Looking to buy a 4WD in good working condition

This forum is for cars that run, or at least are close to running. This isn't for parting out complete cars.
Borden
Newbie
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2021 3:09 pm

Looking to buy a 4WD in good working condition

Post by Borden »

for reasons that are deeply spiritual and mysterious, the 4wd Tercel has long been my dream car.
I'd like to buy one to use as a daily driver and potentially for longer road trips.
Ideally, I'd find one somewhere in North Eastern USA but I'm willing to travel or pay to have one shipped if it's in particularly nice condition.

I have more money than patience, so if you are on the fence regarding selling your Tercel I bet we can work something out.

Cheers!
User avatar
dlb
Highest Ranking Member
Posts: 7305
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 9:03 pm
My tercel:: '87 sr5, '83 dlx parts car
Location: bc, canada

Re: Looking to buy a 4WD in good working condition

Post by dlb »

There may be a very clean one coming up for sale. Here is the post on it.

viewtopic.php?p=114214#p114214
User avatar
rer233
Highest Ranking Member
Posts: 1013
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 1:49 pm
My tercel:: Multiple

Re: Looking to buy a 4WD in good working condition

Post by rer233 »

Where in the NE are you?
if it aint there, there's a good chance it won't break!
83 SR5 Silver/Blue (Snowmobile/work beater)-totaled but drivable
85 SR5 Blue
88 SR5 White (the 'good' one)-not anymore-totaled
87 fwd silver wagon a/t
87 4wd dx Cream (a/t- not anymore- now m/t)
Borden
Newbie
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2021 3:09 pm

Re: Looking to buy a 4WD in good working condition

Post by Borden »

Oh wow, I would be honored. I'll keep an eye on that thread to see how it progresses.

A couple of unrelated thoughts:
1) This car looks like it's in amazing shape, but it's pretty pricey (also far away). What do you folks think? https://inlandempire.craigslist.org/pts ... 40622.html

2) My partner has voiced some strong concerns about these things not having airbags. How can I convince her it isn't a needlessly dangerous vehicle? (Is it a needlessly dangerous vehicle?)

3) I'm in the Boston area.
User avatar
dlb
Highest Ranking Member
Posts: 7305
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 9:03 pm
My tercel:: '87 sr5, '83 dlx parts car
Location: bc, canada

Re: Looking to buy a 4WD in good working condition

Post by dlb »

Wow, that one in the link is clean. If it's as nice as it looks in the pics, I think that's a fair price.

Of all the people on this forum who have been involved in accidents, I don't recall anyone being seriously injured (or really hurt at all). That's a very small sample size but it's something. Also, it's not like everyone who was in a car accident pre-airbags died or was horribly mangled. Yup, new cars are definitely safer but it's not like older cars were rolling egg shells just waiting to be demolished.
User avatar
ALiveSR5
Top Notch Member
Posts: 164
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2020 7:58 pm
My tercel:: Was a stock 1985, SR5, 4WD, 6-speed manual, Wagon.
Location: Pennsylvania USA

Re: Looking to buy a 4WD in good working condition

Post by ALiveSR5 »

Borden wrote: Sun Aug 22, 2021 6:15 pm 1) This car looks like it's in amazing shape, but it's pretty pricey (also far away). What do you folks think? https://inlandempire.craigslist.org/pts ... 40622.html
That 1984 is in amazing condition. For price comparison, here are some window stickers from a brand new 1985 SR5:
~
Tercel_Window_Sticker_01.jpg
~
Tercel_Window_Sticker_02.jpg
No other vehicle that I have ever owned had a heart and soul like my 1985 Tercel SR5 4WD Wagon. :D
~
Great minds may think alike but it is the doers who see their visions become reality. :?
User avatar
Toyotise
Advanced Member
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2021 9:16 pm
My tercel:: 1983 4WD DLX. 1986 4WD SR5
Location: Arizona

Re: Looking to buy a 4WD in good working condition

Post by Toyotise »

Borden wrote: Sun Aug 22, 2021 6:15 pm Oh wow, I would be honored. I'll keep an eye on that thread to see how it progresses.

