You can’t usually choose your family, especially when you’re a conjoined twin. Sometimes it’s a black sheep brother, or the creepy uncle who always wants you to sit on his lap and talk about how much you’ve grown. Car companies are like that too, and not every sibling from even your most beloved manufacturer is created equal.
Lots of us have favorite brands – whether it be Porsche, Chevy or Mazda – and each of those car makers has a slew of cars under their tent. But not all of them have turned out to be a happy ending, despite being from a brand you feel can do no wrong. Of course everyone makes mistakes, that’s why pencils have erasers and Ford never mentions the Aspire anymore.
So which car from your favorite maker makes you kinda’ want to hurl, or makes you so angry at its anti-brand existence that you just want to hurl, or has styling that is so repugnant that you may have to hurl. . . ? Anyway, you get the idea.
Image source: [993c4s.com]
Hooniverse Asks – What’s Your Least Favorite Product of Your Most Favorite Car Maker?
About
160 responses to “Hooniverse Asks – What’s Your Least Favorite Product of Your Most Favorite Car Maker?”
-
I present for your consideration the Anti-Honda.
<img src="http://www.automedia.com/New_Cars/honda_pilot_2010_photos_SUV_Exterior_1-Front-Right.jpg">-
The Ridgeline is even worse, since it's not even a real pickup.
-
I considered the Ridgeline but didn't use it. The Ridgeline was never intended to be a "real" pickup like the F-series or Chevy C/K. It's a brave attempt to re-define the purely recreational pickup with ideas like underfloor storage. My main problem with it is that it's a couple sizes too big and there's no manual. However, it's more distinctive than the generic-SUV Pilot.
-
Ugh. The Honda defense.
This is similar to the spiel I got from a Honda rep trying to defend the CR-Z at NAIAS last year. I said, "But it's stupid, there are a bunch of better hybrids already out there. Hell, the gen 1 Insight got almost 70mpg, where's that car?". He said, "But this car satisfies an even smaller niche demographic. We make the stupid crap everyone else refuses to. You just watch, this will be the car to turn this company around!"
And around and around they go…-
You flunk reading comprehension. Did I ever say I liked the Ridgeline? If you read my post carefully, you'd have seen that I considered the Ridgeline as the worst Honda. I put up the Pilot instead because it's just another big blocky SUV. It took zero imagination to produce it. The Ridgeline, even though it's a turkey, at least represents an attempt to be different. Now take your ugh elsewhere.
-
No need to get personal, tonyola. My 'ugh' was directed at Honda, not at you. I read your post thoroughly and agree that the Ridgeline is more imagined than the Pilot. In fact, I agree with most of what you said. I was only saying that Honda designs cars they think people SHOULD want as opposed to cars people DO want. Which in retrospect I suppose isn't totally a bad thing, just rather unconventional and it's a pretty divisive marketing strategy.
Now to pass that damned reading class…
-
-
-
-
-
Honda stopped being my favorite automaker when they ended production of the S2000. Hell, they're not even making the Element anymore. Is there *anything* worth having in their current lineup?
-
Accord Crosstour, anyone? Such an ugly car.
-
What about the Acura ZDX? If it were any stupider and uglier, it would have to come from Germany.
The KV Mini I outfitted with the excessive 125cc engine. 50cc should be sufficient for anyone.
-
Ah, but for the 50cc Gad'Jet, KV unwisely eliminated the grindstone drivetrain, substituting something a bit more conventional (though not much):
<img src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5050/5352376690_efa1f75570.jpg" width="350">
No, I'll have to say my answer is the Mini 2:
<img src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5042/5352373868_4071a171a5.jpg" width="250">
<img src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5286/5351793129_8b4a793c67.jpg" width="350">
an awkward redesign which sacrifices both the crisp lines of the Mini 1 and, once again, the grindstones:
<img src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5243/5351765985_b86865b954.jpg" width="350">
Shortly after the introduction of the Mini 2, the company went out of business. Don't mess with success. -
Alff, you're nearing the magic ton! Give engineerd a hearty handshake once you're on the other side.
-
what happens then, anyway? I'm imagining something like in the Wizard of Oz – from drab b&w to technicolor madness.
