(first posted 10/13/2016) The November 1996 issue of Car and Driver also served up “Short Takes” and “First Drives” on some of the new products arriving for 1997 from Asian makes, including the Honda Prelude SH, Mitsubishi Diamante, Hyundai Tiburon and Mitsubishi Mirage. Was there anything to catch your fancy?
American Honda was starting to stumble a bit with nomenclature in the 1990s, primarily at Acura (CL, TL, RL blah, blah, blah), but also in some ways even at Honda. Thankfully Honda’s sporty coupe still wore the Prelude name, but added SH to designate the new “Super Handling” edition. The problem with SH for me is that I’ve always heard it used as a “polite” abbreviation for s**t. The Prelude SH*t is not so good. To be fair, Toyota is equally guilty of bad acronyms: Toyota Racing Development being shortened to TRD (aka turd) is no better.
As Car and Driver points out, this 5th generation Prelude bore a striking resemblance to the 3rd generation (1988 – 1991). I owned (and loved) a 1988 Prelude Si, and this car really does look like an update on that design, both inside and out. I also owned (and liked) a 4th generation 1992 Prelude, which I thought was beautiful and flowing outside, but the interior and dash were bizarrely Buick Regal-like. No question the 1997 car was certainly a conservative return to the classic Prelude “look.” Problem was, who wanted a car in 1997 that looked like one from the 1980s?
Contrary to C&D’s assertion that Baby Boomers needed to be pried out of minivans so they could get a sporty Honda coupe, the real issue for the Prelude wasn’t family haulers, it was SUVs and the emerging Cute-Utes. These vehicles featured the newly stylish “off-road” looks, and that was the statement buyers increasingly wanted to make with an “image” vehicles. Sporty was “out,” go-anywhere functionality was “in.” Screaming V-Tec engines and excellent handling weren’t enough to compensate. Also, the $26,000 ($39,912 adjusted) price tag placed the Prelude in a pricey and very small market segment. Little wonder, then, that this generation of Prelude would be the last.
The Diamante was a good example of the homogenization in the Japanese market. Yes, it was better than its predecessor, attractive in an anodyne way, comfortable enough to be a Lexus ES, but… snooze. The market leaders from Toyota, Honda and Nissan could still get away with utterly boring near-luxury sedans from their upscale divisions, but pretenders in that segment, like Mitsubishi, were toast. At this point, buyers wanted a recognizable brand name on their premium pablum.
During the 1990s, Hyundai seemed to simply copy Japanese designs that were a few years old, much like the 1970s for some of the Japanese makes (Toyota, Datsun especially) that seemed to copy (on a smaller scale) recent U.S. designs. Unlike the Japanese in the 1970s, Hyundai’s reputation for quality was still dirt. These cars sold on low price and were seen as pretty disposable, even when new. Not much different than the Scoupe that the Tiburon replaced.
Here’s another completely forgettable Japanese car from 1997. The most memorable aspect of the car from what I can see is the seat upholstery, and not necessarily in a good way… One point in the Mirage’s favor: even the least expensive (Mirage started at $12,000–$18,421 adjusted), most forgettable Japanese cars were still quite competent. However, just as with the Mitsubishi Diamante, many buyers were more attracted to the more established brand names in small cars from Toyota, Honda and Nissan.
What a difference a decade makes. In 1987, the most excitement in the U.S. market seemed to be coming from Japanese brands. However, through the 1990s, Conservatism and cost cutting had crept in and the products were far less exciting, though still excellent in many ways. For well-priced, well-built cars in 1997, it was hard to beat the Japanese brands, and they happily increased their stronghold on car buyers in the middle of the American market.
I remember being smitten by the original Diamante, but this one was just dullsville to me, even though it seems to have been the better car. Something by Mitsubishi needed a bit of a wow factor to get buyers’ attention, and this car just didn’t have it.