A couple of unrelated thoughts:
1) This car looks like it's in amazing shape, but it's pretty pricey (also far away). What do you folks think? https://inlandempire.craigslist.org/pts ... 40622.html

2) My partner has voiced some strong concerns about these things not having airbags. How can I convince her it isn't a needlessly dangerous vehicle? (Is it a needlessly dangerous vehicle?)

3) I'm in the Boston area.
I understand that desire / connection to the vehicle. They are the epitome of practicality frugality reliability humility and excellence.

The vehicle of the forum member who passed away would be a good choice if you get the opportunity. You can always find documentation on here as to how it was cared for. And I think appropriate to take into consideration it going to someone who continues its stewardship in the same spirit that the previous owner did. I believe you may be the correct person for the job if you’re considering spending $10,000 on a 35-year-old car.

1)
That Craigs(list)-ing appears a very clean example, but I’m not sure if it’s worth considering at that price point based on the mileage. Maybe if you could prove Engine/transmission was perfectly maintained and in perfect mechanical shape ( outward appearances are never a guarantee). Looks like it was garage kept and the interior was cared for by a grandma, but the engine and transmission are also driven by a grandma. Not everyone’s grandma grew up on a farm and has knowledge of keeping mechanical things working their best? But with that low mileage there’s not that much chance of something being over-worn mechanically, but still not worth the price point in my opinion.

This Facebook listing may be worthy of your consideration:
https://www.facebook.com/marketplace/it ... 78c2620107
I have not seen it in person, nor do I have relationship to the seller to vouch for it one way or another. I think for the price point that looks like a better value for the money and similar condition, with some period correct/ popular owner modification.

2)
You’ll never be able to justify that it doesn’t have airbags. That’s a hard decision to rationalize, especially when it’s the safety considerations of ones you love. If your wife isn’t comfortable with that risk, it is what it is; a slow thirty year old tin can compared to the monolithic vehicles on the road today. There’s always a CRV or RAV4 of a later model year (1990’s start airbags). Equally or more practical, EFI reliable, though not quite as endearing/ collectable. A low miles example from out west would give you plenty of reliable, easy to find parts, service.

3)
Get one from out west if you can.
Keep it Stock; Live Long.
Borden
Newbie
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2021 3:09 pm

Re: Looking to buy a 4WD in good working condition

Post by Borden »

All great advice. You guys have been extremely helpful, thank you.
User avatar
Petros
Highest Ranking Member
Posts: 11930
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 6:31 pm
My tercel:: '84 Tercel4wd w/extensive mods
Location: Arlington WA USA

Re: Looking to buy a 4WD in good working condition

Post by Petros »

I have a different take on the airbag issue, be prepared for a long rant on this topic. in short, both the industry and the government has been lying to you about the usefulness of airbags. To let you know my background I have a degree in Mechanical engineering and went into engineering because I loved everything about cars, and wanted to work in the industry designing cars. I have been a licensed professional engineer since 1986, and have run my own engineering consulting firm full time since 1994. If anything new revelations about airbags over the years it has only confirmed what I suspected all along about airbags. the primary reason for licensed engineers BTW, is for the sake of public health and safety. My observations and professional opinions on safety are considered in the courts as factual evidence.

I think I was in collage (1977-'82) when the air bag issue was debated in congress, no one in the industry wanted them and neither did consumers. it was shown that 3 point seat belts offered much better protection, and most all automakers were installing 3 point seat belts, along with padded dash and steering wheels, by the 1970s. But congress wanted to ignore the hard data, and decided to pass the law requiring airbags in all new cars starting in about 1991, and phased all cars and trucks in my 1997. Safety of cars had been improving since the early days, and they already had standards for cabin crush, roll over, seat belts, collapsible steering columns and a number of other recognized hazards, much of it learned from racing, but most of it from statistical studies amassed from data on fatal accidents. Improvements in suspension, brakes and tires, seat and cabin design, and 3-point seatbelts had been bringing down the number of deaths long before airbags were mandated by congress.

