn’t have the slightest clue about the subject other than frequency of repair data. Any comparison between this and a real sports car was completely delusional.
The Honda Nighhawk 250 of sports cars?
The unfortunate thing is that when people say they miss diversity in automotive product planning, this is what that usually amounted to …
Yes, this isn’t really much different than US manufacturers in those years decreeing that a body-colored grille and a decal with the word SPORT on the car somewhere was sufficient to make a sport model of anything.
1875lbs?
That seems about right……
My Pulsar memory involves the one that rear ended my grandfathers 1972 Skylark 350 outside Florida International University, in the rain.
It was back when these were brand new, and the girl driving the car was inconsolable about the damages she caused to her almost brandy new silver Pulsar, the whole front end on the thing was wiped out, I remember the pop-up lights were still on and all askew like the Cookie Monsters eyes, the Skylark suffered a broken taillight and slightly pushed in left bumper.
Japan’s success completely threw Detroit into questioning their understanding of their own home market. Worse, marketers felt it was necessary to sell the lastest BS to Detroit in order to stay employed after a decade of bad advice regarding small cars.
American marketer oversold the small car market, getting it wrong again.
It was easy for Japan to ship their little two door coupes to the US, because they were already being made for little Japanese young couples, who oddly, still haven’t figured out how to make babies. So, bringing their little mini-pony cars to the US was a logical extension of what they were already building. Seeing these mini-pony cars being embraced by childless Californians convinced American auto marketers that Detroit needed to do the same.
So we all ended up with a whole slew of mini-pony cars with FWD based on subcompact cars. The MR2 and the Fiero were the second generation of this kind of mini-pony, or commuter car. These cars were smaller than earlier produced pony cars, such as the SX200 and Celica.
But GM, Ford and Chrysler all believed that they needed to produce mini-pony cars based on their subcompacts. These cars ended up looking oddly proportioned in that their greenhouse didn’t fit the larger subcompact body. The Ford EXP/LN7 coupes had high fender lines, but lower rooflines with bubble hatches and hoods. The original Nissan Pulsars suffered this same oddly proportioned look.
But give Nissan credit for really trying to ape both the MR2 Ginsu knife profile and working around the shortcomings of their subcompact sedans. The Pulsar didn’t look like a knock-off like the competition. The second generation Pulsar with it’s modular roofline and restyled diagonal back lights was a winner. Unfortunately, while these cars were popular in Japan, Boomers by this time had figured out they needed to begin a family, so couldn’t really be bothered with mini-ponys without back seats. Callling them commuter cars was a market angle in order to convince a mom or dad that they needed a mini-pony which couldn’t fit their family. That didn’t work either.
Why were they chick cars? Because childless women appreciated their size, price and looks. They were cheaper than a Celica or an SX200, a Mustang, or a Capri. These ladies often went into a dealership looking for a sexy pony car, and ended up convinced that a mini-pony would offer the same without the added costs.
They were not bad cars either. They were based on good economical rides. These cars simply allowed Detroit to discover the limits of the small FWD market when the economy was good, oil drilling and exploration wasn’t considered evil so pump prices were reasonable, and how even sharp little Japanese coupes could fail in the domestic market.
Mini pony car? I believe you have just created a new class of car.
It is such a logical description, I’d be surprised if it hadn’t been used by some miquetoast auto marketer during that era. I can’t be first.
Foal car? Doesn’t quite sound right…..
The 1983 Pulsar NX couldn’t have been a knock-off of the first MR2, the Pulsar came out first.
The Celicas and 200SXs were in one class of car (sport speciality high), the Pulsar NX, Paseo, EXP and Geo Storm in another (sport specialty low).
By this time no one was referring to either class as a Japanese pony car. You got a little of that in the mid-70s, like when the old RWD Celica got the ’69 Mustang inspired LIftback.
You are right almost all of the small sport specialties had unattractive proportions.
“Unfortunately, while these cars were popular in Japan, Boomers by this time had figured out they needed to begin a family, so couldn’t really be bothered with mini-ponys without back seats.”