I completely ignored Hyundai and Kia then, and would have laughed at the idea that anyone could take them seriously. And here I am in 2016, having been a happy Kia owner for 5 years.
J P Cavanaugh
I 100% agree with what you said about the Mitsubishi Diamonte’.
The original was on par with the Acura Legend, Lexus ES, Mercedes-Benz E-class, BMW 5 series etc. However the second follow up model-was a bore fest. It missed every mark that made the original awesome.
It’s like when Mazda went from the beautiful 929 of 1992, to the forgettable bland Mazda Mellenia. Same fate as the Diamonte’.
I have to disagree with your assessment of the 929 & Millenia – the first 929 was “oh ok, Mazda’s in too with the big car thing”; the second was considerably more styled; but the Millenia was WOW…especially the drop in the rear quarter panel. Still a beautiful design 20+ years later…
Having been a happy Hyundai Elantra owner for about a year and a half, I couldn’t agree with you more. I told one of my friends the night before I bought it that I would’ve laughed at buying a Hyundai once, but I’m not laughing now. It’s a nice little car with an absolutely outstanding ownership experience attached. Hyundai knows what they’re doing and they’ll have the #4 or higher in the segment quickly after joining it. The G90 is an even nicer car with an even nicer ownership package. They’ve been an excellent corporate citizen in the USA, and are about to expand and build the Genesis G80 in Alabama. I would love for my next few cars to be Hyundais or Geneses. Copy the Lexus model: make a really nice car and then make it nice to own.
“Was there anything to catch your fancy?”
Not one single car mentioned above.
The only cars that caught my attention at that time was the Dodge Intrepid, Dodge Stratus, Oldsmobile Intrigue & Aurora. I was still happily motoring along in our 1990 Acclaim.
That’s all, Folks!
Zachman
To this day, it puzzles me why the Dodge Intrepid with the advance cab forward design has not been placed as a design advancement. I had a 1993 All black ES, let me tell you that car had the trunk size, and interior room (especially the back seats). That would rival a long Cadillac or Lincoln. With fog lamps, the front end looked menacing and evil. I have not seen a single one on the road now for many years.
Once again nothing from this era interests me. Not even these. Guess I’m just weird.
I am surprised to find so much disdain for 90s cars here. To me, 90s cars were the first ones since 60s cars that would start, drive and run right and which allowed you to drive without being constantly reminded of the engineering tradeoffs made to pass emissions or CAFE requirements.
70s cars were dog-slow with crude but complex emissions systems that made drivability problematic. Dieseling, knocking, hesitation and hard starting were parts of daily life. 80s cars had gotten mostly past the drivability hurdles, but were still dog-slow because of too-small engines mated to badly-geared final drive setups. Cars that couldn’t stay in top gear going up a moderate grade on the interstate and terrifying times on highway entrance ramps were the norm, certainly on anything of any size.
But almost everything I have driven from the 90s starts right up, is geared nicely, runs smoothly and has enough power for most normal people. The interaction of engine, transmission and final drive were once again back in sync. In fact, the 90s cars do what 60s cars did, only without the need for frequent labor-intensive tuneups, and getting much longer life out of most components. I even found the styling better than the harsh angularity that had become the norm in the 80s.
So, I guess I am in the minority. Not like my car tastes have ever put me there before . . . 🙂
When the 90’s cars were new, sure they were better than what had come before. But now they are a lot more troublesome. I completely trust my 74 Impala to take a cross country tour with minimum fuss. I would not trust a computer controlled 20 plus year old car from the 90’s for the same journey regardless of it’s supposed superiority. I can adjust things on the Impala. If the 90’s car takes a crap on me I have to pay for a wrecker and expensive troubleshooting at a shop that could completely exhaust whatever funds I’ve saved for the vacation. I just don’t like that feeling of helplessness. I KNOW I can fix anything that goes wrong on the Impala myself. As for styling, to each their own, I just happen to be a three box straight edge kinda guy. I don’t like all those swoopy curves. They do nothing for me.
