I didn't like the Yahoo Autos list, made my own. Feel free to add your own.
1 - 1975-1980 AMC Pacer
This is the car that killed AMC. It took away much design and redesign dollars away from the Hornet and Matador and squandered them on a car nobody liked and nobody wanted. Even worse is that unlike the Hornet and Gremlin, the Pacer didn't share any platform parts despite being in the same class size as them. It was the nail in the coffin for AMC.
2 - 2003-2006 Chevrolet SSR
A car that is infamous on this board. It didn't sink GM, but is emblematic of everything that's wrong with the company. They cancelled the Camaro and replaced it with this overpriced monstrosity. If they'd been smart, they might have noticed that the Camaro was still rather popular even if it didn't sell well. A sure sign that it was OVERPRICED, Did they listen and lower the price while refreshening the car's looks like they did with the J-bodies in 2002? Nope, they just canned it and tried to pass this off as a sort of successor. Nobody fell for it and the SSR languished in the showrooms.
3 - 1980-1985 Chevrolet Citation
Because of cars like the Citation, it took nearly thirty years before FWD was able to shake off it's reputation of being cheap. Yes, the Cadillac Eldorado and Oldsmobile Toronado were both extremely solid and reliable and exotic cars (for their time) and they gave front wheel drive a good name, but the Citation and a lot of similar junk from the era (Dodge Aries, Ford Tempo) undid everything that had been built up. Unlike a lot of cars on this list the Citation was really popular, which was it's problem in a way because so many people bought one and went Ughhhhhhhh... driving it. Had it been a failure then people might remember Detroit's attempt at modern engineering in a more favorable light.
4 - 1989-1992 Ford Probe
Here's a great idea. Take a beloved American motoring icon that has endured for decades and always sold well. and turn it into a generic Japanese FWD sport's coupe. Bound to work right? Well, even Ford had it's doubts because when the backlash hit them they decided to keep the Mustang around and sell it's replacement under a different name. Unsurprisingly the car sold poorly and the ten year old design of the Mustang was vastly more popular. Again, the reason is obvious, the Mustang was cheaper (Hell, at the time a base 5.0 was cheaper than a Civic Si) and it didn't look like something designed as a joke.
5 - 2005-2007 Ford Five Hundred
Having learned nothing from the Probe fiasco Ford again tried to replace it's aging but well liked Crown Victoria with this... thing. Full size cars just don't work well with FWD. I don't know why that is, but they always feel wrong. The Five Hundred is no exception. It feels too chunky and boxy. The proportions are all wrong. The Crown Vic is older than God but it feels big and airy, the 500 feels claustrophobic despite it's size. Not to mention that police departments and taxi cab operators don't want modern cars. They want old style cars that are easy to maintain and feel large inside. The 500 was the answer to a question no one asked.
the five hundred replaced the taurus. its a foot or so shorter than a crown vic
2002 z24 Coupe
^nah. the taurus is back!
WiGM-Tuners member.
The Five Hundred was meant to replace the Crown Vic while the Fusion was supposed to replace the Taurus. Taurus was mid-size like the Fusion, while the Five Hundred was a full-size car like the Crown. The new Taurus (and 500 replacement) is full-size and Ford has said that it will be the Crown Vic replacement when it's phased out next year.
decent list, however I would add the cavalier/j-body in there as well ....... not because there bad cars, but because the were so behind and never updated technoligically as they should have been
__________________________________________________________________
Where I work:
HP
What I take for Memory and Focus:
Focus Fast
Knoxfire Esquire wrote:The Five Hundred was meant to replace the Crown Vic while the Fusion was supposed to replace the Taurus. Taurus was mid-size like the Fusion, while the Five Hundred was a full-size car like the Crown. The new Taurus (and 500 replacement) is full-size and Ford has said that it will be the Crown Vic replacement when it's phased out next year.
uh no
the fusion is more the size of the former contour
the taurus has always been a bigger car
The SSR is the most god awful piece of flaming ass I have ever seen. I dont understand the appeal of it really. I wouldnt really agree that it was the replacement for the Camaro though. The Camaros were poorly designed also. They were asking to have it axed when the designed newest ones. little legroom for anyone besides the driver. No back seat unless youre a small child (I have to ride laying across the back in my friends Camaro. No trunk. It was fiberglass. It drove like hell in anythign besides dry weather.
