Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Satty

Time: 50 worst cars of all time

20 posts in this topic

Linkypoo

Some I disagree with, many I'm sure a lot of you will disagree with.

1899-1939

* 1899 Horsey Horseless

* 1909 Ford Model T

* 1911 Overland OctoAuto

* 1913 Scripps-Booth Bi-Autogo

* 1920 Briggs and Stratton Flyer

* 1933 Fuller Dymaxion

* 1934 Chrysler/Desoto Airflow

1940-1959

* 1949 Crosley Hotshot

* 1956 Renault Dauphine

* 1957 King Midget Model III

* 1957 Waterman Aerobile

* 1958 Ford Edsel

* 1958 Lotus Elite

* 1958 MGA Twin Cam

* 1958 Zunndapp Janus

1960-1974

* 1961 Amphicar

* 1961 Corvair

* 1966 Peel Trident

* 1970 AMC Gremlin

* 1970 Triumph Stag

* 1971 Chrysler Imperial LeBaron Two-Door Hardtop

* 1971 Ford Pinto

* 1974 Jaguar XK-E V12 Series III

1975-1989

* 1975 Bricklin SV1

* 1975 Morgan Plus 8 Propane

* 1975 Triumph TR7

* 1975 Trabant

* 1976 Aston Martin Lagonda

* 1976 Chevy Chevette

* 1978 AMC Pacer

* 1980 Corvette 305 "California"

* 1980 Ferrari Mondial 8

* 1981 Cadillac Fleetwood V-8-6-4

* 1981 De Lorean DMC-12

* 1982 Cadillac Cimarron

* 1982 Camaro Iron Duke

* 1984 Maserati Biturbo

* 1985 Mosler Consulier GTP

* 1985 Yugo GV

* 1986 Lamborghini LM002

1990-Present

* 1995 Ford Explorer

* 1997 GM EV1

* 1997 Plymouth Prowler

* 1998 Fiat Multipla

* 2000 Ford Excursion

* 2001 Jaguar X-Type

* 2001 Pontiac Aztek

* 2002 BMW 7-series

* 2003 Hummer H2

* 2004 Chevy SSR

Many of the cars on the list, the author, "Dickhead" Dan Neil, bitches about fuel economy, especially on the more modern cars. I do agree with him on the neutered Corvette and a few of the others, but I really disagree on the Corvair, Explorer (it probably kept Ford afloat after the 1996 Taurus debacle) and the EV1, as well as a few others. The EV1 wasn't a terrible car, it was terribly handled by GM.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They give reasons for their choices, but they don't give reasons for their choices over other vehicles. Fluff article.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note that the newer cars on that list are 'bad' because they're 'evil' i.e. consume fuel. Also, the vast, vast majority of those cars are oddities, unique one-offs, or ahead of their time.

The Dymaxion was extrodinarily forward-thinking for its time. Very aerodynamic with a top speed of 120mph, it sat eleven passengers and cruised at 30 mpg. Subsequent cars like the VW Microbus were inspired by it. But, its a 'bad' car because it crashed due to another car.

The Corvair was an attractive, sporty car that was pigeoholed by one man's arrogant vendetta against GM and the auto industry as a whole. And yet, despite his attention-whoring, the Corvair was successful (it didn't steal sales from intermediates like Ford's Falcon), legendary, and still collectable.

The Waterman Aerobile blurb is such a piece of $h! its not even funny. Throughout, it implies this was a hastily slapped-together deathtrap waiting to happen. Yet, ignored, is the fact that this was perhaps the safest of all the flying cars ever pursued, being spin- and stall-proof. How about calling out that God-awful Mizar that actually crashed and killed its creator?

There's so much hypocrisy here, too. The Aztek and SSR are 'bad' because they weren't popular; the Model T and Explorer are 'bad' because they were so popular. What??

God, I can't tell you how irritating this piece is. What should be a list of 'Oddities - some good, some bad, some just plain ugly' is twisted and culled into a OMG THESE CARZ IS TEH WURST!!!1! list for a headliner. Time has zero cred.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the model T made the list I stopped reading...What a load of $h!. Just looking at the list Satty posted shows you how much BS and how little thought was put into it.

Why not put the Prius up their as it attracted foolish buyers because of false claims of super fuel economy when there are diesel powered cars that get better, it's batteries are horrible for the environment, it's slow, ugly, and yet people buy it for the image. Buy a 4-banger economy can and save the cash and almost if not as much fuel.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1899-1939

* 1909 Ford Model T

What is so bad about the Model T? Oh wait, did CR give it bad reliability ratingss?!?!? LOL
1960-1974

* 1961 Corvair

Okay, so a Corvair built with the same underpinnings as a Porsche with a cheaper price is a bad thing? Sounds like someone bought into the Nader :bs: (Typical of know-nothings in the media)

1975-1989

* 1976 Chevy Chevette

Friend of mine had a Chevette... Excellent car and tons of fun to drive! He gave it hell and it NEVER broke down.
* 1981 Cadillac Fleetwood V-8-6-4

Yet again, GM innovates and gets no respect for at least trying.