I dunno, my ’95 Explorer was dead nuts reliable, even at 350,000 miles. The transmission finally died in it for the second time, and I was bored with the thing after 15 years of ownership. It was slightly less reliable than my 77 Chevelle, and got about the same gas mileage. Both cars I’d trust to go cross country in a heartbeat though. The Ford made lots of trips to Colorado, and under my stewardship, the 77’s been from N. Texas to North Carolina, to Florida, to Houston, back home to N. Texas, and been as far west as San Angelo, TX, as far north as Kansas/Oklahoma line. 100,000 miles of mostly trouble free driving.
If you knew me, you’d know I’m not that lucky. Of course being a cheapskate who does not like paying more than a few hundred dollars for a car I wouldn’t be buying the best quality 90’s car anyway. If I let go of a few thousand bucks maybe I could get a better one that would be reliable. But I don’t like ’em enough to do that. And you had a truck. They basically for the most part last longer than car’s because of heavier duty components.
I’d much rather take a computer controlled car cross country, because I don’t have to pull over and “adjust things” when I get into the Rocky Mountains, and pull over and readjust again after the elevation drops.
I’m with you on styling, but in my perfect world I want the old straight line looks chrome bumpers and al a carte options, but with the MPFI, VVT and all that stuff that adjusts stuff right and consistently. Being the 10 year owner of a daily driven now 22 year old 90s car, computer hardware failure is literally the last of my worries with it. It’s actually the being able to find mechanical wear components of good quality.
To each their own..
I think the point is that if anything goes wrong on the electronics, unless you have some form of plug-in analyzer and know how to use it, there is _nothing_ you could do to repair, and even if you did, it is very likely that you will not be able to find the offending electronic gizmo (replacement will be the only option in most cases) given that those are never kept on the shelf for long. With carb/points etc. you have a fighting chance to at the very least crawl somewhere you can sort out the problem.
Plus if you, like I, have spent your entire driving time with the “old” technology you just automatically “know” what the issue is when something starts acting funny. And as you said it’s adjustable. And can visually be checked. For example if you think it’s fuel starvation, you can unscrew the fuel filter for a flow check and remove the top of the carb to check the float bowl and also see if any trash is in the jet, etc., etc. Can’t do that if the intank pump of FI fails.
I also think that there were a lot of interesting and desirable cars from the 1990s (not necessarily the cars covered in this post, but plenty of others).
Seems to me that some of the disdain might be the “20 year” cycle at work. Cars of this vintage are now just used-up and out-of-style in most every way, but aren’t yet old enough or rare enough to rekindle the fond memories of the era. Ironically, even if consumer love for these product returns at some point down the road, I think that there will be few, if any, around to collect and/or restore, because of the increasingly complicated electronic systems and the lack of replacement parts.
“Seems to me that some of the disdain might be the “20 year” cycle at work. Cars of this vintage are now just used-up and out-of-style in most every way, but aren’t yet old enough or rare enough to rekindle the fond memories of the era. Ironically, even if consumer love for these product returns at some point down the road, I think that there will be few, if any, around to collect and/or restore, because of the increasingly complicated electronic systems and the lack of replacement parts.”
Agree fully with both points.
This decade focused on things-gone-wrong at the expense of things-gone-right. It was the first decade to do so and that continues today, in many segments.
Also car styling hasn’t changed much in the last 20 years. We are bored to tears.
Actually, I agree with your observation. I only had one 1990’s car back in the 1990’s, my awful 1991 Mercury Topaz. Unlike my 70’s and 80’s cars, it never left me stranded anywhere. However, it was a pile of excrement that I couldn’t wait to be rid of. The other 90’s cars that I had (a couple of GM J-bodies) were cockroach like in their willingness to run and take my abuse, particularly my Sunfire GT.
That’s a great observation.
