8 ’80s Classics You Can Buy for $5000 or Less
It is getting quite difficult to find a car from the “Rad Era” for an entry-level price these days. The generations that enjoyed these cars when new—as well as a younger audience who might have experienced them on the used market—are recognizing their true worth as relevant historical tributes to a decade known for decadence.
It’s not just Lamborghinis and pre-merger AMGs that are getting the attention, either. Demographic changes and an increasingly globalized 1980s automotive marketplace spoiled “young urban professionals” for choice: cars ranging from a 1982 Ford EXP two-seater to an E32 BMW 7 Series luxury sedan each had their own enthusiast audience then, and they do once again today.
As a result, the list of ’80s cars that are in good shape and can be had for $5000 or less is a pretty short one. We dug into the Hagerty Price Guide for cars in #3 condition (a very clean, driver-quality example that runs well) that met our pricing and age criteria, and here’s what we found.
1984–2000 Jeep Cherokee 2.5-liter (XJ)
Some may forget that the AMC-derived, 2.5-liter four-cylinder motor in the Jeep Cherokee lasted so long, but you could indeed get this entry-level mill up until the 2000 model year. It even had a cool name by that point: “Power Tech,” though, given its 125 horsepower and 150 lb-ft of torque, the phrase risks overselling. (The next and final year of the Cherokee was exclusively powered by the 4.0-liter inline-six.) And when you opt for the big four in your Cherokee, you get the perk of owning a 2020 Bull Market pick, but with a more approachable transaction price.
That’s not to say all four-cylinder Cherokees sell below our promised ceiling of $5K. For the 1989 model year, a two-door, two-wheel-drive example averages at $4900; a four-door example goes up to $5000. Add the 4×4 option and prices for both four-cylinder Jeeps jump to $6600. In fact, the cheapest 4×4 is the 1984–85 base model with a one-barrel carburetor, and it will set you back an average of $5800. Interested in the rarer, turbodiesel four-pot Cherokee? Those go for a far steeper $8200.
1988 Buick Reatta
It is a shame that such a compelling and uniquely styled touring coupe made this list, but the Buick Reatta had a difficult time finding its place in the market. That isn’t likely to be the case for much longer, as only the first year of Reatta production (1988) can be purchased for $4800. This is up 4.3 percent, while 1988 Reattas in #1 condition are up 10 percent to a robust $22,700.
1980–83 Continental Mark VI
Unlike the 1980–89 Lincoln Town Car, which is experiencing a resurgence, the sistership Continental Mark VI can still be purchased for under five grand. The iconic Mark Series was downsized, contemporized, and computerized in the tail end of the Malaise Era, and being early in on that technology hasn’t earned valuations worthy of later Lincolns or earlier Continentals.
The more desirable Mark VI coupe can be had for $4500 in #3 condition, while the more staid sedan rings up for an even more modest $3500. It’s ironic that Continental Mark VIs originally sold for more than their Lincoln Town Car siblings, but the broader appeal and higher production volume of the Townie ensured a comfortable advantage in the classic car market.
1982–88 Cadillac Cimarron
While it takes some serious mental gymnastics to think GM’s J-body would make a car worthy of the Wreath and Crest, the last few years of Cadillac Cimarron production actually made for a decent car. By 1985, GM’s 2.8-liter V-6 had 130 horsepower. A five-speed manual transmission was available, and the front end looked far more like that of a baby ‘Lac and not a tarted-up Cavalier.
Too bad about that, because it wasn’t enough to save the Cimarron. And a mere $2500 in 2024 dollars is needed to buy a #3 condition example, with any powertrain configuration. A shame, because modern motoring could be fun in a 1988 Cimarron with a five-speed and those rad digital gauges, far less so in a 1982 model with its 88 carbureted horses and its less distinctive styling touches.
1982–85 Pontiac Firebird
How can a third-generation F-body go for this cheap? That’s a fair question, as only the older examples without the Trans Am trim level can be had for less than five grand.
You will need exactly $5000 to buy a 1985 Firebird with a 165-horse 5.0-liter V-8 with a four-barrel carburetor, but a 1985 Trans Am is nearly triple the price ($13,800) with the same engine. Considering the long-term appeal of Firebirds in general, the 1985 Firebird V-8 might be one of the best bargains currently on the market.
1984–88 Pontiac Fiero 2M4
The addition of “2M4” to the title is crucial here, as it stands for “two-seat, mid-engine, four-cylinder.” We aren’t talking about the 2.8-liter, six-pot Pontiacs, just the Iron Duke examples that are currently at $4100 in #3 condition. The smaller engines clearly lacked the performance of those in later models, hotter commodities that include the 1988 Fiero V-6 Formula ($7700), and the 1988 Fiero GT ($12,300).
Consider the Iron Duke Fieros as easily approachable fun from the Rad Era, with style that’s hard to beat at any price. And whenever the lack of power becomes impossible to ignore, give V8 Archie a ring to make those pricey V-6 Fieros nothing but a speck in your rearview mirror.
1985–88 Cadillac Sedan DeVille
Much like the aforementioned Cimarron, values for the baby DeVilles do not reflect their regular updates and powertrain improvements. Numerous internal upgrades were done to the worrisome HT4100 V-8 engine in 1986, and the increase in displacement (from 4.1 to 4.5 liters) made the 1988 DeVille a rather fantastic luxury vehicle with wonderfully tidy proportions. But none of this seems to matter, as all 1985–88 Cadillac DeVilles go for an average of $3500 (up nine percent last quarter), no matter the quality of the engine.
And what of the Coupe DeVille from the same time frame? Those two-door Caddies are above our threshold, running a $5400 asking price (up 10.2 percent) in today’s market.