TheSundownFire wrote:The SSR is the most god awful piece of flaming ass I have ever seen. I dont understand the appeal of it really. I wouldnt really agree that it was the replacement for the Camaro though. The Camaros were poorly designed also. They were asking to have it axed when the designed newest ones. little legroom for anyone besides the driver. No back seat unless youre a small child (I have to ride laying across the back in my friends Camaro. No trunk. It was fiberglass. It drove like hell in anythign besides dry weather.
Agreed. There's no excuse anymore for modern Ponycars not to have decently sized trunks and rear seats, nor is there any excuse for them to be crap in winter with electronic traction control. In fact, I remember being slightly surprised that the Camaro, Firebird and Mustang didn't adress these problems during their 1993-94 redesigns. Also, the line between ponycar and musclecar has become more and more blurred since 1989 when the last arguably true old-school musclecars were sold (GM G-Bodies - Monte-Carlo SS, Grand National, 442, Hurst/Olds) and the the 2+2 ponycars have more or less taken the place of musclecars for guys who want V8s, two doors and rear-wheel-drive.
1996blackHB wrote:decent list, however I would add the cavalier/j-body in there as well ....... not because there bad cars, but because the were so behind and never updated technoligically as they should have been
But really, what technology did you want to see in them?
2010 Honda Fit LX
I would add the toyota camary and corolla and the honda accord and civic. They've been kicking azz in sales for a long time, and helped sink GM by giving consumers a better option.
Ford should never get rid of the Crown Vic. They're dumb for making that move, but then again.... if the newest Taurus's becomes police cars I should be having one in my driveway in due time after snagging one from a police auction LOL.
I KNOW I'm not the only one who would rock an AMC Pacer here!
Although, admittedly, I'd prefer a Gremlin
Brian
Funny that 40% of your list is Ford, considering that they are the only company out of the Big Three who's doing "well" right now.
... and yes, I would totally drive a Pacer
no this still isnt right
First off I dont even know what AMC is, it was dead and gone before most of us were born so its not that relevant for the current situation. The SSR was a waste of money and marketing but its so irrelevant that most people don't even know what it is or that it was ever made. I think I saw one on the road my entire life. For a car to ruin a reputation it has to be one that sold massively and fairly recent. Lets face it every car made between 1976-1985 was a complete piece of @!#$ I don't what the make or model was.
A more realistic list would be the following....
1. Chevrolet Corsica - Horrible reliability, cheaply made, and you can't find a single one where the paint is still on. They sold a ton of these and most ppl stil hate chevy because of it.
2. Plymouth/Dodge Neon - Great idea that sold massively yet had horrible reliability. My dad owned one and it had more issues than any other car he has ever had. Also another car hard to find without rust from all the paint falling off
3. Pontiac Grand AM - meant to be a sporty affordable family car, and they nickel and dime you to death with repairs, tons of these on the road at one time, hardly any anymore because they all broke down
4. Ford Tempo - Quite possibly the worst car ever made.
5. Ford Taurus - the number one car of the 90s much like the Corsica but still more problems than you should ever have
1989 Turbo Trans Am #82, 2007 Cobalt SS G85
Rodimus Prime wrote:no this still isnt right
A more realistic list would be the following....
1. Chevrolet Corsica - Horrible reliability, cheaply made, and you can't find a single one where the paint is still on. They sold a ton of these and most ppl stil hate chevy because of it.
2. Plymouth/Dodge Neon - Great idea that sold massively yet had horrible reliability. My dad owned one and it had more issues than any other car he has ever had. Also another car hard to find without rust from all the paint falling off
3. Pontiac Grand AM - meant to be a sporty affordable family car, and they nickel and dime you to death with repairs, tons of these on the road at one time, hardly any anymore because they all broke down
4. Ford Tempo - Quite possibly the worst car ever made.
5. Ford Taurus - the number one car of the 90s much like the Corsica but still more problems than you should ever have
Come to where I live and try most of your statements again. Plenty of Corsicas an Barettas still on the road in very good shape. Not bad for a car that went out of production over 10 years ago.
Once again, look around. Most in my area are in decent shape. Just because your dad had one that was a POS does not mean a whole lot. A family down the street from me had 5 at one time. They only get rid of them when something happens ie. a wreck. Have yet to see one at their house that is missing its paint and covered in rust. Not saying it doesnt happen but more often than not they have all of the paint still on them.
Plenty of Grand Am (and other N bodies) still on the road. Not a whole lot goes wrong with them. I did not make much money off of then when I worked in GM dealers.
