The Worst American Cars - POLL

Forbes ^ | 10.21.02 | Michael Frank

[wallcrawlr]

In the Vehicles section we have had the privilege to glory in many amazing new and vintage automobiles.

But what about the duds?

What about the cars that never should have been made? The ones that, no matter how prescient their creators thought they were when they conceived these cars, were clearly either aesthetically ghastly, deeply mechanically flawed, or both?

That list could be quite long. Don't forget, there were thousands of car companies in the first half of the last century, many of which died because they cranked out substandard machines; the rest croaked either from the dire economic times in the Depression or shortly after the war, when the likes of General Motors made it impossible to compete.

But we prefer to focus on the duds we know and love to hate. That'd be the classic bombs of the post-war years, cars that had no business rolling down the highway--ever--and yet some of which became big sellers despite having hideous designs, awful engineering, wretched build quality, and sometimes all three.

By the way, we are aware that some of the cars on this list weren't the last of their kind, but they are here to remind us of just how bad it got, how wrong car design and production could be.

And we also know that this list is far from complete. So you should vote in the adjacent pole to add your two cents to our dud car list.

Finally, we are well aware that some readers will be terribly put off because they drove their high school sweetheart to prom in one of these dread creations (or they've got the same car up on blocks in the garage right now, just waiting for another paycheck to afford more fiberglass bodywork and another set of chrome wheels). But where's the fun if we don't offend? Remember, one man's trash is another man's treasure (hence the wonder of capitalism).

The Edsel was the ultimate DOA car, but contrary to common opinion, this was more a function of market segmenting and changing tastes than of purely bad styling. And of course it doesn't help that it was ugly. The vertical front grille of the Edsel looked like a big nose that divided the otherwise relatively conventional front of the car, and the front and back styling made even the 350hp V-8 version look slow. By the time Ford decided to restyle the Edsel in 1959, the car's sales had slid off a cliff and that was the end of Edsel.

There were a whopping 52 service bulletins (many requiring recalls) for this bastard-child car born of an unfortunate need by Maserati for ready cash and Chrysler's willingness to turn a LeBaron into a Maserati. Not only was a 3.0-liter V-6 a criminal concept for a supposed Italian exotic (putting out a pathetic 141 horsepower), but so was the American sheetmetal. Then there were the many mechanical nightmares from blown clutches and engines to leaking roofs. This car cost double the sticker on the LeBaron and broke twice as often. After all, it was Italian, right?

Sure, the nifty-looking Corvair had some good points. Like a Porsche 911, its engine was air-cooled, and resided in the back, to provide extra rear-wheel traction. Too bad its flat-six engine biased the weight of the early cars so far aftward that the steering became very light at highway speeds; and it sure didn't help that the gas tank was mounted up front, so if you did wreck--Ka Boom! If only the design had been better executed. Bummer. (Watch out, here come the nasty letters from all those Corvair fans!)

There were four-door Mavericks and two-doors. There was a Mercury version called the Comet. There were vinyl-topped models, too. What they had in common was that they were built on platform designs heavily prone to rust (this was the early days of unit-body cars) and weak-kneed in-line six engines. But the cars were cheap and therefore, popular, especially in the gas-crisis years. Not that we think the Maverick is necessarily as bad as what came afterward--the abysmal Fox-platform Futura/Fairmont, and the Grenada, which was still based on the Maverick platform, and so carried forward all the bad-handling traits and massive rustability to boot.

With a 2.8-liter V-6 and front-wheel drive, this was GM's attempt to take on the likes of Honda and Toyota. GM also shared this so-called X-body setup (of the Citation) with Olds (Omega) Buick (Skylark) and Pontiac (Phoenix). The differences were basically in body style, not fundamental mechanics. Naturally, because the cars looked futuristic and because they got decent mileage, the Citation and its brethren were a huge hit (800,000 Citations sold in 1980). But to meet demand GM let quality slip, so problems like faulty brakes and steering plagued Citations and led to a steep drop in quality--and sales.

