By the time my parents decided to replace their 1972 Chevy Malibu in the early 1980s, the world had changed dramatically. Two gas crises, three economic recessions and three presidential administrations later, there were a whole host of different options available in the market. For their first foray into foreign car ownership, my folks chose the name changing 1983 Nissan (formerly Datsun) Stanza, the company’s first front wheel drive effort in the compact family car class to compete with the Honda Accord. After 9 years of service, it would end up replacing my 1976 Cutlass as the second car I ever owned.
The early ’80s was a confusing time to be a car buyer. Fuel efficiency standards increased and both American and foreign car companies introduced a profusion of newer and smaller front wheel drive vehicles – GM’s X bodies (Citation, et al), followed by the J bodies (Cavalier, et al) and A bodies (Celebrity, et al), Ford’s Escort/Lynx twins, Chrysler’s Omni/Horizon and K bodies (and the variants that followed), redesigned Honda Civics and Accords, Toyota’s Tercel and Camry, and Datsun’s 310, Sentra and Stanza. All of these cars competed against rear wheel drive options, many of which had been on the market for several years (Ford’s Fox platform variants, larger GM B/C body full size cars, Ford Panther platform variants etc). For my dad, it was hard to figure out which would be a suitable family car replacement for his rusty, but trusty Malibu. After 11 years, it seemed like the car came from another world in comparison. I was already deep into car geekdom as a teenager and, as I got older, knew that whatever he bought would end up being the first car I would “officially” get to drive as a licensed driver. So I had opinions and I wasn’t going to be shy about expressing them.
1983 was a pivotal year, in particular, for Nissan Motor Company. Over the course of the model year, it had begun to introduce the Nissan name and phase out the use of the Datsun name in the American market. I’m not sure of the exact reason at this point — and I am sure someone has analyzed why Nissan decided to deep-six whatever brand equity it had developed over 15 plus years with the Datsun name in the US (which included legends like the 510 and Z cars). And so the Nissan dealership in 1983 featured many cars with both Datsun and Nissan name badges. Including the Stanza my father decided to buy.
The saga of the Nissan (Datsun) Stanza has already been covered in some depth here on Curbside Classic. In sum, it was Nissan’s first front wheel drive compact family car, designed to compete directly with the Honda Accord (and, later on, Toyota Camry). The cars looked modern, drove and road relatively well, and offered pretty high feature content with the XE package for the price point. It got generally positive reviews from the car magazines and Consumer Reports recommended it in its first year. A four door sedan was introduced in the US as a late ’83 model and, after a test drive (including a quick drive by to our house in Queens where my dad confirmed the car would fit in the narrow driveway between our house and the neighbor’s), my folks bought their first new car in over a decade.
It was the most 80’s of models. The exterior color was called French Beige, but would be better known as mauve. My mom thought it was “classy”. It also featured both Datsun and Nissan badges – the company clearly hedging their bets with the rename. The interior was a bright maroon red velour. Not for the subtle. And it featured a cassette player that could seek and scan for the next song. My teenage heart loved that feature. It was surprisingly roomy and the four of us (my parents, me and my sister) all fit comfortably. The trunk, while not huge, actually had more usable space than the Malibu, despite the car being smaller.
The Stanza was a member of the family for almost 12 years – the first 9 with my folks, the last 3 with me. My dad moved me into my college dorm room with the Stanza – trunk full and back seat packed to the roof. I passed my driving test in the Stanza. The car was driven all over the Northeast and, once it became mine, to Oklahoma when I moved there for a year after law school and then to Michigan the year later.