-
I think it's somewhere in between the sound barrier and a hyperspace jump.
"The roar, the whoosh, the pretty colors! …I wish WE had hyperspace!" —Captain Butt-
Galaxina… whoa.
As a motorcyclist (not an HD enthusiast at all), fan of bad movies & Playmates, I'm conflicted; now I need some alone time.
-
-
I think it involves 44 virgins.
-
So it's not quite as good as what an Islamic martyr gets (72 virgins)? As a Douglas Adams fan, I think I'd settle for 42.
(Also a fan of Buster Poindexter. I don't think he knows a lot of virgins.) -
At least not after he's met them, amiright (wink, wink)?
-
-
-
For me it is the Chevy Traverse. Simply because it isn't what it should be. It should be the Chevy TrailBlazer with a proper frame underneath for proper off roading. I know, I know, unibody is where it is at but personally the TrailBlazer was just right the way it was. But GM decides to kill it off and in its place is the Traverse. A really fat and ugly car that sits up higher than a car should. Blah to that thing.
-
In it's defense [devil's advocate yadda yadda], the trailblazer was just a slightly more capable ugly truck with too little ground clearance that rode like garbage. I rode in one all the way to Indiana once. I still can't sit right.
-
No argument that it has horrible ground clearance but compared to the Traverse off road (I've driven both) I'd be afraid of wrecking the Traverse putting it through what I put my TB through.
Ugly…ya, the Trailblazer isn't very pretty. If I could get some extra coin I'd strip the front end off mine and put a proper front bumper. Also up the lift a few inches to match the larger profile tires I already run. My running boards would appreciate it.-
Major props for driving both offroad. I can appreciate the attempt to at least try to use these things for their supposed purpose.
-
The Trailblazer sees about 40% of its life off-road now. Summer months I never travel on pavement unless it is to work. Enough trails to drive on to keep most people happy. Most of its life it was my wifes daily driver. Soccer mom SUV at its finest. I got my hands on it and felt it only would do justice to the poor thing to get it muddy and dirty as often as possible.
The Traverse was a friends, we took it from my house to the our farm. Across nice flat field roads I was afraid of ruining the poor thing. -
Hah that's incredible. As for the Traverse, quite a misnomer, eh?
-
-
-
They killed the Trailblazer? I thought they are making both.
-
Ya, sad day. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_TrailBlaze…
Since the Aspire was already mentioned, I'll go the house of Aston Martin for my pick — actually two:
<img width="500" src="http://5o55y.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/aston-martin-lagonda-concept_31.jpg">
[Image from http://1001carsgalleries.blogspot.com]
It's fugly. AM has no business getting into the SUV world, and it's fugly.
They also have this little gem:
<img width="500" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b6/Aston_Martin_Cygnet_%2882%29.JPG">
[Image from Wikipedia]
I understand why AM is producing this, and that it will hopefully keep some lights on, but a tiny, rebadged Toyota is very un-Aston Martin.
-
The Lagonda? Kill it with fire.
-
I was going to Thumbs Up you for mentioning the Cygnet but then you posted the Lagonda concept.
[puts on flamesuit]
I happen to like the Lagonda and its potential. Everyone hates on the Porsche SUV but look what it did for the company. It sold in high volume at a profitable margin. Aston could use some of that.-
The profitable part came because they're overpriced beyond recognition and also because most of the development costs came from VW/Audi. Even with the Benz GL underpinnings Aston still would have to shed a lot of money on this, and I don't think they can. I actually respect the Cygnet more than the Lagonda. They NEED the citycar, the fat SUV that they WANT is just making things even worse.
-
I respectfully disagree. Aston doesn't NEED a citycar. Look at what's happening to SMART. Sales dropped 40% over the last 12 months and 84% for the month of January.
Yes, the Toyota iq is selling well oversees but at a price point fractional of the Cygnet.-
Aston Martin has to comply with the European Union's fleet average emissions standards beginning in 2012. The Cygnet will help them meet the standards. So yes, Aston NEEDS a citycar.