Since I had worked for several racing teams assisting with design and building race cars, including one factory backed professional team (for Nissan, back when they had a racing program, and much better cars) and worked designing turbo induction systems for production cars for AirReaseach, I knew something about the industry. Racing cars had already become very safe by the 1980s, deadly accidents were rather rare and newsworthy in racing, despite no airbags ever being used in race cars, and also despite their much higher speeds than typical road cars. Race cars have of course simple, but much better restraints (seat belt harness), and a stronger/better roll cage, and other measures, none of which ever included (to this day in fact) airbags.

There was very little actual data on the airbags ability efficacy in preserving life over what a modern car with three point seat belts could do. and as an engineer in the industry it seemed to me having an explosive device go off in the your face did not seem a very good way to keep a driver/passenger safe. Also, in most severe and deadly accidents, they typically involved multiple collisions, side impacts and roll overs, of which the airbags offered no benefit, and may also contribute to injuries and deaths. it seems to me a stupid and costly way to reduced deaths and injuries since the industry had a large body of evidence on how safety can be improved without the use of airbags. but like most all issues that congress takes up (both than, and still to this day), what the congress approves is based on what lobbyists offers the better bribe...er, ah, I mean "deal" to the elected officials. of course congress writes the laws on how they can be "legally" bribed, it is highly immoral, but it is legal. You know any laws are lies based on this legal bribery, to this day, when they pass a law mandating you to buy one product, rather than just setting a safety standard. for example, if safety is the actual goal, they would set a rational standard for accidents, that 95 percent of the occupants must survive a 30 mph collision (or what ever standard they choose), and let the industry determine how that will be achieved. but clearly when they just list the one product, that comes from one supplier, that you must buy, regardless of alternatives, you KNOW that is a crap lie of a law. And all the car manufacturers have found another rip off profit center, requiring you to ONLY buy dealer replacement airbags, and they can ONLY be installed by dealer mechanics (no DIY guys). so as far as the car makers, and the airbag maker is concerned, they get a "win-win", at our expense. there was no real follow up for many decades if safety was actually achieved, of course that is irrelevant when profits are to be made. So the propaganda machine rolls on, convincing consumers they actually WANT airbags, for safety.

Image

Note that the ONLY line that matters in this chart, is the red Deaths Per Billion Vehicle Miles traveled. all others are not important. Can you see any improvement after airbags became admonitory in 1997?

I read in a business magazine how the holder of the patent for the airbag got a law passed to force us to buy the airbags. The magazine praised the businessman, who could not get anyone to buy his invention, so did what all modern successful businessmen do, he got laws passed to force the public to buy them in every new car. He had gotten investors that would allow him to pay off congress with bribes. He used the money to make campaign contributions to key lawmakers, those who were the chairmen of the committees for the NTSB, the DOT and in charge of funding the US Transportation Department. and look! low and behold, these esteemed law makers suddenly saw the virtues of these newfangled air bag devices, and of course they passed this law to protect the innocent consumers from the evil car companies making unsafe cars. I hate everything to do with this kind of "marketing", getting the laws changed to force us to buy their crappy and unwanted product. this unfortunately is how and why we "get" all new congressional mandates, someone is making a lot of money off of it. I wanted to write the business magazine to tell them they should be ashamed of themselves for praising such despicable and abusive "marketing", it is not a "market" at all, but mafia marketing, getting the "muscle" of government to force us to buy into their corruption.