In other markets they did have back seats
The ’87+ taillights were the coolest of the entire 1980s. When I was very young, my great grandmother rented an apartment from someone who had one of those as well as an Isuzu Impulse with the “Handling by LOTUS” badge. I was very impressed by both when I was 6 years old!
The Pulsar NX was one of, if not the first design to come out of Jerry Hirschberg’s California design studio in the mid-1980s when I was nearing completion of my industrial design degree. He came to Tech and spoke once during my Senior year – don’t remember what he said, but it was pretty cool he came, none-the-less.
I always liked the Pulsar and Pathfinder styling… they had a nice design language going on there (which wasn’t very consistently applied to other Nissans, but, oh well…).
Here’s a newspaper article about the Pulsar:
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2194&dat=19870105&id=de4yAAAAIBAJ&sjid=bO8FAAAAIBAJ&pg=1500,2169976
Like some of you I remember hearing the 1983-86 generation had the highest percent female of any car sold in America. The car reminded me too much of a door stop.
The 1987-90 generation was a much nicer car and had removable T-tops 100%. Unlike most cars, where you had to strap these to the trunk floor, in the NX they fit in a hidden compartment under the floor.
They added an SE version with a 1.6L DOHC (NIssan’s first in North America) and it was a dog. In 1988 they bumped the displacement to 1.8L and it was finally a very nice driving car with a surprisingly stiff body structure.
Hirshberg’s team did the second gen (the one with the Sportbak accessory) and also its replacement the ’91 NX1600/2000, which was one of the ugliest cars ever.
The 2nd gen pulsars were VERY stiff.
They weighed nearly HALF A TON more than the 1st gen pulsars and you could feel it in every aspect of driving one. I had a first gen (in light blue) and my brother had a 2nd gen (same color) and it was literally yin and yang lol.
1st gen doors felt like the doors on a playskool cozy coupe (but tinnier)
2nd gen doors were every bit as heavy as a GM G body coupe’s and closed with the same
Authority, as in slamming it made the WHOLE CAR WIGGLE)
The 1st gen was thrown around like a plastic bag on a windy day while the 2nd gen was stable as a pontoon boat on a calm lake.
The 2nd gen felt like a brick shithouse, 1st gen felt like a house of cards.
The 1st gen was noisy on all counts, engine, wind, and road noise, the 2nd gen was almost Cadillac quiet (no, seriously, it really was).
It wasnt just illusion, either. My old pulsar met its end after a friend bought it and got hit by a Cadillac…the 1984 pulsar folded up like a liece of aluminum foil.
My friend’s son had a 1988 just like my brother’s…he was copping a feel on his girl and drove THROUGH the back of a 1987 Ford escort.( literally crumpled it clear to the B Pillar)
That 88 pulsar? They put a new right side pop up headlight assembly in and (after heating cherry red) pulled the front bumper straight.
They even reused the bumper cover.
That newspaper article has some fascinating quotes from Jerry Hirschberg about the Sportbak’s genesis and car design in general. He mentioned the third option, leaving the sport/hatchback off completely, like a little pickup (without a fully enclosed cab). In areas fairly safe from rain or thieves, I’ll bet that was the most common configuration.
The car was attractive as a notchback as well as with the Sportbak. The convertibility made it an interesting concept for sure. An obvious drawback was the hassle of removing the hatch (more difficult when it was the larger/heavier Sportbak) and then having to store it someplace.
On the surface it would seem no more difficult than removing a hardtop on the 2002 Thunderbird and so many others — hoists and storage racks help a lot. But hardtops were designed for quick release at the windshield header and in back, usually with easy to use levers and/or a special tool.
The NX hatch was not designed for easy release. It was a bit easier than say removing a hatch on a Pinto but there were no special tools provided with the car, it was a wrench out of the tool cabinet. It was easy to strip the bolts during the reinstall.
Between the difficult release, heavy liftoff and cumbersome storage the idea died after about a year and the Sportbak became a separate model in the lineup.