-
Exactly. Also, current AM owners will be given preference for Cygnet sales. This is important in places like London where you pay a congestion charge. The congestion charge on a city car is much less than on a V12 Vanquish.
-
I see your point and agree but to play devil's advocate:
If AM builds the Cygent to meet emissions standards but it doesn't sell, is it still a good decision? How much does it cost to produce a car that doesn't sell vs. paying European Union penalties? -
'In 2012, 65% of each manufacturer's newly registered cars must comply on average with the limit value curve set by the legislation. This will rise to 75% in 2013, 80% in 2014, and 100% from 2015 onwards.'
Givan Aston's production volumes, I don't think they'll have trouble selling a couple thousand Cygnets per year. I could see the Cygnet being sought after in Japan, for instance. -
Exactly. Plus, since AM didn't spend a ton of money developing a whole new car it is a pretty efficient way of meeting the EU regs without having to redesign their engines/exhaust systems in short order.
-
The AM V12 is not direct injected is it? That would be the next step. If it is, I think they squeezed all they could from that engine.
-
I think of the Cygnet as being like a tender is to a megayacht. Also, it gives the landed gentry something reliable to drive when their Aston is being repaired. Again.
-
The landed gentry? So it's not just footballers that buy Astons these days.
-
-
-
-
Maybe they should bundle it in with the purchase of any proper new Aston, which is what I think they're doing. Then they can say the 'sold' however-many-Astons-they-sold and be in the clear!
The Cygnet only makes sense if it was exclusive to proper Aston owners ONLY. That way, a Cygnet on the street says "I've got a real Aston in me garage!". -
The Japanese love tiny cars with upscale trim. Look at the success that Mitsuoka and other converters have enjoyed with turning home-market micro-cars into miniature versions of classic deluxe Euro machinery. I think the Cygnet plays perfectly into this market, and I wouldn't be surprised if Aston sells most of its production in Japan. Aston doesn't even have to switch the sides for the steering wheel.
<img src="http://www.dymee.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-o-matic/200909-2/83bda_mitsuoka-viewt-f3q-a.jpg" width="400/"> -
I don't know if the totals are based on global production numbers, but if it is then they can make it a Japan-only thing and be done with it! There is definitely a market there and we wouldn't have to hear about the person who boasts about having an Ahhston Mahhtin when he's got a Cygnet.
Otherwise, they need to market the Cygnet as an 'accessory' and not a car so to keep the brand 'pure', I think. One thing is for sure; A Cygnet is not an Aston Martin. It might be like an Aston Martin wristwatch, or an Aston Martin ashtray, but NOT an Aston Martin, full-stop. -
The Cygnet will be sold in the UK first then in mainland Europe. I'm not sure what their plans are for worldwide uber-luxury microcar domination.
-
If Aston-Martin is going to produce the Lagonda SUV, then any concept of keeping the brand pure has already gone out the window. If Ferrari can put its name on a skateboard (yes, it's an official product), then I wouldn't worry about the Cygnet.
<img src="http://store.ferrari.com/upload/img/0/0/0/0/8/8/B/D/260_13031_1.jpg">
Not only luxury cars. Dream Factory Blow will take your kei car and make it an awesome Chevy!
<img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/translogic.aolautos.com/media/2010/12/autostranslogic901videostill480.jpg"/>
I want one of these.It I ever get my grubby paws on one I'll hang around all the Jaguar Owners Club meetings and enjoy the reactions.Best not stay too long however.
That was meant to be a comment about the Mitsuoka.
There used to be an old joke about a Texas car dealership. A guy comes in and can't decide between the Eldorado or the Coupe de Ville. While he's walking around the two cars, the salesman says, "Can I get you something while you're deciding? Coffee…Cigarette…Volkswagen?"
Change that to an Aston Martin dealer and the Cygnet, and it works even better today.
I wasn't aware until you put that up that Aston Martin was reviving the Lagonda name. What a shame to soil it with something like that.
<img src="http://www.thetorquereport.com/2009_vw_routan_red.jpg" width="500">
-
The CRouton!
-
Sorry, this is not a car. It is, among other things, a complete and utter fail. I worked for VW when it was announced they were going to do this, and wanted to slit my wrists at the mere mention. The company who INVENTED the minivan concept lowering themselves to a rebadged Chrysler? Disgusting.