Anyway, my thoughts at the time were, that what ever their merits, like all other components in the car, they were subject to malfunctions, and eventual failures like everything else. When an explosive airbag malfunctions it could result in it causing a deadly accident, and recently we have found out that not only has this been true, but that many times when the metal canister of the devices itself disintegrates when it deploys, it can blast jagged metal sharpener into the face and neck of the driver and passages. All of the deadly accidents caused by their airbags was proven to be systematically covered up by both the government and the car makers in a massive lawsuit. the victims were paid off, and forced to sign non-disclose agreements. some of the malfunctions were rather gruesome and frankly quite horrifying. one young mother in a relatively minor fender-bender discovered her baby, properly in a car seat, was instantly decapitated right in front of her by the airbag. I can not imagine such a horrifying event, that poor woman likely will need psychiatric care the rest of her life. these kinds of deadly encounters were intentionally covered up for the sake of public safety (of course), because the "experts" decided you had no need to know about this kind of incident, but it might make air bags less popular (and of course we can not have that can we?), and they did not want consumer to think that getting into a modern car, surrounded by up to 16 explosive devices (waiting to go off) was unsafe. Of course not, nothing could go wrong with such a product designed for safety. how could anyone think getting into a metal cage with 16 explosive devices is unsafe?

It was YOUR government, and the car companies, that proceeded to hide these horrific events from the public. as if we had no right to know what we were forced to buy. after this incident became public, along with many others, the industry response was to add an "off" switch to the airbag. Not only too little too late, but if I do not want them, why the hell should we have to pay for them?

Safety they claimed, they can PROVE that lives are saved with the airbag. This is lawyer talk for lies, damn lies, and statistics. all along they played a statistical shell game with data, using only data showing improved safety after airbags were introduced, ignoring the long term data showing improved safety without airbags, and most maddening to me, they did not include, nor off set the presumed safety improvements, with the number of accidents, and deaths directly caused by the airbags malfunctioning. because those were not really car accidents. so it is not included. Nor have I ever seen alternatives to the use of airbags proposed, that could actually increase safety without the use of airbags at all. again, the hallmark of dishonest laws is when the product you are forced to buy is the standard, rather than the presumed reason for the device. Oh, I am sure there are some accidents where the airbags saved lives, but that is not an argument for them. You have to look at the whole picture, how many lives were lost because of them, and the costs as compared to alternatives (of which has never been done to my knowledge). the only option we have now is to turn off the airbag we do not want, you are not even legally allowed by law to remove the dangerous explosive device, no matter how old and unsafe it may become.

You all know how many airbags get recalled every year because of dangerous potential malfunctions, it seems it is in the news every year. I recall in one year Ford had to recall 17,000 brand new pick ups because the airbags could blow without warning. I can only imagine how that must improve driver safety, having a bomb go off in your face while driving down the hwy at 80mph. and of course everyone remembers a massive recall of many brands of cars that used the Takata airbags, that could kill you or at best disfigure your face when the canister turns to sharpness when it deploys. over 70 million cars were recalled. my daughter was driving one such car, it took months to get her car into a dealer for the correction. Truly that frightened me, I was ready to rip that POS out of my daughters car, I do not know what I would have done to the shithead geniuses who designed such a defective devices if my 23 year old daughter's face was disfigured by that airbag. that is a "safety" device that is worse than useless, but a real deadly hazard to your safety.

Safety in a car accident, as shown by the countless racing events around the world every weekend for many decades, is best achieved by good driver restraints in the car. if you really want to improve the safety of the Tercel, you can buy aftermarket four point seat belts and install them. a bit of a nuisance to use, but once in the habit of using them, you will not even think about it. that would be far safer than an explosive device. you can further enhance safety with a simple roll over bar behind the driver, also a nuisance but not really a big deal if you rarely use the rear seats. And of course, you can go the full cage, and even modern racing seats, and a racing steering wheel. and wear a crash helmet. all designed to improve driver safety at high speeds. though for normal highway speeds I doubt this would be necessary, but you can go way beyond what an airbag, and what most other cars can offer, for far less money.

Do not believe the lies and propaganda about the safety of airbags. Yes, older cars are less safe than newer ones, but you can make an older car much safer with some carefully planned DIY improvements.