The Stanza was an overall decent performer – everything about its performance was competitive with modern front wheel drive vehicles of the time. Except it never really had the kind of bulletproof reliability that Japanese cars were supposed to be known for. The carburetor needed to be rebuilt twice. The front axle boots tore at the mere sight of potholes. A bolt dropped on the drive to Oklahoma which resulted in vibrations so severe we had to turn off the A/C. (This was in August.) The engine motor mounts needed to be replaced. The automatic transmission leaked at the seals around 75K miles and, even after resealing, had shift and leak issues. It finally gave up the ghost driving home to Ann Arbor one January evening in 1995 and refused to shift out of first gear. It was a slow drive. I sold it for salvage not wanting to dump more money into the car. By then, my girlfriend (and soon to be wife) had a 1984 Corolla that we used as a backup.
So while the Stanza looked like it belonged with the Accord and Camry and performed well enough, it always seemed to not quite make it. Maybe it was the name confusion. Maybe it was the generally new FWD design for Nissan/Datsun. It was a car that served its purpose, but didn’t inspire a lot of passion or love.
No car as ever been a member of my family. Just like no TV or bed or refrigerator has been a member of my family. We had a few dogs which where family members, a rabbit or two, but no cars.
Sorry Ted, can’t disagree more. I have an 80 year old GE fridge that is a member of the family. Clearly you need to watch a few episodes of My Mother the Car. All in good fun..
In 1988 I had a new colleague which enthusiastically told his father had bought a new car – a Nissan Stanza. I could not believe someone could get enthusiastic about such a boring car. A view I still keep.
So why did I read this CC article? Intriguing, want to know why people like these kind of cars and what they see in them.
Beyond the Datsun/Nissan name confusion, the Stanza was also considerably smaller than most of the cars it was intended to compete with (Accord sedan, Camry). Fortunately the Stanza was quite space efficient, but visually it looked more like a Civic than an Accord.
My mom had an ’82 Stanza XE four door hatchback. This was the top line model at the time with “Deluxe” being the misleadingly-named base model, but the sedans, all of which had GL trim, pushed the XE to mid-level. Nissan was implying that hatchbacks were perceived as cheap. Anyway, the XE didn’t have the pitted velour upholstery but rather an interesting gradient cloth, red on this example. The car had some pretty snazzy features for 1982, like mechanical bells for the seat belt chime rather than a buzzer or beeper, and a dome light that did a slow fadeout when you closed the door. It was fairly reliable but was badly damaged in a collision when the car was less than two years old. Like virtually every Stanza I’ve seen of this generation, it developed a big rust hole in the passenger side rocker panel just ahead of the rear wheel. Any idea what that was about?
It was considerably smaller than the Accord/Camry, but I think it was also about 20% less in cost. Or 20% more in cost than a Civic. But it was somewhat surprisingly roomy, so even at the time the Stanza seemed hard to peg down regarding just what its competitors were. So I guess all this leads to the Identity Crisis.
Out of curiosity, I looked up the Stanza in Consumer Guide’s Auto 83 book, and this was their take on it:
Verdict: a Japanese Ford Escort with a different set of virtues and vices.
That’s being a bit harsh, but their point’s well taken. An Accord it ain’t.
it was considerably smaller than the Accord/Camry,
You must be thinking of the Altima, which arrived in 1993, and was a tick smaller than the Accord and Camry. The Stanza was a direct competitor to the Accord and Camry, and was sized the same. In fact, these Stanzas had a 4″ longer wheelbase than the Accord of that same vintage (100.4″ vs. 96.5″) and as a result had better interior room, especially in the rear seat. It and the Camry (102.4″ wb) were decidedly roomier than the Accord, which was a bit tight. That forced Honda to increase its size in the following generation.
And the Stanza was highly competitive otherwise with those two, and priced accordingly. I may have to dig up a vintage test, but it’s not fair to say that it was substantially inferior to them.
The problem was that subsequent generations of the Stanza, which were really just evolutions of this one, failed to keep pace with the Accord and Camry’s more rapid evolution.
I guess Nissan’s anonymity got the better of me. Upon looking it up, I was surprised to see that the interior & exterior dimensions were so close to the Accord’s.
I just quickly looked up R&T’s initial Stanza road test (Dec. ’81), and it was a highly positive review.