No I am a fan of cars from the 1980’s and 1990’s. I think the 1970’s were a bland decade when it came to cars with the exception of a few models. I remember when I got my first fuel injected car. It was a 1990 Ford Escort with the CFI(throttle body mounted fuel injector), it started up all the time and I did not need to warm the car up to move it. No carb to pull out the rosary and pray it would start and run fine without issue.
Cars were sleek, HP was up thanks to fuel injection and better engine management(something that is happening to this day) and thanks to the design dynamics that were changed by the Taurus, Audi and others, a lot of cars from the 1990’s still look fresh and would not look out of place with new cars on a car lot.
I’d have to agree. In the ’90s you didn’t have to tip toe around the dreck in the showrooms like you did in the ’80s. There were a lot of vehicles that drove nicely, had decent power, and were reasonably reliable. The industry, particularly the domestics, had engineering that had caught up with fuel economy and emission requirements while producing a good owner experience.
Heck, I bought a ’95 Chrysler Concorde 3.5 and lived to share that I enjoyed the experience.
J P Cavanaugh
You are correct again in the way you broke it down man.
As a person that is a fan of the late 80’s and 90’s cars. I’m stunned that many people do not appreciate the major technical car advancement that took place in these era’s that made it possible for the cars we drive today. Like the 1986 Buick Riviera CRT in dash computer. Experimenting the digital dash boards that used L.E.D. back lighting, and fiber optics in dash lighting. Toying with Airbags on certain models like the 1986 Ford Tempo offered it as an option. Gradually perfecting ABS, Traction control, and AWD. In the 80′ it seemed like the car designers were learning more and more how to match the correct performance tires with the right performance engine/suspention etc.
Fuel Injection started off shaky in the early 80’s, but had drastically improved by the end of the 80’s. The fact that car makers were forced to learn how to make lighter cars, better crash resistant crumple body frames.
So many gems came out of the late 80’s and 90’s.
Turns out it wasn’t the “broody Boomers” but their kids who appreciated what the sporty Hondas of the late ’90s had to offer. Of course, they couldn’t buy one new, especially the top-of-the-line Prelude, so they were rare even at the height of the tuner era because there weren’t many to be had. Basically it was a fuelie ’57 Chevy compared to the Civic’s being a 265/’glide one.
Remember when Mitsubishi was relevant?
Pepperidge Farm Remembers.
Principaldan
You are right about the Mitsubishi, they use to be the go to import if you wanted style. Now it’s like Mitsubishi who. So I’m new to this curbsideclassic chats and addicted to them now. I noticed you’re well thought out comments on several boards when I went to the older retro write ups.
Could you do me a favor, I would like to know your thoughts on the 1989-1991 Cadillac Seville STS. I responded to something you wrote on the STS story.
Thanks,
I considered, and still consider, that last generation of Prelude as more of a timeless, than a dated design. Understated, nothing faddish, with no bad viewing angles. Still on my short list of desired older cars. Too bad they were so expensive, and so rare.
Me too. Ultimately the 91-96 looked more “nineties” with it’s curvy rounded lines, but it’s rigidly tied to that decade, and to my eye only really looks attractive in the vacuum of it’s contemporaries. The 97 does look timeless, it could probably be plopped right into a decade before and a decade after and still look right.
CC Effect. I saw a white Prelude of this generation earlier this week… sporting a fart can muffler.
Yeeesh! 🙁
Of all the cars listed here in ’97. I still like the Diamonte, but don’t fit behind the wheel, and I’d probably rep a Prelude. But given my preferences, a 97 Explorer with a V8 would be my chariot. I had a 95 V6 Explorer, which the engine was fairly bulletproof, but the transmission was the weak point, I loved the size and capabilities though.
Its a shame the Diamante didn’t catch on, my brother in law had one he bought new, and it was a really nice car. And quite the bargain.