My friend had one of these in high school that he inherited from his dad, who was like 6″4. I have no idea how that man fit in the thing. His was an ’87. I drove it on several occasions and I remember my ’86 Mercury Cougar LS being a lot quicker, at least in a straight line. It was a fun car though, especially with those pop up headlights, funky taillights, and T top. It’s probably been over a decade, but I’d like to see one up close again. Are there any left?
Though not everyone’s cup of tea, I liked mine. It certainly was not a sports car, but it was reliable, easy to service, and very frugal. The “Armstrong” power windows, locks, seats, and sunroof always worked. The one car I wish I still had. I miss it, it was a happy car.
I like yours, I wouldn’t mind having one like that. Sharp styling and color scheme, nice!
The first gen Pulsar sold well, but the ’87 update was over the top. Car & Driver said then that it was trying to be ‘hip and trendy’, but that “hipness is elusive.” In one year, out the next. The removeable Sport Back was something to go ‘ooo and ahh’ at an Auto Show. But who really wanted it?
I remember these on off turbo with corresponding wheelspin all it did was convince Ford Australia they could restyle a Mazda 323 cabriolet into the Horrible Ford Crapi and it would sell and we know how that turned out.
Despite not being a “real” sports car or really anything more than a re-bodied Sentra, anything this small with so much as a passable engine and suspension is usually kinda fun to drive. I never drove one of these, but I’ve always enjoyed similar cars. The light weight and short wheelbase goes a long way towards disguising typical negative FWD handling characteristics. The “plow” is still there, especially with the 175-width tires these probably had, but it’s easier to stay out of and correct – and you can drive the car with your right foot throrugh the firewall 90% of the time only barely breaking the speed limit!
As I just noted in the CC itself, the morning after I’m asking myself whether the Sportbak is really a wagon. (Nissan never called it a wagon, I did.) Can a wagon be a wagon without a tailgate? That’s some lift-over height. If it’s not a wagon, then what do we call this Sportbak? Not a hatchback. Maybe it’s a boxback?
On the other hand Volvo’s 1800ES was called a Sportwagon, with an all-glass “tailgate”. Even though it doesn’t reach all the way down to the floor, it gets quite a bit closer than Nissan’s Sportbak. Of course its roof and sides don’t swing up like the Sportbak’s.
When is a wagon not a wagon?
Don’t the Euro-pee-ons use the term “shooting brake” for that general body style? Maybe that would be more appropriate?
I was going to say a shooting brake is just British English for what Yanks call a station wagon. But a little research shows you have an interesting point. Wikipedia says:
“Proper usage of the term shooting-brake refers to sporty two-door hatchback (i.e., three-door) variants. In 2006, The New York Times described a shooting-brake as “a sleek wagon with two doors and sports-car panache, its image entangled with European aristocracy, fox hunts and baying hounds,” In 2011, Top Gear described a shooting-brake as “a cross between an estate and a coupé”.
“Automotive designer Peter Horbury described the contemporary three-door shooting-brake, saying “it is not your basic two-door hatchback, a body style with different proportions: the hatchback tends to be squatty, while a shooting brake is sleek and has “a very interesting profile.” It makes use of the road space it covers a little better than a normal coupé, and also helps the rear person with headroom. Especially in America, every member of the family has their own car. The occasional use of the rear seat means you can do one of these cars, even if such a wagon lacks the everyday practicality of four doors.”
All the same, has an American ever called any such car a shooting brake?
Would the 87-90 VW Fox wagon be called a shooting-brake? It was only available in 2 door wagon guise.
That was an odd car and one that did not sell well in the USA due to it only being offered with a 4 spd manual or 5 spd manual
My interpretation is a shooting brake is a wagon-style version of a 2-door sportscar. It requires a low, sleek, long roof – the archetype would be the Aston Martin DB5 as used by A-M owner David Brown to take his guns & hunting dogs. It is not something based on a ‘normal’ sedan, a lower cowl height as well as roofline is required.
I think “squatty” as Horbury used the word would refer to lack of length, eg 3rd-gen Civic. The reference to improving headroom relates to the wagon/long-roof aspect, a sloping rear window is no longer impeding passenger space.
Note this does not include the new M-B CLS ‘shooting brake’!