Stanza was also considerably smaller than most of the cars it was intended to compete with (Accord sedan, Camry). Fortunately the Stanza was quite space efficient, but visually it looked more like a Civic than an Accord.
You must be thinking of the Sentra; the Stanza was exactly the same length as the Accord and Camry of that time.
The first generation Stanza was released in the US before the Camry so at least for this market they weren’t initially competitors. And with the 5 door version it was arguably very spacious compared to the 3 door hatch or 4 door Accord of the time. I test drove one in late ‘81 after being priced out of Accord due to dealer markups, and was very disappointed. All the pieces – FWD, hatch, etc – seemed right, after the sad 610/710 years, but the result was dull. Bought a Civic 3 door instead.
A friend’s family who was my daily ride to and from school had an 84 Stanza with all the bells and whistles with a red cloth interior. I was so impressed with how comfortable and “high tech ” it was. Power windows all around, chimes instead of buzzers, and yeah, the cool radio that could seek AND scan. It seemed so different compared to the other car, a 78 Olds Cutlass with no bells and whistles just a cb radio, vinyl interior and rear windows that didn’t roll down.
“So while the Stanza looked like it belonged with the Accord and Camry and performed well enough, it always seemed to not quite make it.”
This comment was still true years later with my 92 Stanza. It was just not as refined as the Accord and Camry.
Just a minor quibble. Mauve – the color – is a purple/gray/beige mix, and the color of the car in the photo is not mauve. Maize, named for corn, or some other descriptor may be a better choice for the color. Or butter yellow, or such. French Beige is what Nissan called it, but then, one can call it whatever one likes.
The Stanza in the pictures has a hint of pink in the color. So does mauve. It does not like like yellow. Beige yes, yellow no.
In online color chips from automotive paint suppliers, Nissan French Beige does have an easily seen reddish tinge. “Pale mauve” could seem appropriate. Here’s a French Beige Z-car.
I actually don’t have pictures of the actual car on the internet – I looked, but I am sure there are some old ones somewhere in my folks’ boxes that I don’t have. I should have put the disclaimer out there on the pics – none of them are the mauve French Beige color. The Datsun Z in your comment is close though. It was a color I frankly never saw in another car after the Reagan administration.
My mom had one too, an ’85 sedan, our first Japanese car, which replaced a Dodge Aspen. So the reliability and quality of our Nissan was a revelation. I was also impressed with all of the thoughtful features and the space-efficient packaging, but that’s about as far as it went. It was boring to look at and even more boring to drive, with an engine that was positively gutless. It did its job well as a transportation appliance, but we didn’t miss it when it got replaced a few years later by an Olds Cutlass Ciera (we didn’t miss that one either).
I distinctly remember Car and Driver noting their five-speed ’82 Stanza accelerated to 60mph faster than the fastest manual-trans Pontiac Trans Am available that year (with the carbureted Chevy 305 V8). My mom’s ’82 had the three-speed automatic though (a delayed-availability option that year) which didn’t mate with the 2L four very well. Acceleration was very lethargic at low revs but became brisk at higher RPM, then fell off a cliff with each upshift.
Exactly our experience with the automatic Stanza we had. Slow off the line – little torque. But it moved once it got going until the next shift. My sense is Japanese car makers hadn’t really figured out automatic transmissions to match what the American makers offered.
I should have mentioned that the Stanza did have some neat features – one, which I have never seen in another car, was the front door arm rests on both sides had covers that revealed storage underneath. It was a handy place to put change and other small items you wanted at hand. The Stanza we had was “loaded” for the time – and was the first car I ever drove with cruise control.
Very interesting, because the Stanza I drove was to replace my own ‘81 Chevy 305 powered 4 speed TransAm, and the 5 speed Stanza didn’t seem quick. Despite low HP and probably poor drag strip numbers the V8, even at its emission-controlled nadir, had mid-range oomph that no carbureted sub-2-liter Japanese OHC four of the time could match.