Apparently I’m the only one feeling the love for the first gen Tiburon. Somewhere in my archives, I have a pic of my (then six-year old) daughter popping out of the sunroof of one of these. It was some promotion at a local shopping mall; she thought the car was “cute”. I have to agree, looking at the smiley face on the front, it does seem to possess a personality. At least it wasn’t scary clown looking like recent Mazdas…
I also liked these cars back in the day, they were a good value as opposed to the slightly earlier Hyundais, which could be incredibly good value purchases. Hyundai was starting it’s upmarket march about this time, and cars like this were the stepping stones on that pathway.
Unfortunately, when these cars were released, I was in no position to get one. I like small coupes like these. But, two small kids at home and two paid off cars in the driveway were big incentives to keep my wallet in my back pocket. Now, these have all but vanished from the Earth, especially here in Western Michigan.
The last one I saw for sale was a couple of years ago in front of a local Chinese restaurant (of all things). It was definitely driven, but not totally neglected. The rust monster had not completely ruined the car, I thought there might be a few years of life left in it. By the time I seriously thought about looking at it, it had been sold. I haven’t seen another one of this generation since.
+1 on the Tiburon. I too really liked that car.
Back in ’97, I was looking for a replacement commuter car (an ’88 5.0L V8 T-Bird with 236K on the clock), and took one for a test drive. It was fun to drive with a 5 speed stick, and I seriously considered it for my daily drive. But at the time, my drive to work was 57 miles or more, one way, in sometimes (more like most of the time) awful traffic, and decided a stick shift car with potentially serious NVH as it aged probably wasn’t a good choice for me.
I drove across the street and bought another Thunderbird.
My folks bought a brand new ’98 Tiburon while I was in college. They got plenty of use out of it, and it was a fun little car for what it was. They ended up giving it to my sister when they replaced it about 10 years later. It just gave up the ghost a couple of months ago, and she replaced it with…a ’99 Tiburon FX.
I’ve owned 4 or 5 70s cars and4 or 5 90s cars, and all were reliable. The worst of the lot was a 76 280Z and that was because the car had spent a fair amount of time in the “rust belt”. Aside from the rusted frame rails, the wiring was crumbling from corrosion.
My favorites? A 74 914 and a 92 Infiniti G20.
About these cars, I would have considered the Hyundai attractive but a chancy proposition. The Mitsus? The last few days I’ve seen a few Mirages from the generation pictured and they seem like a decent and cheap substitute for a Civic.
I had a burgundy 2000 2 door Mitsu Mirage (this was of the same generation as the 97) as a winter beater car two years ago before I bought the Caddy. It was a 5 spd version with all the toys and had 180,000 miles on the odometer. It still looked good and it ran like a champ. The manual transmission was one of the best I had ever driven with a good clutch pedal feel and a nice shifter.
The only issues I had were the wiper motor went bad ($15 at the pick a pull yard and 15 mins to replace), a bad drivers door sensor($7 brand new and 2 mins to replace) and a rusty oil pan that leaked( no cost to me as the dealership I got it from did it under warranty)
I sold it to a friend and it is still on the road today. it was an attractive car and the coupe seemed to mimic the looks of the Civic coupe while the sedan looked like the same era Mazda Protégé.
I had totally forgotten that there was ever a Diamante wagon. Those couldn’t have sold more than a few thousand, if that.
There are cars in every decade worth owning. Some decades have more than others. The 90’s on average would be better than the 80’s. Of those listed here I would take the Prelude hands down. Conservative styling? Must be old as the Prelude looks fine and has exactly what I like. A crisp, taut handling car that is quick and small.
Bought a 2001 Mitsubishi Mirage DE in 2005 and drove it until 2011 when the engine started making alarming noises at 88000 miles or so. It was rear-ended by a pickup so I never got to diagnose the noise but it was an alright little sedan. Radio broke 2 times and the fuel injectors failed but it had ice cold AC and wasn’t bad on gas. Decently quick too!
Unlike many here, each one of these cars from the post has a certain appeal to me, and I have some limited experience with each one.