1985–91 Subaru XT
Perhaps we saved the best for last, as the Subaru that tried to be normal is such an eye-catching example of 1980s excess. How exactly has the most aerodynamic car not achieved the return on investment seen by cars like the Mazda RX-7 (FC) and Nissan 300ZX (Z31)?
We may never know, but it likely has something to do with Subaru’s more workaday front-wheel-drive architecture (though AWD was optional) and more limited reach thanks to lower production (around 98,000 units globally, less than 30 percent of FC RX-7 production), and a relatively small dealer network in this era. The end result is that a Subaru XT in the high-spec “GL 10 Turbo” trim level only fetches $4700 in modern times. And that’s a bit of a shame, as the looks alone should push it above the $5000 mark.
***
Check out the Hagerty Media homepage so you don’t miss a single story, or better yet, bookmark it. To get our best stories delivered right to your inbox, subscribe to our newsletters.
The problem is: What will be the $100,000.00 car in 50 years? And, will I care then?
I sold two 1953 Corvettes in the late ’60’s for $1,500.00. They’re $250K each today.
Possibly, one should do what rocks your boat today – rather than try to guess the future. For instance Hagerty needed an article, and shucks, it worked.
$5000 for all of them together would be too much.
I had a worked 1988 5-speed, dark red Fiero GT with T-Tops back around the turn of the century. Got it with low miles for around $8,500. The thing was a mechanical nightmare.. It was also the best handling car I’ve ever owned (I’m in my mid-50’s). Cornered like it was on rails.
The Firebird and Fiero for me from this list. Pontiac is the winning here.
Oh Yes MANY problems with these older Classics! I have a mixed collection of older and newest Vehicles,however lately I have had Major Challenges finding Electronic replacement parts for the GM and Ford products.My mechanic informs me that the Chrysler line is even worse! One customers Dodge sat in his shop for 6 months before parts could be found.
Cool stuff. Would love a 4×4 Cherokee. I bought a 4 cyl., fuel injected, auto trans 2000 Jeep Wrangler. Motor was so anemic is couldn’t get out of it’s own way. Put a Power Commander(?) chip on it after 20 years. Totally new motor. The little four isn’t now a six. But it is noticeably more powerful than it was before. And gets better gas mileage. Especially on the highway.
Another bizarre, nonsensical article from Hackerty’s fine writers.
First off, you couldn’t pay me $5,000 to take some of these poor-performing and/or notoriously unreliable “Classic” picks such as the 4-cylinder Fiero, the Sedan de Ville with the horrendous HT4100 engine or the 4-cylinder Cavaron (I’d consider the zippy V6 version but that would likely be more than $5k)
The other five — Jeep XJ, Buick Reatta, Lincoln MK VI, Firebird V8 and Subaru XT — are interesting cars I wouldn’t mind owning but the writer claiming you can get a nice, number 3 example for $5k makes me wonder what hallucinogens these writers are on. Prices in the real world for any of these in number 3 condition would be double that amount.
There is definitely an opportunity for a follow-up article on better Classic Choices for $5K from the eighties. The Jeep can stay on the list and maybe the Lincoln.
I appreciate that Hagerty wants to generate interest in “affordable” collectibles, but as many said the 80’s cars, especially American, were saddled with poor build quality and complex emissions equipment although better than the 1970’s emission equipment. The final blow is they are NOT easy to work on and find parts for. In many states they have to pass emissions tests. Not a bargain if you find you have to spend more then what you paid for the car to keep it running!!
The cars in this story may be “collectible” or “antiques” or “special interest” but they assuredly are not “classics”. “Classic” cars are those designated by the Classic Car Club of America (CCCA)–primarily large and expensive prewar makes (Duesenberg, Auburn, Cord, Packard, Marmon, Rolls-Royce, etc) and a few post WWII models (46-48 Lincoln Continentals, etc).
And one more Cimarron story: when they first came out in 1984, I was interested to see exactly how Cadillac had transformed a Cavalier into a compact Cadillac. We show up at the Cadillac emporium in a BMW 2002 and the salesman was practically drooling at the thought of a conquest sale–just what Cadillac wanted. So with wife and I in the front seat and salesman in the back, off we sped (not a descriptive term!) onto an interstate ramp. With my foot to the floor I was straining to hit 40 at the top of the ramp. My wife and I looked at each other and simultaneously said,, “Is that all it’s got?” The salesman’s face fell as he knew he lost the sale. I still have the BMW, and it’ll still outrun a Cimarron…
Cherokee for 5k….you are only about 10-15k short. Watch often buy rarely as if decent at all they are expensive. The 2.5L is ok in a Comanche but overwhelmed in a Cherokee. Comanches – and most mini trucks now are a 20k adventure!
And although Reatta’s can be a decent buy, good ones are not anywhere near what you claim.
The only 5k Firebird might be an 82 Iron Puke 4-bang, and that probably is rougher than you would want to own.
This is excellent – any article that can generate this many great comments and discussion is a winner !!
7 out of 8 are domestic iron. See if you can guess why….
I drive a 1965 pontiac parisenne 2 door hardtop in teal green original unrestored 42500 miles I am second owner. its a canadian car made in oshawa ontario when I bought brake shoes and shocks for it I found out it was built on a 65 chev impala frame so all parts are chev as the u.s. parisenne is on a oldsmobile frame and is 6 inches longer who know ? Car is a great cruiser and trophy winner at car shows G.
When I read “’80s” and “Classics” in the same sentence, I can’t help but to cringe. Besides possibly the two Pontiacs, I just feel sad for younger fans; these cars are pretty thin soup for my appetite! Better to get a real ‘classic’ and spend some sweat building it into a nice collectible. OC, that takes tools, time and talent. I M Humble O !