First let’s finish up on our imported hot hatches from Friday:

Close one! And I was watching the votes on Friday – it was tied several times. I had a hunch the Honda City was going to end up winning, but apparently the Alto had enough of you singing a different tune to give it the win. So: Onward. There was a fad in the late 1990s and early 2000s that you may have noticed: Automakers jumped on the nostalgia bandwagon with both feet. Everything from the Mini Cooper to the Ford Thunderbird was given a retro makeover, and new models were introduced with old-school design elements. Some were wildly successful, some not so much. The two we’re going to look at today enjoyed huge popularity when they were first introduced, and in the intervening two decades have become fixtures on the used car market. Are they still worth a look, way down at the bottom of the depreciation curve? Well, let’s take a look and find out.

1998 VW New Beetle – $2,500

Engine/drivetrain: 2.0 liter SOHC inline 4, 5 speed manual, FWD Location: Portland, OR Odometer reading: 103,000 miles Runs/drives? Yep I confess I did not like the new VW Beetle when it was introduced. I think it was primarily because I am such a fan of the VW Golf, a no-nonsense hatchback that does so many things well. And here was a car on the same platform that was nothing but nonsense – all awkward proportions and wasted space. It just did nothing for me. But apparently it did something for a lot of car buyers who remembered the old Beetle fondly: VW had a hit on its hands. But the honeymoon was short-lived; the aging college professors and hippies who had been able to keep their old ’60s Beetles running with nothing but a flathead screwdriver and a John Muir book were suddenly faced with the reality of a modern Volkswagen and all its foibles.

But the New Beetle’s charm was great enough that it hung around for twelve years, before being replaced by a new New Beetle, which stayed in production until 2019. It’s a far cry from the original Beetle’s half a century run, but it’s nothing to sneeze at. The Beetle was offered with a few different engines over the years: This one has the standard garden-variety 2.0 liter naturally-aspirated four. It’s nothing special in the performance department, but it’s probably the most reliable of the bunch. [Editor’s Note: That black stripe the owner added on the bumper is interesting; I wonder if they were trying to emulate the black rubber strip – either tape or rubber – found on the simpler 1968 and up “Europa” bumpers ? I kinda like it. And I’ve always had a soft spot for these. My parents had a yellow turbo New Beetle, and it worked for a cute, tiny older couple zipping around in it, with a license plate that read YOLKSWAGEN. – JT)

This Beetle has only 103,000 miles under its belt, practically nothing for a twenty-four year old car. It looks pretty good, too: I see one scrape in one door, but no other damage, and the interior looks clean. We don’t get much information about its mechanical condition, but it has current registration, which bodes well. A buyer would probably find a few things that need fixing (it is a late ’90s Volkswagen, after all), but it looks like a respectable little car.

I’m personally still not sold on the New Beetle’s styling, but I’m coming around, especially for prices like this. Secondhand Golfs are still more appealing, but Beetles are easier to find. If I were ever to return to my water-cooled VW days, which I have threatened to do a few times, a Beetle like this wouldn’t be a terrible choice. At least they made it a hatchback.

2003 Chrysler PT Cruiser – $2,300

Engine/drivetrain: 2.4 liter DOHC inline 4, 4 speed automatic, FWD Location: Clackamas, OR Odometer reading: 98,000 miles Runs/drives? Sure does We’ve talked about the Chrysler PT Cruiser before. In fact, it was the subject of the very first Shitbox Showdown that I wrote, back in April (which feels like either last week or ten years ago). I’m a fan of the PT; despite the unorthodox styling and baffling NHTSA classification as a truck, what it really is is a small tall station wagon, and there’s nothing wrong with that.

All PT Cruisers in the US were powered by a 2.4 liter four, or turbocharged variant thereof. This one lacks the turbo, and it also lacks a clutch pedal (sorry). Out of the more than one million PT Cruisers sold, I would wager that the majority were equipped with the naturally aspirated engine and the automatic. Nothing wrong with it, but small cars are more fun with manuals. But hey, you can’t have everything.

What this particular example does have to offer is an odometer still on five digits (barely). It’s an early model, with the ugly gray plastic bumpers, and they haven’t weathered the years too well. The paint looks great, however. With this few miles, I suspect, and hope, that the seat covers and dash covers and big rubber floormats are precautionary, and the seats and dash look like new underneath. I could be wrong – it could be trashed, but I doubt it.