In a desperate attempt to reach a younger demographic, Cadillac revamped its classic Eldorado to look less like a classic Caddy road yacht and more like a two-door version of the ill-conceived four-door Cadillac Cimarron. Demand for the new Caddy fell (big surprise), and only a year after introduction production sank to just under 18,000 units. Did it matter that you could get a V-8 in the Caddy and not in the other GM look-alikes? Nope. It took another 16 years of awful versions (2002 will be the last year of the Eldo) but the decline all started back in 1986.

In the early 1980s American Motors Corporation (before it was absorbed by Chrysler) and French-maker Renault teamed up to make some really awful cars but none as bad as the Fuego. Thankfully, the relationship died out--and today AMC no longer exists and Renault hasn't set foot on American shores since. The Fuego's screamed "car of the future" but it was more like a bad omen. It came in a sporty turbo edition and even handled decently. But its odd appearance and legendarily short-prone electrical system (and no-go engine) soon had customers saying "au revoir."

Hands down probably one of the ugliest, if not the ugliest, car car ever made. When the car went into production it was discovered that the rotary motor had serious quality issues, so at the last second AMC had to switch to an in-line six, which also required widening the car and scrapping the front-wheel drive setup. The width helped: Handling was fairly impressive and huge doors made the car practical. The car sold well, but after the first year it became apparent that the car was too heavy, too goofy, and far too unreliable. Did we mention its looks?

Were the designers at AMC blind? How could they consistently turn out so many hideous cars? While the Gremlin enjoyed the distinction of being the first U.S.-made subcompact, its V-8, which was introduced right when the oil-crunch hit, hurt it. People wanted little four-cylinder models, not cars that were funny looking, small and oddly powerful. It also didn't help that initially it came only as a coupe. Later, AMC would later add a four-door but the problem was really with the looks. It didn't matter that the Gremlin was more reliable and sportier (in many guises) than the equally lame Ford Pinto--it was just uglier.

We're not knocking all GTOs by any means. The GTOs from the 1960s were great but by the time pollution and fuel-consumption standards had been put in effect in the early 1970s GM didn't have an answer. Its huge but inefficient V-8s were no match for all the smog-limiting hosiery that had to be attached; power and performance both dropped, but mileage didn't go up. Then in 1972 the GTO became an option--not even a model--of the Pontiac LeMans. By 1974 it was just a badge-job Chevy Nova, a disguise nobody bought (literally or figuratively) and the GTO finally bit the dust that year.

The best thing you could say about this car is that at least they got the scale right. It was meant as an answer to Honda and Toyota's fuel-sippers, and it was a small four-seater. But besides getting good mpg the Chevette was a really badly made, poorly assembled car. Rust, major mechanical failures, leaks--it had it all. It was also no fun to drive (unlike those Japanese cars like the early Accords) and gutless. Some people thought Chevettes were cute, though. Who could resist one with glued-on faux wood panels like this one?

If only. If only the Eagle Wagon weren't such a dog. If only Chrysler had changed the body styling in the late 1980s and made it a Jeep, not an Eagle. See, the Eagle was the original Outback off-road wagon, but came out a decade and a half before Subaru thought of the notion. Sadly, the Eagle had an old, inefficient six-cylinder motor (only capable of 110hp), a body borrowed from old AMC Hornets, and a clunky, three-speed automatic licensed from Chrysler. Talk about missed opportunities.

The Chevrolet Caprice got a new, fuel-efficient 250-cubic-inch engine and earned an EPA rating of 22 mpg on the highway. That was pretty impressive, but the beasts wallowed in corners and required great attention to go straight at speed. Later Caprices got V-8 engines and were restyled to become Caprice Classics in the later '80s. But even these faster cars understeered in the extreme and sent every road dent and pothole reverberating from the suspension straight to your clenched-in-anticipation jaw. The fact that they were also one of the most boring-looking cars ever designed didn't help either.

[Ukiapah Heep]

Where's the Vega?