The final Preludes were very nice cars, and boy did I ever want one. I really liked the chunky looks, and found them to be of vastly higher quality than the concurrent Integra GS-R’s. Problem was, they were crazy expensive, and I had just bought a 1995 Celica GT coupe two years prior. I was not willing to up the car payment further than what I was already dealing with on the also not cheap for the times Celica. Several years later, my boss owned a 2000 SH. He had owned two Preludes prior (1986 and 1989, as well as a 1992 Integra that he hated) and was very adamant that, although he loved the improved performance, the maintenance costs on this particular one was way more than he was expecting and used to. That trick SH differential was the big money item, and they would fail around 90k. The other problem was rust; he had a heated garage and a pressure washer at home, and the rear fenders still got ate up with terminal cancer around year 7. As for why these ended up being the last of the line, when the new 1998 Accord coupe hit the scene, the writing was on the wall. V6 power, lower price, more usable space, better appointments… Not hard to see how they withered on the vine after that.
The second generation Diamante is the the true dark horse of this group; Very quick for the class, bigger than most competitors, and dealers willing to deal. Car and Driver did a comparison of 8 or so near luxury sedans in late 1997 with one of these, and they placed it third behind a Volvo 850 they thought was rigged, and the then new Lexus ES. The mentioned how it, by far, had the most comfortable interior and was practically made for long distance cruising, and was a bit of a rocket. A little wallowy, and no real cachet, but an astounding value. My best friend was looking at replacing an MN12 Cougar for one around 2005. We both thought it was a great replacement, and supremely competent. She would have bit the bullet if the dealer offered a reasonable amount on trade; if I remember correctly, they would not budge above $700 for a 1997 with only 80,000 miles, in good, unrusted shape.
The Tiburon was very stylish to me in a way at the time. I really liked the folded and creased look the fenders had, and that first year they came out, you could get one in a really nice shade of deep metallic purple. I halfheartedly checked them out, and was pleasantly surprised. That was the first car where I took Hyundai seriously. It was nowhere near nice enough for me to trade the Celica off, but I certainly saw the value in one; Choose a Civic LX coupe, or a faster, loaded Tiburon FX with a better warranty? That car, along with the 1995 Accent, and the 1996 Elantra really were the first coming of Hyundai being a first tier automobile manufacturer in my mind.
Cars from the 1990s hit a sweet spot for me. Well engineered. Not cartoonishly proportioned as they are now and reliable. They had not yet morphed into complete computer controlled madness we have today and the designs were friendly looking. Lots of glass to see well. The Japanese cars back then had nicely built interiors with good plastic. Not the junk plastic we see today.
I had a 2001 Prelude…great car. Very smooth and polished. Unfortunately, it was one of those cars you enjoyed, and then traded for something more practical, as it was somewhat inconvenient to use as a daily driver. Which is probably a big reason why there is no 2016 Prelude.
I really liked the final generation of Prelude. But as everyone has said they were really expensive. The generation before I absolutely detested. Too round, too soft and it had that ridiculous dash.
Honda lost a lot of momentum with that car. They recovered nicely going back to straight lines but it was too late. The segment was also in decline which didn’t help. In terms of design trends it’s almost like these two should have ben flip-flopped. The ’92 looked vaguely like an Olds Alero to me.
Calibrick
To me the model you showed was the one Prelude that I did not like. I thought the front looked too much like a birds beak. It reminded me of the Eagle vision (sister car of the Dodge Intrepid).
Oh I hated the generation I showed. Agree about the beak and the Intrepid similarity. It was a strangely “American” car inside and out, like they studied the market and gave us what we “wanted”. Honda should always just be Honda, that we will like.