I remember going to check out a used Pulsar of this vintage that a (female) friend was considering purchasing back in the ’80s. It was the same bodystyle as the subject car, it might even have been the same colour.
The car had been detailed nicely, but wasn’t very well sorted mechanically. On the test drive, I noticed that the steering was a bit sloppy. When I pointed this out to the salesman, he said “It’s a sports car, they all do that”. The (manual) gearbox was difficult to shift, and when I pointed that out the salesman again said “It’s a sports car, they all do that”, to which I replied “this is no sports car” at which point my friend piped up and said “yes it is – sports are dangerous!”
No sale…
Funny! That’s a great story.
I drove an 87 in high school. Fully loaded T-tops power everything AC and a 5 speed. My aunt bought it new in 87 and sold it to my Dad around 96. I drove it for a couple of years before I got the ramcharger. Fun little car and great MPG for the time (I got over 34 MPG on a trip to NY) My Brother totaled it around 2002-3 at that point it had 200k miles and the only problem had been a transmission issue which was resolved with a used one from a junk yard. Also regarding fitting in it I’m 6’3″ and at one point my brother, myself and two of his friends all rode in the car to a local amusement park. Not comfortable but it worked. If it had a little more power I would love to have one again, I remember it handling quite well not as well as the CRX that replaced it but pretty good.
I had an 89 Targa with the bigger 1.8 motor. For the time it was pretty brisk, if not at the top of the performance ladder. I think if it had just been engineered without the fancy top and hatch it would have been faster, as the body was pretty heavily beefed up. As for the removable hatch? In the four years I had it I removed it once. It was just too awkward and heavy. The roof panels came out often though!
The Sportbak wagon inspired a Dutch (I think) company to offer a very similar Sportbak kit to convert the Volvo 440 hatch into a wagon. I think the idea worked a lot better on the Nissan…
I like it, looks good to me. That rear side window with the diagonal feature across it echoes the trademark Volvo grill.
The conversion was by a company named Toncar. Apparently Volvo was less than thrilled with it and took sucessful legal action to stop sales. More info here: http://www.volvotips.com/index.php/440-460-480/history-volvo-440-460-480/
The diagonal line through the rear side window is actually the D-pillar – the Toncar conversion was to simply unbolt the hatchback and bolt their new extended-hatch on – although it looks more like a wagon, the new hatch still hinges above the D-pillar, so the wagon can be converted back to a hatch in a few minutes. Most owners left the D-pillar body colour, but some tried to disguise it with black paint to represent a more conventional wagon:
Here’s a prototype of a ‘460 GLE’ wagon from Heuliez:
Some of you guys might get a chuckle out of these concepts
I remember GM calling that a Kammback and it looks somewhat good on the Firebird
this one isn’t so bad
This one…not so much
Reminds me of the Dodge Magnum wagon. The trouble with those Firebird concepts is that super-long rear overhang. The rear wheels are begging to get pushed back a foot or two. As in the well-proportioned Dodge, which looks great to me.
In the CC I wrote, “I can imagine a T-topped Camaro Sportbak, why not?” Philhawk, you’ve shown us why not.
That is the car that I learned to drive a stick on and it still makes me feel nostalgic. If I could find a decent one, I’d absolutely buy it and use it for my daily driver.
“A mild restyle of the ’83, you could easily mix the two up.”
Sorry, but without referring to the dimensions the 87 was in no way a ‘mild restyle’, it was several inches wider and lower.
The original EXA turbo as it was called here was raced under the local Group C touring car regs, which permitted outrageous wheel arch flares. It didn’t do very much, at least in part because torque steer was comically bad.
Just wanted to share my car on this post, even though it was written a couple months back. This is an ’88 I bought back in 2006 to replace an ’89 blue pulsar I had owned. I have rebuilt the engine, added go fast bits, and swapped the suspension from the newer nx2000 cars.
Great to see a survivor – and sounds like it’d be a lot of fun with the mods!
89 Pulsar was my first car. Silver with some odd red stripes on it. No canopy though. I did go an entire summer in a drought here in New Jersey with the t-tops off. I still wish I could drive it one more time.