[I still care]

I had a Dodge Aspen. I thought it was a pretty car. I owned it for 10 years. Out of those 10, for 6 it wasn't moving. And the last 4 years you could see the road through the floor. But it was a pretty car.

Now I have a Camry - not sporty or fancy, but I love it. It's smooth, reliable, drives like a dream, and pieces don't fall off.

[XBob]

"In April 2002 I bought a new 2002 Honda Accord, loaded.
Big mistake, I could easily list my car as #11.
28 "

why do you feel it is so bad. I have been considering buying one used.

[AnAmericanMother]

We had a brown Bimmer 2002 tii (square tail lights) that we ran into the ground . . . 120K miles. We had our first child about the time it hit 120K and dropped its differential in the street, so we sold it to our mechanic, who restored it. It's still going strong.

Here's a photo of the same make/model/year as my baby, but my baby's candy apple red with a white top . . .

My dad is original owner on our darling . . . 200K+, engine is running like a top but the body's getting a bit rough in spots and the tranny has never been strong (2 forward speed auto . . . ugh.)

(That's a '62 Studebaker Lark Daytona convertible for folks who've never been privileged to own one. Ours has the Stude-Packard police pursuit engine and a Holley 4 barrel (original equipment) in it.)

We used to have a '72 TR-6, now have a '64 TR-4. (Anybody interested in buying it? My father in law took it on a bad debt, it's a fairly rare surrey top and in good shape, but I'd rather keep the Stude.)

[Professional]

I think you're describing the Caddy Seville Yes! Ugliest thing on the road. I lobbied for an ugliness tax for every Seville owner. It always reminded me of the way a dog stands when taking a crap.

LMAO!

[Professional]

In 1985, I was driving a 1978 Chrysler New Yorker, in of all places, Sweden. That car in Sweden, was like the Nimitz next to a Swedish world full of Boston Whalers. I called it the driving chandelier. It was white with red leather interior, absolutely top of the line everything on it. That was one BAD MF'r.

So, I'm driving it home after work, Rolling Stones "One Hit To The Body" BLASTING as loud as it could get driving a wee bit too fast thru downtown. Suddenly, I notice the light has turned red. I STAND on the brakes and the mammoth Michelins are screaching and screaming STOP!!!! There I sit, in the middle of the intersection, smoke all around this beast, Mick Jagger blaring away, and my face redder than the leather interior.

There. My favorite "car" story.

[Professional]

Girlfriend back then had a Fiero. The car spun like a top on ice, because of mid engine. Suicide on ice!

[ccmay]

The BMW 2002 comes to mind. With a few minor improvements they could make this today and it would still be one of the best cars on the road.

As a BMW 330 owner, I can assure you that the best cars on the road still come from Munich. Nothing I have ever driven compares to it as a total driving package.

-ccm

[epow]

I've had some really bad cars in my 65 years, but the all-time hands down worst was a top of the line '71 Audi 100LS. I needed a very nice and dependable car for my job, and the Audi salesman told me it was "just like a small Mercedes" for only 3/4 the price. My wife ate that line up. Leather interior, real walnut dash, etc, but as I soon discovered, the only thing it had in common with a Mercedes was that they both came over on a boat.

I can't take up enough time and space here to begin to list even 1/10 of the major problems we had with that example of fine German engineeering and craftmanship in the 1-1/2 years I owned it, but I will list a few of the most maddening ones.

1. A/C. It never worked properly from day one, and neither the dealer nor any A/C shop in FL could fix it. In all the time I owned the car, the A/C never worked for more than 2 consecutive days at a time. Most of the time it simply didn't work at all. That may not be a major problem in Deutchland, but it sure is in FL.

2. Starting the engine. Simply put, much of the time it just wouldn't start. It would start fine when the engine was cold, but after running for a few miles it wouldn't re-start until it cooled down again. Another problem that neither the Audi dealer nor any other repair shop could fix, or even explain. A German mechanic told me he knew what the trouble was and how to fix it. But after spending over a thousand dollars (1972 dollars) and several months with him, it was no better than before. The problem was still there when I traded it in.