R&T’s review had the Stanza doing the 0-60 in 11.1 seconds. That’s pretty quick for 1982 or so. Faster than a Cosworth Vega, FWIW.
I wouldn’t be surprised if that was also quicker than a 305 F body from that vintage.
What the market wanted during the early 1980s was pertinence for Personal Luxury Cars. Instead of a long hood, opera windowed, gew-gaw conveyance, the market was seeking atonement for frivolously driving fashion mobiles. Most of us were aware of our 1970s indulgences but were not in the market for new vehicles just yet. We saw gas prices triple and quadruple in cost and worried about getting to work.
These cars made a statement for their new owners. They would be seen as rejecting Detroit’s offerings. Rejecting gas guzzling bloating cars. Rejecting the frivolous over-powered cars rusting on the roads. Buyers want a new way to stand out from the crowd. During these years, the market swung towards severe, functional, efficient and imported cars.
I believed at that time, and still do, that these vehicles were a breath of fresh air. These cars brought to the market a new design language that focused on form over fashion. Simple could be beautiful and these cars were. Having these kinds of experiences with this era’s cars causes me to be biased towards them. I cannot speak for younger drivers and auto enthusiasts so I don’t know how these designs aged in their eyes.
I don’t believe that Nissan was trying to create a boring car. I see it as a car in the mode of the era. Compared to an old Malibu, it was a pretty good choice in 1983.
Completely agree that car buyers in the early/mid 80’s were looking for very different things than similar buyers a decade earlier. “Modern” design from that era was, indeed, about function over fashion. And the results were, in many ways, better cars than the ones they replaced. The Stanza didn’t inspire a lot of passion, but it was functionally a far better family vehicle than the one it replaced. The ’72 Malibu was a coupe with a 350 V8 – swoopy styling, hard to access back seat and oddly shaped trunk. It looked “cool”, but was inefficient of space and energy. The Stanza handled far better and felt way more modern in its ride and handling.
I guess, what is interesting to me – as someone who came of age when all of these changes happened – is how individual choices and expectations were shaped by the evolutions in design and performance. My dad loved his Stanza – it was small enough to fit in his garage, was fuel efficient and felt “sporty” instead of ponderous. He never complained about the car – and, frankly, comparing it to the 1976 Cutlass I drove, it was a HUGE improvement. All within 7 model years. That was a tremendous change in a short amount of time. And it was dislocating from the corporate C suite to the street corner. What made so many cars comparatively successful – vehicles like the Chrysler K cars and its derivatives, for example – was the sense that you could buy a modern, efficient vehicle that could do everything the older models did with less waste and cost. In an era of economic dislocation, those were important selling points.
So funny that your family replaced your 70’s era Malibu with a Stanza. We did, too! A ’76 Malibu to an ’83 Stanza. I thought the Stanza was the best car I had ever seen at the time—a digital radio readout, seek/scan, cruise control, etc…I also thought it had good giddy up in 3rd gear (we had a 5 speed manual trans). I got to take it out on dates and for it’s time it was a nice car.
Mom had a ’85 Stanza 5 speed, fuel injection. Had the red velour interior with a sort of dark red exterior color. Very reliable and seemed to have plenty of power for the times. Drove from SoCal to Washington state and it pulled very well up the steep mountain passes on the long drive. It was nearly totaled by a motorcycle once, but after the repairs still drove fine. Did develop a coolant leak shortly afterwards, turned out the head had been cracked in the accident. Insurance replaced the head and told her the car would have been totaled had the crack been discovered before the bodywork had been completed.
I think these were the first Datsuns / Nissans I didn’t remember from when they first came out. Looking at them in 2020, they have a really clean look. The notchback / trunkback has a bit of an Oldsmobile Firenza look out back, but not in a bad way.
I have seen the three-door hatchback given away as a prize on the original, 1980s version of the game show “Press Your Luck”. It was the most basic Stanza they could offer, with radial tires and California emission as the only options.