Okay, rant over.
'87 Tercel 4wd SR5 (current engine swap project)
'84 Tercel 4wd (daily driver, with on going mods)
'92 Mazda MPV 4wd (wife's daily driver)
'85 Tercel 4wd DLX auto(daughter's daily driver)
'01 Honda Civic (other daughter's daily driver)
The Professor
Highest Ranking Member
Posts: 650
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 6:38 pm
My tercel:: 1987 Tercel SR5 4WD wagon
Location: Western Washington
Contact:

Re: Looking to buy a 4WD in good working condition

Post by The Professor »

Your licensed opinion is great and all, but as a mechanical engineer and journalist, I want to make an informed decision for myself. The only thing presented here is opinion and an unattributed graph. Where's the data to support your position?
1975 Subaru SuperStar wagon
1984 Subaru Turbo-Traction wagon & hardtop
1987 Subaru RX 3-door
1987 Subaru RX Type-RA 3-door
1987 Toyota Tercel SR5 wagon
1999 Subaru Forester S
2002 Subaru WRX sedan
2019 Subaru Outback 2.5i Limited
User avatar
Petros
Highest Ranking Member
Posts: 11930
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 6:31 pm
My tercel:: '84 Tercel4wd w/extensive mods
Location: Arlington WA USA

Re: Looking to buy a 4WD in good working condition

Post by Petros »

that chart is I believe from NTSB data. I can add a lot of links for sources of information, if you will actually go look at it. if you are unconvinced, no amount of data will change your mind.

It is a fact that the industry and the consumers were not interested, consider the auto airbag was patented in 1953, and modern sensor triggered airbag was patented in 1967. Yet they were not required by legal mandate until 1997. all dates that can be verified. the deaths per mile during that time had dropped by 60 percent or so, the contribution due to airbags after that date is difficult to separate. Where is the evidence to support airbags? I have not found any outside of industries that benefit from the government mandate.

the real problem is the lack of comparable data. there is not overwhelming evidence that they have improved safety, but nor it is possible to prove the opposite either since it is difficult to separate the data. As you know, the gold standard is a back to back study with a large control group without airbags, and one with them that shares the same driving habits, types of vehicles, miles, etc. Most other "evidence" I have seen is individual, or anecdotal incidences. not a valid basis for a study. if there is hard data from legitimate sources I would like to see it. to belittle my observations without any supporting evidence is not convincing.
'87 Tercel 4wd SR5 (current engine swap project)
'84 Tercel 4wd (daily driver, with on going mods)
'92 Mazda MPV 4wd (wife's daily driver)
'85 Tercel 4wd DLX auto(daughter's daily driver)
'01 Honda Civic (other daughter's daily driver)
Borden
Newbie
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2021 3:09 pm

Re: Looking to buy a 4WD in good working condition

Post by Borden »

You raise some compelling points about possible collusion.

My personal (uneducated) take is it could be a little of both. Airbags significantly improve safety, but their effect is overstated and the way they came to be mandated was shady.

This paper by the NHTSA seems pretty good (airbag stuff starts on p. 119).

The methodologies of two studies, in particular, seem sound to me.
In one, they controlled for other safety features by focusing on similar model years with and without airbags. In another, they focused on the period when airbags were common for drivers but not for the front passenger. Two people not only in the same exact car, but the same exact crash. One with an airbag, the other without. In this configuration, the front passenger was half-again as likely to die. That's pretty bad.

Another bit I find interesting about the paper is the mention of airbags being far less effective than the NHTSA predicted. Like, half as effective. Airbags were more or less useless in anything but frontal crashes. In my opinion, the fact that they published this stuff lends credibility to the paper.

