1987 Nissan Pulsar Reviews - Page 3 of 5

1987 Nissan Pulsar 1.6 TBI from North America

Year of manufacture1987
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 1.6 TBI Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10
Distance when acquired108000 miles
Most recent distance121000 miles
Previous carNissan Sentra

Summary:

Economical, but not a slouch

Faults:

I bought the car with a destroyed automatic transmission and replaced it with a manual unit. Nothing else is wrong with the car.

General Comments:

This car performs very well within the parameters of the engine limits. Most people expect 4-cylinder cars to put out lots of power at low engine revolutions, and 4-cylinders can't do that. When driven with a light foot, higher revs and respect, this car will reward you with stunning power and superb handling.

The '82-88 Pulsar and Sentra use the same engines, transaxles and suspensions; But the Pulsar's lowness to the ground make for great handling, just like my two Sentras (Only better).

This car is comfortable, responsive, reliable, and downright fun. I cannot recommend it enough.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 17th October, 2003

1987 Nissan Pulsar CA16DE from North America

Year of manufacture1987
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission CA16DE Manual
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 10 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
9.5 / 10
Distance when acquired106000 kilometres
Most recent distance107000 kilometres

Summary:

A High Performance Bargain

Faults:

The only thing that has gone wrong with my Nissan Pulsar NX was the electrical contacts behind the cluster (the RPM display) were a little faulty. The RPM display started reading redlines when in fact it should only be reading 1,000 RPM or 2,000 RPM--It was reading at 8,000 RPM. That is all.

General Comments:

My general comments are that the Nissan Pulsar is a very staunch, very comfortable and very cool car to drive. It's T-Top really put you in the center of the attention of other people.

It accelerates very quickly and handles very well. However, the space inside isn't exactly the most spacious, but it will do because of the sporty design.

Mine produces around 113 horsepower, with almost the same amount of torque to provide those times when you need to accelerate quickly (highway mergers).

Overall, awesome car.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 12th October, 2003

1987 Nissan Pulsar NX E16i from North America

Year of manufacture1987
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission E16i Manual
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 10 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.4 / 10
Distance when acquired174000 kilometres
Most recent distance174000 kilometres

Summary:

A economy quick car

Faults:

When I got this car, the seats are broken, but it came with 2 newer seats, just need to install in, and 3 tires were worn up, plus I need to change a ball joints, nothing else were wrong with it.

General Comments:

This is my first car, when I got it, it has a great shape on it, no rust or dents on the body, but the only thing I sad about is the power, E16i engine only produce 70 horsepower, but the car is so light, and runs quick, also the pulsar is great on gas, save me lots money. And the Pulsar has good space design, you can put lots things into it than you thought.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 6th June, 2003

1987 Nissan Pulsar DX 1.6 from Australia and New Zealand

Year of manufacture1987
First year of ownership1999
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 1.6 Manual
Performance marks 5 / 10
Reliability marks 1 / 10
Comfort marks 2 / 10
Dealer Service marks 0 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
3.0 / 10
Distance when acquired185000 kilometres
Most recent distance240000 kilometres
Previous carSuzuki Swift

Summary:

Extremely unreliable piece of junk

Faults:

Exhaust Blew as soon as I bought it.

I had to get a new carburetor as soon as I bought it. Its ready to be changed again.

Head gasket blew at 200,000 km.

I got a new radiator two years ago, but the new one also blew after 220,000 km.

The speedometer cable snapped and the fuel indicator also doesn't seem to work.

Drivers side window glass keeps on falling into the door frame. I have to open up the panel every time this happens.

Had to get a new gearbox, clutch plate and cable at 215,000 km.

All four shock absorbers are leaking.

Hand brake gets loose every two months.

General Comments:

This is the worst car I've ever had. I've been in deep trouble since I bought this car beacase there is something breaking down all the time.

The car drives very well in corners and is fairly quick for a 1.6 liter engine, but is extremely unreliable. It simply dies after 200,000 km. All my efforts to keep it alive have resulted in a disaster.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 16th February, 2003

13th May 2003, 03:30

I am frustrated with your review on this vehicle, honestly 200,000 kilometers is a long way to drive. lets see how you would go, my honest opinion is that you should save a little more money and buy a more newer car, that way it would not have traveled nearly as far as your DX and it might last you a little longer.

Basically you pay pennies you get nothing new. try using a few more bucks. You'll be surprised.

Pulsar owner.

4th Apr 2006, 05:24

We have had our pulsar for 5 years, got it with 215,000, now done 278,000ks with very little trouble. Had to replace the starter motor and gearbox and that is all. Not the nicest car, but certainly very reliably, economical and great value for money. Sadly it is now at the age where everything is falling apart (rough roads do that) and I need a replacement. Maybe a low ks Pulsar?

21st May 2007, 09:10

It sounds like a lot of the problems you have are related to lack of maintenance by the previous owner. It is important to carefully inspect ANY used vehicle to signs of poor maintenance. BTW shocks simply blow out after a while, they are not permanent on ANY car and replacing them periodically is routine maintenance (every 60k miles or so depending on driving environment).

If you bought a new radiator and it failed after 20k miles, it was either installed improperly or the radiator itself was defective. You should hold the shop that did the work accountable for that and not the car.

Average review marks: 7.5 / 10, based on 15 reviews