3. Brakes. Went out after one month. Dealer couldn't get parts to repair, so after 2 weeks with a loaner I had to drive 80 miles to find them at a ridiculously high price, and then couldn't get reimbursed by the dealer. Also the power brake unit never worked properly.

Too many more problems to list, but I can only say there was no end to the serious troubles with that car for the 1-1/2 years I owned it. Every week was a new set of problems. I spent more time driving our old '66 Dodge Monaco 2nd car (great car BTW) than I did in the Audi. That was over 1/4 century ago, and I have never been tempted to buy another German car since.

FWIW, after owning 21 different makes of cars that I can remember offhand, and a few I can't, I don't believe Nissan can be beaten for dependability.

[Nik Naym]

Well now just hold on a minute! 76 Caprice? Bad? No way. Gas hog yes, but a good car nonthelesss.

My Dad had one. Hell, I Learned to drive in that thing. It was a beuty too. All black inside and out, had every option and a big block 454 engine. And contrary to the article, it was a Caprice Classic.

Rode great, handled just fine for a big boat. Most comfortable thing on wheels. Went like a raped ape, as long as you didn't tow anything with it. If you didn't mind slow acceleration, you could tow a house with the thing. IIRC, it even had dual exhaust. He sold it around 1988 or so. It was in great shape with no rust at all.

76 was the last year before they started shrinking the Caprice, and IMHO, was the last good year for the model.
Perhaps the article should have started with the 77. That was the year they wrecked it.

Nik.

[connectthedots]

4-Door Maverik?

[connectthedots]

I bought a '70 Ford Maverick in '73 for $1300 and drove it until 1981 when I sold it for $500. It was a good commuter car. Car rust in the Pacific Northwest has never been much of a problem, so that may color my opinion a bit compared to owners in other parts of the country.

[DBtoo]

Wow that brought back memories. Cars from my youth. I remember the AMC Gremlins. I guess AMC went out of business a long time ago. They did have a reputation for producing junk cars.

[DBtoo]

Hey! That Pontiac Aztec looks like the type of vehicle I'm looking for. I'm not a lesbian, but I'm looking for a used small car that can handle rugged roads and a very cold climate with lots of snow. I am starting to look around now. That looks like the sort of car I would be interested in. I need to do some research and find something small, hardy with good gas milelage. Where I live now we all have to live a bit poorly as things are so very expensive here. I bet that Aztec is out of my price range anyway. I don't want to spend over $10,000. If any Freepers are experts on small but durable cars for rural Alaska please let me know if you have any ideas. Thanks.

[DBtoo]

Why are Aztec's so bad? Do they fall apart quickly, or poorly designed or both?

[Tall_Texan]

Anything by FORD. "Quality is job one!"

I'll never forget the commerical they ran of the black guy on the Ford assembly line:

"I seed duh quaddity dat goes in dem."

First time I saw it, I yelled at the tv: "You can't even say 'quality', much less produce it!"

[Nik Naym]

"Why are Aztec's so bad?"

You didn't happen to be a designer for AMC back in the 70s, did you?

Nik

[Eva]

My guess is that he hates the way the Aztec looks. Everyone time my husband sees one on the road, he remarks that he can't believe that anyone would pay $30,000 for anything so ugly.

[Tall_Texan]

Here's what I'm talking about...

If you've ever driven behind one, you'd never forget the image.

[Rockpile]

My folks had a 66 Dodge Monaco wagon with a 383 and a Carter AFB. That was one big, roomy, powerful car that floated over bumps--I think it was the smoothest riding car I ever rode in--and it had an underdash A/C that would grow icicles on you. I'd like to have a new one.

PS several of my brothers were in Oklahoma with my mother when they had a close encounter with a tornado. Those who say you can't outrun a twister are full of it. They were all telling me about how she was going the fastest she ever had in her life:} "Did you know that big wagon will go over a hundred!"