Plus there's this fun video.
It's anecdotal, but I'm not interested in being impaled by a steering column.
User avatar
Petros
Highest Ranking Member
Posts: 11930
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 6:31 pm
My tercel:: '84 Tercel4wd w/extensive mods
Location: Arlington WA USA

Re: Looking to buy a 4WD in good working condition

Post by Petros »

that would be true for people without seat belts, I wonder how they controlled for those using seat belts vs. only airbags. Airbags would be a great improvement over nothing, at the time no state had mandatory seat belt laws, and I recall one of the arguments were the airbag was of most benefit to those who did not wear seat belts. I have no argument there, but that I do not think there is a way to show those who used both seat belts and airbags, and those who did not. Now when you drive on a public roads you have certain obligations as a driver, it took almost a decade before it occurred to the states to make using a seat belt as one of them. you get fined if you do not have your seat belts on , and that has contributed far more to lower the death rate than anything else. there are also warnings in every new car, that the airbag is a Supplemental Restrain System, and is not designed to be used without a seat belt. this always struck me as an odd legal loop hole, if I am required to wear seat belt by law, and the airbag does not offer protection without a seat belt, than why do I need the airbag?.

Also, do not get me wrong, I am not saying they have not contributed to safety. I am saying there are other, better and less costly ways to achieve better safety. And their contribution to saving lives I think is difficult to determine, and likely much less than claimed.

I do not like the idea of explosive devices around me in my car, I will be willing to wear a better restraint rather than have to buy airbags. but I do not have that choice unless I stay with older cars.
'87 Tercel 4wd SR5 (current engine swap project)
'84 Tercel 4wd (daily driver, with on going mods)
'92 Mazda MPV 4wd (wife's daily driver)
'85 Tercel 4wd DLX auto(daughter's daily driver)
'01 Honda Civic (other daughter's daily driver)
User avatar
splatterdog
Highest Ranking Member
Posts: 1623
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 10:26 am
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: Looking to buy a 4WD in good working condition

Post by splatterdog »

The best safety feature in your car is paying attention to yourself and EVERYONE else on the road that is trying to kill you(my motorcycle rule).

Also, it's hard to beat the visibility in a Tercel wagon. Add a panorama rear view mirror, now you have nearly a 360 degree view with only a glance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJxhb5VvxsY
The Professor
Highest Ranking Member
Posts: 650
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 6:38 pm
My tercel:: 1987 Tercel SR5 4WD wagon
Location: Western Washington
Contact:

Re: Looking to buy a 4WD in good working condition

Post by The Professor »

Petros wrote: Fri Aug 27, 2021 1:45 amAirbags would be a great improvement over nothing, at the time no state had mandatory seat belt laws, and I recall one of the arguments were the airbag was of most benefit to those who did not wear seat belts.
That's why we have airbags now, as a SRS (supplemental restraint system).

Clearly, one does not need an airbag to survive a car crash. Numerous motorsports crashes over the last few decades have demonstrated the requirements:

A solid chassis with a well-designed, welded steel roll cage
A solid, securely mounted seat, multi-point harnesses and a HANS restraint

In most cases, the above will prevent driver death, even when plunging off the side of Pike's Peak or being T-boned by a 12 -in. tree trunk.

Airbags for there to protect the lowest common denominator, the clowns who still don't wear seatbelts. If you want to complain about the rise of safety systems and electronic nannies, turn to your neighbor. They're likely the cause, not the manufacturer. The airbag/nanny/etc. we all detest is a regulatory reaction to human frailty and incompetence.

As for me, I love older cars. But I certainly don't want to crash one...

https://youtu.be/taXJ0u6tFrY?t=24 - '78 Tercel 35.28 mph frontal impact
https://youtu.be/NmDaXYf_9ic?t=457 - '20 Corolla 35 mph frontal impact
1975 Subaru SuperStar wagon
1984 Subaru Turbo-Traction wagon & hardtop
1987 Subaru RX 3-door
1987 Subaru RX Type-RA 3-door
1987 Toyota Tercel SR5 wagon
1999 Subaru Forester S
2002 Subaru WRX sedan
2019 Subaru Outback 2.5i Limited
Post Reply