/shakes fist in general direction of Wolfsburg/-
Sorry, this is not a car. It is, among other things, a complete and utter fail.
Well, it's a Chrysler. I think everything you said is pretty well redundant, taking that fact into account.
I still work at Volkswagen, and we flat-out refuse to bring in any Routans. We won't order them, and won't keep them on the lot. We'll only bring one in on special order. Volkswagen isn't entirely sure what to do with us. They told us they were sending us three of them, for such a massive discount it was nearly free, and we refused. The parking spaces were worth more to us than the vans were.
-
-
Yeah, pretty much.
It's definitely the Porsche Cayenne.
-
I used to think the same thing. Then I found out the Cayenne has a darn good tow rating and is quite the capable SUV. Should Porsche ever have entered the SUV market? No, and for that you're absolutely right. However, they did a surprisingly good job on it.
-
Volkswagen did a surprisingly good job of it.
-
"The Cayenne's frame and doors are sourced from Volkswagen, who uses the frames and doors for the Volkswagen Touareg model. All other aspects of vehicle design, tuning, production are done in house at Porsche."
-
Simply put, that's the most white-washed version of the story I could imagine. The entire chassis and unibody were designed and funded by Volkswagen for the Touareg. The original 3.2L engine was the Volkswagen VR6, re-tuned by Porsche. Now, since it's been out for a while, there are a lot of components that have been changed, and Porsche has finally had some input into it, but trying to claim that it's a Porsche-developed platform is a stretch. Volkswagen paid for all of the development, and subcontracted Porsche to work on it. Essentially, in one of the best deals in automotive history, Porsche got an all-new SUV platform for free.
The platform itself is built alongside the Touareg in Bratislava, Slovakia; once the chassis and basic running gear is installed, it is sent to Leipzig in Germany for completion. Porsche now uses their own engine, but the all-wheel-drive system is the same as on the Touareg and Q7, and the new base engine will be Volkswagen's 3.6L VR6, while the diesel will be the Touareg's 3.0L TDI. -
Nibbles done et up your reply. This might save it.
Also, I can't find whatever it was I read a decade ago, but this thing off howstuffworks sounds familiar:
"AutoWeek noted that Porsche execs were "sensitive" about this newest venture with Wolfsburg, perhaps recalling the brickbats hurled at the Porsche 914 and Porsche 924, which used some VW and Audi components, respectively.
Porsche, however, worked hard to get across the idea that its engineers led the way in this joint SUV undertaking. Understandably keen to protect a blue-chip brand image, it wasn't about to have its first SUV dismissed as an upmarket VW.
"Porsche acted as project leader, and much of the work done on VW AG's nickel was conducted by Porsche's contract engineering division…" AutoWeek reported. "Joint development was limited to the basic floor pan and some drivetrain parts. Engines, suspension tuning, styling and finish work were the independent domain of each manufacturer."
Driving home the point that Cayenne wasn't a gilded Touareg, Porsche spent $124 million on a new dedicated plant in Leipzig. There was no room at Porsche's main facilities in Zuffenhausen, and though VW set up for Touaregs in the nearby Slovak Republic, where labor costs were lower, Porsche refused to follow, believing "made in Germany" was crucial to Cayenne sales.
The handsome new glass-walled factory received painted Cayenne bodies from VW and various ready-to-fit modules from other suppliers. Car and Driver noted that Porsche itself contributed only about 20 percent of total content."
VW absolutely funded it, and the majority of the materials were made to order for Porsche, but the design and testing was mostly done by Porsche, including the all wheel drive system. It was a Porsche brain and VW braun venture. When you make a building, do you cite the architect or the construction crew for a successful design? Ironically, VW's design team has gained more design input over time (primarily due to the merger). The next gen Cayenne is going to be an entirely VW design, as Porsche designers are being re-tasked to sport-luxury sedans like–ugh–Bentley.
