It’s been a while since I’ve written up a twofer, and as a result, I have a few in store. So this will be T87’s Twofer Week, live from the depths of the Japanese capital. We’ll start with this chalk and cheese duo. But which is which?
The web is not entirely clear on the gen 3 (1995-2002) Sprinter Carib, but I’m sure the CCommunity will have all the answers. It seems this was mostly a JDM model, but Toyota made a Corolla-badged version (eventually with a completely different front end) for Europe. Is one to infer that these were never sent to the US, Australia, Africa or South America?
If so, that’s a damn shame. With its tall roof, AWD drivetrain and quirky styling, the Sprinter Carib was a great little wagon. But then again, this was the mid-to-late ‘90s, when SUVs started roaming the Earth and wagons became passé – at least from a North American perspective.
And it was the last of its kind, too. Even though it sold relatively well for a niche vehicle (over 125k units in Japan – a bit less, but not dramatically so, than its predecessor), Toyota called it quits after that, 20 years after the Carib first appeared in the range.
European Caribs only came in 1.8 litre form, whereas JDM ones could also be had with a 1.6 and a FWD-only drivetrain. This broadening of the bottom of the range was not a bad notion necessarily, but it did not seem to work in the model’s favour. Our feature car is nevertheless a lower trim “S” with the 115hp 1.6 litre engine.
That 968 makes for quite a contrast with the Carib, doesn’t it? Say what you will about front-engined Porsches (I mean the non-SUV ones, of course), they certainly look the part. Especially in yellow.
This is the Club Sport version of the 968, offered from MY 1993 to the model’s end in 1995. The idea was to improve performance by removing toys, such as power windows, leather seats, driver’s airbag or the rear wiper. The rear seats were also taken out, to save even more weight.
In the end, the draconian diet improved the 968’s performance pretty noticeably, shaving off almost a full second from the 0-60 time and pushing the max speed up to 260kph, versus 250kph for standard 968s. All that oomph came from a 240hp 2990cc straight-4, which is about as huge as 4-cyl. engines ever got in postwar cars.
The price was also reduced on these by 10-15% compared to the standard coupé, but sales remained pretty slow. Only 1538 of these were made in three years – but then, this model was only marketed in Europe, Australia and Japan. Total production numbers for the 968 in general, including the convertible, were between 11,000 and 13,000, depending on the source. Whatever it actually was, Porsche lost a packet on the 968 and gave up on the platform, which had begun in 1976 with the 924.
These two may be very different, but they do have one common feature: they were the final iteration of 20-year-old concepts that had run their course. They’re not strange bedfellows. They are a pair of swansong models – and pretty neat ones at that.
Related post:
Curbside Classic: 1992-1995 Porsche 968. Phoning It In, by Don Andreina
I have had some experience with a 968, a convertible belonging to a friend. His father bought the car new. To drive, it is a fantastic car. As on rails, the engine is everything you want in a fast two seater convertible. It is very smooth and pretty comfortable, not too harsh. Driving position is very good too. Would be an excellent daily driver.
However, for me there stops the fun. The interior is a bit cheap and not very attractive, the same could be said for the exterior. The car does not have much more attractions. Strange to say, but in the end it is a pretty boring car. It maybe is just too good for me.
Lover the front-engined (non-SUV) Porsches, the 924S I owned ten years ago was the best car I’ve ever had. Never should have traded it, but after my wife’s death the thought that I’d never owned a roadster started bugging me. Foolishly, as two convertibles later I realized they would never replace a motorcycle.
I did test drive a 968 cabriolet during my hunt for that roadster, but it was a Triptronic that completely gutted an otherwise really nice car.
Nope, no Carib in the U.S. The “fun” for us stopped after the Corolla All-Trac wagon with the weird rear side windows that supplanted the Tercel wagon with the weird rear end. I guess this Carib was viewed as not weird enough… Subaru was coming on strong during these years and Toyota pivoted towards the RAV4. In the end it was a winning move for both makers I suppose.
I like the front engine/water cooled Porsche’s myself. I briefly worked with a guy that had a 924 with a swapped in Buick 215 aluminum V8. No idea how he adapted it to the rear transaxle, but he did. Didn’t work with him long enough to find out. You never know where these pesky Buick/Rover V8s are going to show up.
I see a 968 every Saturday if it is not raining. It is in your more proto-typical black.
There’s something compelling about high performance big fours; the “ripping” sound they make at peak revs is intoxicating. The four in Stephanie’s TSX is only 2.4 L but it sounds heavenly at 7000 rpm.
But the ultimate in that regard were of course the Offenhauser fours, which went up to 270 cubic inches (4.4 L). The naturally-aspirated classic 252 inch version made 420 hp @6,600 rpm, swinging a 4.375″ stroke (4.28125″ bore). Why were they so dominant at Indy and other circle tracks for so many decades? Because of their phenomenal torque, so essential for powering out of the curves since they never shifted any gears once at speed.
Agreed about big fours, if done well. Citroen’s big pushrod four, for eg, was as rough as bags, to me. But the Mitsubishi 2.6, with the Lanchester-derived balance shafts that Porsche had to pay a licence for in the 944/968, could be a very decent thing. (The “could” is because longevity was either long, or short, and seemed to be a lottery). In this country, the rear-drive Galant(?)/Sigma was a very acceptable drive in the sporty-ish GSR 5-spd form, even with only 5k revs useful – moslty, you used the great torque. I’d love a fang in a 968, if only for the extra 2,000 rpm on top.
That generation Carib is totally unfamiliar to me. But I love the colour: perfect nineties.
Interesting to see a CS version of the 968. Any 968 would be a rarity these days, let alone a version I never knew existed. And yellow!
I was interested in the 924, but really liked the 944s. Especially the turbo. I was into early Datsun Zs at this time. I looked at several 944s but I found that the steering wheel always rubbed against the top of my legs and that was uncomfortable. True, that I’m kinda fat, but there wasn’t that much flesh on top of my femurs! I stuck with my Datsuns. The N/A 944 was a great combination of performance, fuel economy and practicality. I can’t speak on their reliability. I still look on CL, but I guess that the Boxster has eclipsed the older models.
I own a 1990 Porsche “Cab” with 24000 miles and find it to be a wonderfully balanced car. Great 5 speed and all told these are still available for modest money . They were only around for 1990 and 91…then the 968 I believe . They are a great “sports car”.
I think if was offered a green carob, I’d presume it was off, and decline.
Very silly nomenclature for a dowdy copy of the Subie Outback, Carib. (I mean, what happened to the “-bean”? Oh, right, it’s in the carob. I’ll stop).
Did Porsche in fact lose money on the 968? It’s a pretty cheap facelift, albeit very effective to these eyes, and the basic structures were surely amortized long ago, you’d think.
Here, the 968 (let alone a CS) was never cheap and nor did it ever become so, quite unlike 924’s or 944’s. The club-racer types had (and have) the cash to Sunday race them, I guess. Lucky bastards.
Why, I suppose even I’d agree to driving around in a green fake-chocolate Toyota if I had a 968 for the weekends.
I’d forgotten how awkward the 968 front wings and headlight set up were….