* 1981 De Lorean DMC-12
WTF?!?! That car was just cool!
1990-Present

* 1995 Ford Explorer

The car that OWNED the market?!?!?!

* 1997 GM EV1
The car that INVENTED alternative transportation... Another example of GM innovation that the media loves to take a $h! on.
* 2003 Hummer H2

Yeah, because that one didn't make GM any money...

Hmm... Funny there are no asian cars on there; not surprising though. Because we all know that they're WAY too perfect to make a bad car. (Barring pretty much all of the asian sushiboxes until around 1990, of course)

P.S. And Dan Neil is still alive?!?!? I figured someone would've shot that dumb bastard by now. Oh well, wishful thinking I guess.

Edited by FUTURE_OF_GM
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course their are no Asians, they can do no wrong. :AH-HA_wink:

The fact the DeLorean is on there is almost are retarded as the model T and Explorer...it's so bad and yet they plan to start making them again because of demand? Riiiight....

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

* 1899 Horsey Horseless

There was a car named 'Horsey Horseless'? :lol:

EDIT - I found it! It even had a fake horse's head in front: clickypoo

Edited by ZL-1
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this article was in the 50 worst print articles of all time.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Ford Pinto?

The Gremlin?

The Pacer?

ANY car built from 74-82

The Toyota T-100's

The Izsuzu anything (Impulse, I-mark, et al)

Renault Le Car

Renault Alliance

Subaru Justy

Mazda GLC

Geo Storm

Toyota Echo - (IF you run one over, do you get to enjoy the crunch noise twice?)

I mean to say there are a ton of cars that I think are justified to being on the list...and I do not think the Explorer or the Model T should be among them.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where the hell is the 1986 Hyundai Excel?

Posted Image

This list sucks.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey now! I think this article is not only excellent, but also dead on. I'll have you know that my '13 Scripps-Booth was easily the worst car I've ever owned! I can't tell you how many problems I had with that godawful machine!

But seriously, who the hell is writing this horse $h!? I find it hilarious how badly this liberal arts-educated douchebag that has zero pulse on the real world and has probably been buying Toyotas and Datsuns since the days when foreign vehicles were only for hippies and homosexuals failed at attempting to be an automotive authority.

First of all, has he ever owned, ridden in, or even SEEN 85% of the cars on the list? Have any of us, for that matter? Maybe I had a different upbringing than he did, but I don't remember many of my friends' parents having an Aston Martin Lagonda in the garage. If I recall correctly, annual production for those cars was somewhere in the double digits. I worked with a guy who inherited one from a former business partner of his; it was a 1983 model that came from the same run as the one that belonged to Prince Charles. Not exactly a vehicle I'd go lumping in with not only mass production but ULTRA (like, everybody's owned ten of them) mass production vehicles like the Model T and Explorer.

Honestly I don't even know how he can call ANY vehicle built before the 1930's bad at all because they were all "bad" to an extent. Not because people were into building inferior equipment in those days (I dare you to find a vehicle to this day that has been made with better construction and a higher quality of materials than a Simplex from the teens), but because the technology was so incredibly new to everybody, and the 1930's was about the time that the last of the really weird concepts and antiquated technology holdouts had finally been weeded out. Car manufacturers didn't even have a uniform method of propulsion until this time period; remember, Stanley built steam-powered cars until 1927 and Doble built them until 1931. Before the 1930's, every tin knocker and machinist and bicycle mechanic that went and bought the trade papers and soon after took to the streets with their homemade motorized buckboards were all taking a huge chance with anything they developed and had to innovate as they went. Any problem incurred meant weeks in the shop fixing, fabricating, developing, etc. They had a hundred huge disasters for every little success, but they kept at it and that's why we're at where we're at today. I'd like to see anybody today have an engine grenade on them and go cast a new cylinder head or piston themself! Their endless dedication to getting it right is the reason we don't have to! These fearless men who crank-started their prototype contraptions after filling the grease cups on top of the external valve train and lighting kerosene lamps before roaring down a dirt road with a tiller handle in one hand and an external hand brake in the other are the reason that the jaded pussy writing this article that's taking a $h! in their hard work's mouth can go get f@#ked in the ass on a Lexus that parks itself. Could he be any MORE disrespectful!? Have any of you guys ever seen a Briggs & Stratton Flyer? If not, you can make one in about ten minutes. Got that old wooden toboggan from when you were a kid? Plop a lawnmower engine on the back, attach four bicycle tires and the most crude steering system you can make out of bar stock and baling wire and call it a day. Hard to believe that one might run into a few hangups with such a sophisticated vehicle.

Everything on the list seems to have made it because it it's either ugly, a one of a handful, a completely offbeat concept, received bad press at some point, or is a little bit more thirsty at the pump than the average vehicle. All of which are bull$h! reasons.