-
-
-
I don't hate the Cayenne for existing to fill Porsche's coffers, I hate that it's so cynical about it. The Panamera sort of makes sense as an attempt to diversify the lineup, since it's akin to a stretch 928. On the other hand, by going straight for the SUV, they may as well have gotten Poochie to give his (fictional) endorsement.
-
-
I was never real sentimental towards Porsche so if they feel like going out and creating a killer suv even though they're ONLY supposed to make 911 derivatives, I'm all for it!! And I don't even really like suv's…
I just realized that I don't have a favorite car maker. At least not among those still producing cars. They're all just companies.
-
Couldn't agree more,well said.
-
And they're all made out of ticky tacky and they all look just the same.
<img src="http://www.cartype.com/pics/2929/full/lincoln_new_1.jpg", width=500>
I'm a Ford fanboy but I despise what they are doing with Lincoln. They are nothing but a bunch of rebadged Fords with silly letter connotations.
What happened to unique cars like the Mark VII, Mark VIII and the LS? I'm all for platform sharing to reduce costs, but make a different vehicle on the platform.
-
I'm with you, and hopeful that the demise of Mercury means they can focus some $$$ on giving Lincoln some unique product. They've alluded to this, and the fact that they would like to move Lincoln back up-market.
The Chuck series were always my least favorite.
<img src="http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSzKWc6Rk3L84NncMXELGa8MtELPTHl2OlhhMzE3jXdoAA8IeSARg" width="400">
-
Disagree. My 1 year-old hoons the crap out of his garbage truck version, and the smaller, soft ones are easier for really little ones to vroom around, as well as softer on your feet when you step on them.
-
"Let's get rolling! We've got work to do."
Shit. I can hear it in my sleep.-
I thought of that after I posted. None of the Chuck-related stuff in my house makes any noise, which is why I like it so much.
-
<img src="http://www.luxurylaunches.com/entry_images/1006/31/pink_veyron.jpg">
Now, let me explain. I don't have a favorite car maker either, Audi, BMW, Maserati, Porsche, Lambo, Ferrari etc. are all partly OK because they have produced engineering or styling marvels but at the same time they have produced some big disappointments.
I love the idea behind the Bugatti as a car maker, to push the envelope and produce audacious, superbly engineered no cost spared hyper car. Also, I think result should have been slinky, nice looking sportscar. Veyron could've been more.
-
But then, the beauty in the EB110 is also subjective.
-
The last Bugatti automobile worthy of the name (although just barely) is the Type 251. Of course, my taste in French cars has been called into question before….
-
I'm split. I'd like to think that way too, but the EB110 was a 550HP quad-turbo V12, the Veyron is a 1000HP W16 car. It is offensively ostentatious, it IS a Bugatti. I don't know much about Maybach, but I'm sure the 57 and 62 have similar places as they had in the past. I'm with you that it shouldn't rely on the name of the brands but I can't discount the cars just because nobody from the original company is involved.
-
-
EB110 SS <- YES, uh……"regular" EB110…well, very eighties and from some angles not too beautiful, also I think Bugatti blue wasn't the best color for this car.
-
Ferrari California. The retractable hardtop was completely unnecessary, and "does this make my butt look big?" becomes a rhetorical question.
Big time fail on the part of Ferrari, they could have made this car look great as a coupe and a spider, but decided to mash both together.
Another Ferrari stumbling point was when they stopped putting quad taillights on the cars – 599/458, hopefully this trend stops.
-
Big time fail? But it's all the LA posers need. Considering the people who buy these things, it's the perfect Ferrari.
I'm a Mazda fan. Obvious answer is thus the CX-9. Take the last of the right-sized minivans (not too big, not too small), scale it up, remove the functionality, and drop it beside your Miata's, Mazdaspeed 3's and RX-8's.
It's a half-effort, decidedly main-stream product from a company that does best being ever so slightly off centre.
Also, it's existence prevents me from buying a turbocharged, AWD MPV like those Domestic Market Japanese get.
This:
<img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/64/2010_Mazda_CX-9_Grand_Touring_–_08-25-2010.jpg/800px-2010_Mazda_CX-9_Grand_Touring_–_08-25-2010.jpg" width=500>
is not better than this:
<img src="http://wallpapers-diq.com/wallpapers/17/Mazda_Mazda8_MPV_Black_2009.jpg" width=500>
-
+1 – I don't care much for the CX7 (especially since it probably didn't help the 6 Wagon's case), but at least it's off-kilter. The CX9 is just bloat personified.