In 1996, I was a “professional” test driver. My roommate and i would frequent lots to test drive pretty much anything we could get our hands on. On one such occassion, we drove the new 1997 Prelude. They only had the automatic on the lot, so that would have to do. The salesman was an idiot, he had no idea how the Sportshift auto worked. He would floor it from the line (to show us the acceleration) and as he got up to speed then he would slide it over intot he sportshift mode to illuminate the large “4” in the gauge cluster. When it was my turn to drive, and he sat in the right rear seat…. I made sure to show him (without telling him) how it was supposed to work.
This was also the year that I found out that Tiburon was Spanish for shark. Hyundai also did the media preview drives in Tiburon, CA. I believe I read that in Autoweek, as that’s what I had a subscription to at the time.
Wow, $34,000 for a Mitsubishi?! BTW that’s $51K today! FYI, a top-spec 2016 Outlander doesn’t even cost $34K in 2016 dollars!
And the Oprah comment by the review’s author is quite off-colors btw. I don’t think that could ride today.
I had to dig out the comparison test from Car and Driver I mentioned upthread after seeing your post (Feb. 1997).
As it turns out, Car and Driver assumed the Diamante would be pricier than in reality. The car they tested, with every option, was $32,330. Yes, a lot of money, but only the Ford Taurus SHO, Infiniti I30, and Saab 900 were cheaper out of the nine cars tested.
As I recalled, it was very fast. 8.1 seconds to 60, 16.3 seconds in the quarter mile. Only the SHO and a Volvo 850 GLT could beat those numbers (and C/D was pretty certain Volvo sent them a souped up ringer; it’s performance figures were miles ahead of the other cars with the second lowest power output).
The results fell as follows:
Saab 900 SE; 82 points
A three way tie between the Acura 3.2TL, Ford Taurus SHO, and Infiniti I30; 83 points
Mazda Millenia L; 84 points
Cadillac Catera; 86 points
Mitsubishi Diamante LS; 88 points
Volvo 850 GLT; 92 points
Lexus ES300; 95 points
Nothing too surprising here except the Infiniti and the Volvo to me. As already stated, there is a reason why the Volvo did not take first outright in the test, but I thought for certain the Maxima based Infiniti would fair better. Turns out, they hated the suspension tuning, being both rough and wallowy. It was made clear a Maxima SE was the better buy.
There was really nothing wrong with that first-gen Tiburon. It wasn’t outstanding in anyway, but they were decent cars, and proof of Hyundai’s upswing. They did make it uglier with that first-gen update in 2000 – those quad headlamps were hideous, as you can see here. But it was still a decent low-priced semi-sport coupe.
I had a few 90’s cars. A 90 Civic SI which I bought new and is still one of my favorite cars. A ’90 Dodge Caravan also bought new. I kept this through one transmission until it hit 165K. ’94 Cadillac Seville two years old, with 24k on the clock. This was my dream car and it was quite impressive, at least until it hit 100K and then the problems started. ’92 Nissan 300ZX with five speed. It was a seven year old, high mileage 160K car that had it’s engine professionally rebuilt. This was back when the Z had its own chassis and platform. That made it world class. It also made it quite expensive, but it was an impressive machine. I bought a seven year old Chrysler Town and Country LXI with 70K. It was a great family hauler until it hit 120K then the trans was replaced and it was never the same.
I bought a ten year old ’97 Acura CL w/four cylinder and five speed for my Son. It had 160K he took that to 216K before he gave it to me. This car had a lot of miles but ran like a champ. It was as plush as an ElDorado and I was really impressed by Acura. I got a 2004 TSX to replace it. Another outstanding Acura. I bought myself a ’96 Mustang GT which has been really good to me and it just hit 218,000 miles. I’m gonna hold onto this one for a while longer.
The 90’s was a good decade, cars had gotten much better, were faster, more economical, and more reliable. Now all I need is to find a nice Acura Legend Type Two coupe, and my 90’s experience will be complete.
Oh, I almost forgot my ’97 Jaguar XJ6. It was a beautiful car. I was impressed by it’s styling, interior and performance. Pretty well built compared to earlier Jags. I sold it to concentrate on my Mustang obsession.