I am the original owner of a 1988 Nissan Pulsar NX SE. Still have it and it’s mint. As a matter of fact, when I got a job several years back that was 45 min away, I got a MINI Cooper S as a daily driver, just so I wouldn’t run my Pulsar into the ground. *laughs* I admit to being abnormally attached to it and when I take it out, I get heads turning everywhere.
A few things to note: ALL second generation Pulsars came with removable T tops. They locked with a key so the panels couldn’t be stolen. They stored neatly under the floor in the hatch area. The hatch itself is entirely removable so the car can be almost completely open air. The SportBak was an option to make the car a station wagon with more storage area. The Pulsar was to be the world’s first “modular” car. They made the model through 1989, then replaced it with the NX and NX1600, which is the same general shape but was a bit more bland (in my opinion) with oval head and tail lights (non-pop up headlights).
I would absolutely buy the car all over again. It’s all I need in a car and I love love love it. 😀
To this day I don’t know WHY but my folks bought ME, a MALE heterosexual, a red ’83 Nissan Pulsar NX for my 16th birthday in 1986. It was $3,000. We were not in any way a flashy type of family so it was kind from out in left field. I never expected to ever even have them buy me a car so I was tripping out. I think my Dad just had a wild hair and saw it and thought it would help jump start my life. It did actually. At the time I was inwardly thinking, ok, this is a full on CHICK car. I was still SUPER appreciative and grateful. Everybody thought it was cool bc ANY car is cool at that age. But then GIRLS started liking it and before I knew it I had cheerleaders crammed in my back seat riding around with me. So that car was instantly LEGIT. That bastard drove like a champ and I got like 30-35 miles a gallon. Gas was still .79-.99 cents so I could fill up for $10 or less and literally roll around for a month. Fun little car. Got a lot of leg in it too. Salute!
Had an 1986, was my first car, so even though not my first choice, the price was right at $700. Used at a local used car dealer, for that price the ac didn’t work, but i liked the sunroof and pop out rear windows, found out why the price was so cheap, had an internal water leak into.#4 piston, causing it to foul the plug, and turn the motor oil milky, in approximately 100miles of driving, so I kept spare plugs and changed them out , frequently until i decided to change the head gasket, itwas difficult for me since it was polution controlled with tons of vacuum hoses everywhere, etc, then once i changed the gasket i found out the leak was coming from a crack in the intake manifold that preheats the carb, it has a waterjacket running through it, i was going to fix it, but i drove it late one night and got struck by a drunk driver in a full size pickup truck, the damage was significant but i still drove it home, the insurance company totalled-out the car and gave me like $2,000, or so, for the car i paid $700.00 for, then my Dad made me buy another econno box, a 1984, 2-door sentra, for $1200 bucks, it only had a four speed, same engine etc. , i remember the pulsar for having a 5speed, being my first car, and the pop up lights, and sunroof, not for its performance, it was basically a reboidied sentra. But i didn’t consider it slow, it could keep up.with traffic, shifting a 5-6k before redline. I’d like to own onw again to relive my memories of my first car, mine was black, with a 1980s pinstripe job on it.
I bought this 86 Pulsar NX to use as a beater. When I got it home and started looking it over I realized it’s in excellent condition with only 1 tiny spot of what looks like surface rust about the size of a paper clip on the rocker panel. I don’t have the heart to run it into the ground when someone might want it. So I’m putting it up FOR SALE. It’s only had 2 owners (not including me, I haven’t signed the title yet), has ~88k original miles. the 1st owner put 58k on it, 2nd bought it around July 95 and put just under 30k on it. The only problems I found are the clear coat is pealing, it has a high idle and the drivers side low beam doesn’t work.
SOLD
Mark, how much did you ask for it ? ehh.. I am looking for one like that.
I am looking for 1st Gen pulsar engine condition is not important but should have a solid straight body. I owned an 84 years ago and miss it badly. Please reply if you are willing to part with yours and it is fairly priced.
Thanks.