-
Agreed. I don't love the CX-7, but you can (could?) get the turbo-4 and AWD.
-
Still can – they only brought out FWD and natural aspiration to give them a more competitive price.
-
-
-
It's not better than nothing….
Soooo, remove the double neg's and it's better than something… What is it?!?-
It was a link to a picture of the current MPV/Mazda8. Obviously from a sketchy website that Hoonibbles does not like. Just imagine a minivan with a Mazdaspeed6 powertrain.
-
Ahh Mazda5 you mean? Yes agreed I like that thing. Now dat's a sexy minivan, so they say.
-
-
-
I'd argue that the CX9 & CX7 are better fits than the horrible badge engineered Tribute. At least the CX's are true Mazdas and reflect the design quality of the rest of the lineup. The boxy Tribute with its forced Mazda face just doesn't work. If it's no different than an Escape, why does it exist?
That said, a crossover with minivan towing capacity is silly. When i moved from a van to my Outlook, I wanted a CX9, but with only 3,500 lbs towing it didn't make any sense.-
Weren't the Tribute and Escape co-developed by Ford and Mazda? It's absolutely due for replacement, but at the time, it was decent for a Mazda crossover.
-
-
As an admittedly HUGE Mazda fanboy and owner of a 2000 MPV I immediately thought "CX-9" myself. I went to check it out when it was new, and couldn't believe how much bigger it is than my MPV while being smaller and more cramped inside!
Also, it's much more expensive than the MPV was!
Subaru Bahahahahahaha
-
Those make a lot more sense to me than the new Outback. I'm so confused, they already had the Forester.
-
…and the Tribeca!
-
-
Legacy, ughhh.
It's like the Taurus of cars you would expect to be cooler than like.. a Taurus.-
Yes, Subaru has pretty much jumped the shark. Sad, considering their aspirations for the last generation of Legacy – to be a viable competitor to the A4 and 3-Series. My '05 GT lacks the refinement of the similar year Audi, but it will eat it for lunch. Now they're just boring and bloaty.
-
Yea my buddy bought a stickshift '07 and loves it. It's a great looking car. The new concept gave off an upmarket feel but the new gen Legacy just looks like a Subaru Accord.
-
-
Uhoh guys. I think I am having a crisis. I don't know who my favorite car maker is.
I like a lot of them, but I cannot choose a favorite, let alone a least of my favorites. Shit.
Help!
-
Donkervoordt?
-
Wow, excellent suggestion. I ADORE those cars. There aren't many that make me say "WANT!" but Donkervoordt is one of them.
Partly just to try and register it, and watch the monkeys in the registry office struggle to spell the name.
-
-
Ooh Hummer! Pick Hummer!
-
I like it, but I think I will pick Exxxcalade. Caddy is a decent car maker, and I have no problem with any of their cars. I do have a big problem with the Escalade. Also, this is for fun:
<img src="http://www.insanelimos.com/wp-content/gallery/fleet-pictures/escalade-hummer-limo02.JPG" width=500> -
Yeah, telling your buddies you were going to get a hummer used to mean you had something to brag about…until it became an automotive make.
-
The new Citroen DS3. Do not defile the good name of DS (or SM, 2CV, Traction Avant, H-van) with a new-retro car that looks nothing like the awesome original. Damn thing doesn't even have hydraulics, turning headlights or a button for a brake pedal.
-
There's one that parks in the same car park that I use in the morning. While I understand your point about it not being a "DS", however it is a really nice C3. And I think that it looks good.
Shelby, through his various manufacturing companies from time to time, has made some unbelievably great cars (the 427 Cobra, for example), some other cars that had their full potential unlocked by him (Mustangs), and made some chepa cars that outperformed cars costing much more (GLHS). I never really got excited by the Series 1, though.
<img src="http://cdn.wn.com/pd/7f/b2/c42deb5655ef005f83e78d1109c2_grande.jpg">
-
Series 1 always had a bit of a "reunion tour" feel to it.