Dont know much about the Fords as I have no real experience with them.
Knoxfire Esquire wrote:
4 - 1989-1992 Ford Probe
Here's a great idea. Take a beloved American motoring icon that has endured for decades and always sold well. and turn it into a generic Japanese FWD sport's coupe. Bound to work right? Well, even Ford had it's doubts because when the backlash hit them they decided to keep the Mustang around and sell it's replacement under a different name. Unsurprisingly the car sold poorly and the ten year old design of the Mustang was vastly more popular. Again, the reason is obvious, the Mustang was cheaper (Hell, at the time a base 5.0 was cheaper than a Civic Si) and it didn't look like something designed as a joke.
The Probe was a "replacement" for the Ford EXP. The EXP is the car that was supposed to "replace" the mustang and flopped..Just figured I would throw that in here since it was on the topic.
mitdr774 wrote:Rodimus Prime wrote:no this still isnt right
A more realistic list would be the following....
1. Chevrolet Corsica - Horrible reliability, cheaply made, and you can't find a single one where the paint is still on. They sold a ton of these and most ppl stil hate chevy because of it.
2. Plymouth/Dodge Neon - Great idea that sold massively yet had horrible reliability. My dad owned one and it had more issues than any other car he has ever had. Also another car hard to find without rust from all the paint falling off
3. Pontiac Grand AM - meant to be a sporty affordable family car, and they nickel and dime you to death with repairs, tons of these on the road at one time, hardly any anymore because they all broke down
4. Ford Tempo - Quite possibly the worst car ever made.
5. Ford Taurus - the number one car of the 90s much like the Corsica but still more problems than you should ever have
Come to where I live and try most of your statements again. Plenty of Corsicas an Barettas still on the road in very good shape. Not bad for a car that went out of production over 10 years ago.
Once again, look around. Most in my area are in decent shape. Just because your dad had one that was a POS does not mean a whole lot. A family down the street from me had 5 at one time. They only get rid of them when something happens ie. a wreck. Have yet to see one at their house that is missing its paint and covered in rust. Not saying it doesnt happen but more often than not they have all of the paint still on them.
Plenty of Grand Am (and other N bodies) still on the road. Not a whole lot goes wrong with them. I did not make much money off of then when I worked in GM dealers.
Dont know much about the Fords as I have no real experience with them.
I'll agree about the Corsica. My friend's mom has one, that has about 130000 miles on it, and it is still running fine. No major rust damage or paint issues either.
As for the grand Am. I see tons around here. My ex owned one as a matter of fact and babied that car. I barely see them come into work for repairs.
Trucks
Licoln navigator
Ford excursion
2nd generation chevrolet blazer
older jeep suvs
cars
1st gen dodge viper
that dodge or chrysler roadster convertible - looks like a hotrod -
Working on obtainting an M-Class license... ?? Hint: 2 wheels.
1996blackHB wrote:decent list, however I would add the cavalier/j-body in there as well ....... not because there bad cars, but because the were so behind and never updated technoligically as they should have been
Add a car that sold Millions and countless millions????????
Because of a lack of IRS? Rear Discs?? You bought one, didn't you?
i have a 98 camaro myself. it could use some improvments. like a bigger trunk area. the rear seats i can care less about. but the fact GM replaced it with the SSR is repulsive. makes me want to barf
Im a Xbox 360 fanboy...and damn proud of it!!
Toronto Cavalier wrote:Trucks
Licoln navigator
Ford excursion
2nd generation chevrolet blazer
older jeep suvs
cars
1st gen dodge viper
that dodge or chrysler roadster convertible - looks like a hotrod -
The Prowler
I`m surprised no one mentioned the Aztec...ugliest vehicle ever....I can`t believe they sold (the few they did)
Disclaimer: I will probally offend you with what is written in this post.
Rodimus Prime wrote:First off I dont even know what AMC is, it was dead and gone before most of us were born so its not that relevant for the current situation. The SSR was a waste of money and marketing but its so irrelevant that most people don't even know what it is or that it was ever made. I think I saw one on the road my entire life. For a car to ruin a reputation it has to be one that sold massively and fairly recent. Lets face it every car made between 1976-1985 was a complete piece of @!#$ I don't what the make or model was.
I think the death of AMC is relevant, because it highlights exactly why car companies today are dying. AMC died because it was small and affected first by the troubles facing car companies now.