I have an 83 pulsar nx and i love it. Drive it daily. Not the fastest but very fun to drive. With as light as they are, it does not take much mods to make them quite zippy and even more fun to drive.
https://youtu.be/kRFaG8QLncI
Saw this second gen recently sitting on a lot with a bunch of old cars.
Rumors where that the front end was based on a Porsche with a car bra covering the front, a popular accessory back then. True?
I wish Nissan still made fast. fun and cheap cars like this. You could hoon it with some expectation of reliability. They’re not fun anymore.
I don’t know why “Chick car” gets tossed around as a derisive term. Why cannot women get cars they like too? Why not have an inexpensive, sporty/fun looking, reliable, econobox in sharp duds? Underneath all these cars was a pedestrian platform which made them inexpensive to develop and purchase, but with fun looks.
The failure of the recent GTO/SS, the Mazda 323 GTX, and the Sentra SE-R show that buyers prefer sporty looks over actual sporty performance. And please let’s not forget that there was not a lot of actual sporty performance to be had in the early ’80’s- cars were getting better, but the new Camaro debuted with the Iron Duke 4 cylinder as the standard engine as did the Mustang. I suppose the VW GTI did the best job of actually transforming an econosedan into a real performer with upgraded suspension and handling, but A) it started with a much better car, and B) by today’s performance standards it didn’t.
Why not have fun styling to go with your dose of practicality underneath? These cars were popular with high schoolers- o, and by the way, ANY car is going to be made plenty sporty by a high schooler. Grandma’s Mercury Topaz can be made to perform amazing athletic feats in the hands of a 17 year old. Perhaps this car could have been made more powerful, or a better handler, but all the money went into the styling. That was what buyers wanted.
Also, some cars are pointed out as having “timeless” designs. This is rather the opposite and very obviously early ’80’s. It should be followed everywhere by lasers! and that graph paper pattern that was popular then! and that weird fog that ’80’s commercials used.
What a vile pile. Drove one back many moons past, and it took everything about the Pulsar (Sentra), and added worsener.
The Pulsar we got was locally made and modified, with truly superb seats, acceptable handling, good quietness and gearing that meant it could theoretically do 280kph at peak power, “power” ofcourse being a relative term (ie: no relative of this car). Sure, it looked so boring that you could lose it in a carpark even as you locked it, it weighed slightly less than a sneeze, and was constructed mainly out of tinfoil and creaks, but it worked more or less as small Japanese cars did then. Namely, slowly and reliably.
This sounds unattractive, until you understand what the imported EXA did with these features. The creaks and tinfoil remained, as did the moon-landing gearing, but the seats went – it felt like they actually, literally went, so bad were the Japanese ones – the forgettable styling became unforgettable (in the same way as a recurring nightmare) because it was apparently the product some of the slower Japanese first graders in the Amatuers Origami Competition, the local suspension tuning went (they installed rocks and understeer instead), and the power became entirely non-existent, (until 4,000 rpm was attained, say, 100mph in second gear), when what power did suddenly arrive overwhelmed every other part of the car. To add insult, they liked a good grenading, did these early turbos.
These were the good points. There isn’t time to list the bad ones.
I didn’t like these cars. I still don’t.
This one has been in my neighborhood for years – it’s still there as of last week. It’s got the redesigned taillights (sadly, I haven’t photographed from the rear).
(I posted this on the cohort July 2018 and it might have been written up shortly thereafter)
photo:
not sure how old this article is, but I just put a blue one of these
for sale up on Ebay tonite. Im in Tucson Az, and mine although needs
work and restoration…has no rust or rot anywhere.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/333809433374
Back in ’84 a co-worker had a Pulsar NX that had been converted into a convertible.
I had a red Nissan Pulsar turbo version back in high school. And yes, I am a girl. 🤣 I even had a black “bra” over the front that covered the headlight eyelids. It was a funny little car, the clutch went out, so I literally had to stuck my leg out the side door and push back to reverse this car a few times. It was light enough. Speaking of light, my car would often not be where I parked it. Apparently the football team would pick my car up and move it around the parking lot as a practical joke. It was pretty funny.