Ugly: I'm not a fan of the Dodge/Chrysler/Desoto Airflow family but I'm certainly glad that somebody finally grew a set and took one of those first uncertain baby steps at trying to make a car that didn't have the aerodynamics of a cinder block. It might be ugly, but what it lacks in looks when you put it next to the other vehicles of its day, it certainly makes up for it in the innovation department. Edsels and Gremlins also look like crap, but I'd like to see any modern-day abomination of a vehicle last as long as these ones do.

Limited Production: Anybody know anybody with a Peel Trident (45 total units), Lamborghini LM002 (328 total units), Lotus Elite (998 total units), or Bricklin SV1 (2,854 total units)? Didn't think so. Don't feel bad, because I don't either. But apparently the guys at Time magazine remember everybody running out and buying each and every one of them and their joy quickly fading to disappointment and then utter disgust.

Offbeat Concept: Who ever would have thought there was any room for improvement when dealing with mid-century cars that try to be airplanes and boats? Imagine that, your Amphicar (3,878 built in the course of eight years means it's a vehicle we can ALL relate to!) leaks. Well so doesn't that brand new multimillion-dollar luxury yacht you saw at the boat show last month. What do you think a bilge pump is for, decoration?

Bad Press: We all know that Pintos explode when you plow into the back of them and that Yugos fell apart on test drives when they were brand spanking new, and that French economy cars from the 1950's couldn't possibly be good, so it's really not a watershed moment anymore when you tell people they suck. I'm guessing this category is where the Ford Explorer comes in, which were pretty damn good vehicles in the eyes of the media until Firestone sold Ford a whole $h!load of defective tires a few years back and a couple of them rolled over (read: not Ford's fault).

Gas Guzzlers: I'm sure I'm not alone in being one of those people that would gladly sacrifice a little bit of fuel economy for a little bit of meat in their ride. You may be saving the planet in your Geo Metro, the automotive equivalent of a soda can, but the guy in the H2 or Excursion will still be alive after the two of you collide some day during morning rush hour. The modern day gas pigs aren't for everybody, but to put them on a "worst" list simply for that reason means you couldn't find any REAL problems (safety, quality, etc.) with them.

And another media outlet's credibility is flushed down the toilet....

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

* 1961 Amphicar

Why? I'm sure it had it's problems but name ONE direct competitor.....

* 1961 Corvair

* 1971 Chrysler Imperial LeBaron Two-Door Hardtop

I STRONGLY disagree!!!

* 1976 Chevy Chevette

* 1978 AMC Pacer

* 1982 Camaro Iron Duke

* 1984 Maserati Biturbo

Not horrible cars, just cars from horrible era.

* 1980 Corvette 305 "California"

Anything "california emissions" from 1974-1980s sucked!

* 1997 GM EV1

* 2002 BMW 7-series

* 2003 Hummer H2

* 2004 Chevy SSR

Again I disagree...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before the 1930's, every tin knocker and machinist and bicycle mechanic that went and bought the trade papers and soon after took to the streets with their homemade motorized buckboards were all taking a huge chance with anything they developed and had to innovate as they went. Any problem incurred meant weeks in the shop fixing, fabricating, developing, etc. They had a hundred huge disasters for every little success, but they kept at it and that's why we're at where we're at today. I'd like to see anybody today have an engine grenade on them and go cast a new cylinder head or piston themself! Their endless dedication to getting it right is the reason we don't have to! These fearless men who crank-started their prototype contraptions after filling the grease cups on top of the external valve train and lighting kerosene lamps before roaring down a dirt road with a tiller handle in one hand and an external hand brake in the other are the reason that the jaded pussy writing this article that's taking a $h! in their hard work's mouth can go get f@#ked in the ass on a Lexus that parks itself. Could he be any MORE disrespectful!?

TOTALLY right XP.... some of those early automotive pioneers were ridiculed (sp?) or even killed tinkering with those early cars..... without them, where the hell would we be?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of you guys have made excellent points.

Here's a few of my nominations:

Honda Ridgeline

Honda Element

Honda Del Sol

Toyota Echo

Toyota Previa (remember that deathtrap? easily the least safe car of the mid-1990s)

Toyota Sequoia

Toyota FJ Cruiser

Hyundai Scoop

Hyundai Excell

Kia Anything

Mitsubishi Anything (w/ the possible exception of the Montero & Diamante)

Suzuki X90

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh...wow. I agree with a very select handful on that list...not counting cars I never knew existed (Horsey Horseless?).

The article about the Model T is actually completely infuriating...its bad because 100 years ago it put everyone on wheels and that equaled pollution overtime? And its a piece of junk because it was manufactured so everyone could afford it? Way to totally miss the point.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where the hell is the 1986 Hyundai Excel?

Posted Image

This list sucks.

A friend of mine was commenting on how many nice cars there were in my parking garage. Then we walked around the corner and saw one of those Excels. I asked him to repeat himself.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's one of the dumbest lists I've ever seen.

What's the criteria? Some guy tosses his opinions into a hat and pulls the first 50? Some of the cars listed don't make any sense whatsoever IMO.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0