The downward spiral technically we're seeing come to a head at the moment started in 1972 and were insanely apparent around 1980. No company as huge as the big three were can kill itself in 5 or 10 years, it's just not possible. This took a long time and was caused by endemic bad decision making. Hell, they were publishing books about how GM was committing suicide in the seventies, nobody listened.
Just think, Car companies in the late fifties and sixties would refresh their cars EVERY YEAR. Imagine how expensive that was. Today, car models are almost identical for a decade. You look at the new 2010 Camaro and go "Hello 2020 Camaro!". Imagine how much design money that cost. Yet, they could swing it easy. What happened?
What's frightening for all of us is that this isn't just a car company thing, but a "company" thing. All corporations do it. They sacrifice long term sustainability to make insane amounts of money in the short term. Of course GM and Ford and Chrysler sold millions of cars and made a profit until just now. But it was like watching someone burn down his house for warmth. Eventually, you need that chair you just tossed in the fire and... oops.
Just look at the list of problems that started in the seventies:
- Inability to build cars that are both attractive to the public and fit the safety/pollution/MPG norms.
- Complete lack of ideas on how to make pretty cars anymore.
- Incapacity of getting any serious power out of an engine.
- Incapacity of implementing any of the above in a reliable package.
Sound familiar? For nearly forty years now they still act like it's insurmountable.
Then, there's the business-as-usual BS where they consciously cheapen less expensive models to make their mid and high range ones look better in Comparison. Why do you think the Fiero couldn't have had a 3.8 Turbo and made 245hp like the Grand National? Because it would have been more powerful than the Corvette and we couldn't have that. Same for why the Camaro never had more power than the Vette despite having the same engine. And so on... and so on...
My point is... that this isn't new. This has been brewing for three decades. Everyone may act like they're suprised, but us older guys aren't surprised. We knew this was coming a lonnnnnng time ago.
--
As for the EXP being a replacement for the Mustang, naw. Two reasons: I was there and 16 in 1989 when the whole Probe/Mustang thing was blowing up and I remember it pretty darn well, and because they started making the EXP in 1982 when the new Mustang was barely 3 years old.
"- Inability to build cars that are both attractive to the public and fit the safety/pollution/MPG norms.
- Complete lack of ideas on how to make pretty cars anymore.
- Incapacity of getting any serious power out of an engine.
- Incapacity of implementing any of the above in a reliable package."
GM has had some fairly decent looking, fuel efficient, low pollution, and safe vehicles compared to other like vehicles they competed with. I will use my 98 Z24 as an example. It doesnt look to bad, I have no concerns about surviving a wreck (already wrecked my 00 and it held up better than expected). Gets great fuel economy (27 MPG in my normal weekly driving, 70/30 city/highway, and 32-39 highway depending on conditions). Last time I put the 98 on a sniffer it was well below the standard for emissions. Producing 150hp and 155tq from a 146ci engine is not to shabby. I replaced a leaking water pump, and a transmission that I broke. That is it The car has been very reliable and problem free since the day it was picked up from the dealer in 1998. My 96 K1500 has also been a very reliable truck since Dec. 1995.
Most of the imports I have been looking at are not exactly what I would call a good looking car. They suffer the same bland look that quite a few domestics do. I spent some time working in a Nissan dealer and can honestly say that they do not have the quality, reliability, fuel economy, or styling they are hyped up to have.
I will buy a domestic over an import for many reasons. Of the domestics I will buy a GM over the others. I know GM vehicles, worked in GM dealers for 7 years, have grown up around GM vehicles, both of my grandfathers have retired from GM, and my mother currently works for GM.
Knoxfire Esquire wrote:
As for the EXP being a replacement for the Mustang, naw. Two reasons: I was there and 16 in 1989 when the whole Probe/Mustang thing was blowing up and I remember it pretty darn well, and because they started making the EXP in 1982 when the new Mustang was barely 3 years old.
True, I keep forgetting about the older frogeyed ones. I have looked back and yes, I stand corrected...I still miss my exp tho!! Mine was an '87 SC. I must have read some bad information somewhere..
I miss cars like the EXP and the Fiero. I think they were ahead of their time and would work better today than they ever did then. We need cars to be fun and cheap again.
Also, I personally don't think American cars are bad. In fact, I often like them more than imports by a wide margin. However, I do think the Domestics have been mismanaged all to hell. My list doesn't include bad cars so much as cars that are symptomatic of the bad decision making that Detroit has shown over the years.