There isn’t much information to go on, again, so a careful inspection is a good idea, as well as a timing belt change if there is no record of it being done already. The only thing that worries me a little bit is that it looks like more than one wheel has a missing lug nut. I’d like to know what the story is there. With that caveat, this looks like a decent deal on a reasonably good car. I know a lot of you will take one look at these and say, “Ew, neither.” But set aside the hokey nostalgic styling, and what you’ve got here are two pretty decent little cars. Sure, you’d have to be seen in them, but for cars this clean and low-mileage, I think I’d be willing to make the sacrifice. What say you, Autopians? Which cheesy retro-mobile do you choose?  

(Image credits: Craigslist sellers) I worked with a guy who was a Type A project manager who never backed down from an argument and used to regularly get involved in road rage incidents. One time, he got a new beetle as his rental car. It was hilarious watching this aggressive jerk in a “chick car”. It was just such a dichotomy – angry aggressive male/cute friendly car. No matter how aggressively he drove, people would just smile and wave at him. So I’m going with the VW on this one. The 2.slow might not be the best engine for fun, but at least it’s durable and reliable. The original was very affordable, had economical fuel consumption, and was simple to repair. The looks of the New Beetle were reminiscent of the original, but that was about it. It was pricey compared to similarly sized cars, it wasn’t particularly fuel efficient, and mechanically it was… well, it was a late ’90s VW. Some original Beetle drivers dove in because the looks reminded them of their old cars (and now had the disposable income to spend on it), but many were upset because the new car didn’t exhibit what they loved about their originals — to them, it felt like a superficial imitation. It would be like if Toyota were to come out with a “New Prius” that’s kinda-sorta shaped like the original but starts at $45k and pulls 25mpg. Anyway, this was a tough choice for me. I’m aware of their limitations, and I certainly would prefer a stick shift, but in the end the PT Cruiser wins it for me because it would be more useful. The interior of both of these, while well-preserved, was never any good at all, but I genuinely prefer four-doors, and I like having cargo space. The Bug might be slightly more fun to drive, and might have barely edged out the PT Cruiser if it weren’t white. And since they’re both shitboxes that I can expect to spend time under the hood with, I bet the Chrysler is cheaper and easier to work on. Yes; I am damning with very faint praise. I want to do a psychedelic ’60s style paint job on an odd-style vehicle. This VW is that rare combination of cheap enough to do whatever you feel with it, and enough life in it that you’ll get to drive it around and show it off. The PT would be appropriate for that kind of paint foolishness, too, but the advantages of better utility don’t apply in this situation. On the other hand, I have no experience at all with the “new” Beetles, but manuals are usually more fun and my daughter loves these things, so Slug Bug White from ALL CAPS CRAIGSLISTER is what I’d take my chances with this round. Stick > automatic. The convertible was so popular that Nissan copied it to make their CrossCabrio 😛 But even as a NA 4-door, it’s better than any VW of the time. The PT Cruiser is not a great car, but at least has more usable space and seems to be in absurdly good shape.

Low Mileage Retro Mobiles  1998 VW New Beetle vs 2003 Chrysler PT Cruiser - 29Low Mileage Retro Mobiles  1998 VW New Beetle vs 2003 Chrysler PT Cruiser - 44Low Mileage Retro Mobiles  1998 VW New Beetle vs 2003 Chrysler PT Cruiser - 74Low Mileage Retro Mobiles  1998 VW New Beetle vs 2003 Chrysler PT Cruiser - 49Low Mileage Retro Mobiles  1998 VW New Beetle vs 2003 Chrysler PT Cruiser - 20Low Mileage Retro Mobiles  1998 VW New Beetle vs 2003 Chrysler PT Cruiser - 22Low Mileage Retro Mobiles  1998 VW New Beetle vs 2003 Chrysler PT Cruiser - 55Low Mileage Retro Mobiles  1998 VW New Beetle vs 2003 Chrysler PT Cruiser - 40Low Mileage Retro Mobiles  1998 VW New Beetle vs 2003 Chrysler PT Cruiser - 96Low Mileage Retro Mobiles  1998 VW New Beetle vs 2003 Chrysler PT Cruiser - 97