All the parts are there, just like last time…but it's never the same.-
Around 2001, I saw a Shelby Series One in for service at a Coral Gables performance shop. The people there told me that the Shelby One was a real dog – poorly put together, trouble-prone, and not all that fast.
-
It's really too bad, because it used a bunch of parts and engineering from the Oldsmobile Aurora, which was a car I always had a soft spot for. I saw the potential in that car to make something awesome, and when Shelby did, I was kind of excited about it.
Then I saw it, and wasn't excited anymore. "Reunion Tour" is pretty much the perfect analogy. "Hey, we're back, the lead singer is a geriatric and our arthritis prevents us from really rocking, but we're back!"-
<img src="http://www.flightstosydney.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/RollingStones-TW-3-2-10.jpg" width=400>
"Shufflin' Jack Flash has gas, gas, gas!"
-
-
-
My favourite new car is not made by my favourite company. But, my favourite company makes a bunch that are favourable, but definitely not my favourite of all time. Also, the company that makes my favourite car also makes a bunch of other cars that anyone can consider their least favourite, especially journalists, because those are their favourite fodder for fun-to-read articles without resorting to favouritism.
To actually answer the question, it's Subaru. Every car is lovable except for the Tribeca, which I checked still belongs on the front page of subaru.ca so they still sell it, stand out like a sore thumb. The rest are just Imprezas good, capable, solid vehicles that are fun to drive. And every car can somewhat realistically imagine themselves fitted with the turbo engine from the STi, which is very appealing.
But no Subaru will ever be like the new 2011 Dodge Charger. Big, vulgar, yet refined piece of road machinery. They fixed the important bits, too. Made the interior a habitable place, bigger windows, etc. It's like owning an elephant that knows to take a dump outside and won't trample up the neighbor's fence. But the rest of the lineup is not-so-good. Also, that had nothing to do with the question. Moving on…
-
"It's like owning an elephant that knows to take a dump outside and won't trample up the neighbor's fence."
thumbsuped
If you'd asked me in 2003, it would've been the Liberty. Man…didn't know how good we had it back then. The Compass for reasons that have already been beaten well past death.If you'd asked me in 2003, it would've been the Liberty. Man…didn't know how good we had it back then. The Compass for reasons that have already been beaten well past death.
In the interests of a more contemporary answer, as a current and would-be future owner, I'm still trying to make sense of Subaru's lineup.
They de-wagoned the WRX wagon, then made the Legacy/Outback into a midsize crossover…which the Forester already was…and meanwhile there's the vag on wheels Tribeca. So…compact hatch and 3 midsize crossovers, great. No compact-to-midsize wagons or even CUVs with a flash of sportiness like the Forester 2.5XT (5MT).
Don't make me buy a Volvo…
-
Do it, you won't.
-
Seriously. Volvo doesn't sell Volvos here anymore.
-
BMW X6 and 5 Series GT. I just saw the GT on the road, and it looks absolutely horrible in the metal. Both these cars are spearheading BMW's transition from driver's cars to overpriced, overweight pigs for suburban housewives.
-
So they've become Mercedes?
-
I despise everything the X3 and X5 stand for, but I sort of like the X6. It's not pretty, it's utterly massive, and yet I still want one in 15 years (despite how much it would cost to run). It's strange how looking like it escaped a video game endears it to me.
But the 5-series GT is sadly charmless.
Even new Acuras look good next to BMW's. With Acuras, it's just the details, like the huge chrome honker, which ruin the looks, but the overall shapes of the Beemers are a disaster. The X6 is a huge pig, but even it looks good next to the 5 series gt.
-
I just don't understand how they manage to make a vehicle like that weigh 5300 lb.
-
I think the engineers walked out to protest management decisions like self-recycling cars and Bangle design.
-
I found it difficult to pick my least favorite Holden…so I give you the Saturn Vue
<img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b2/2006-2008_Holden_CG_Captiva_LX_02.jpg/800px-2006-2008_Holden_CG_Captiva_LX_02.jpg">
-
What about the Holden Barina? Or the Barina Spark? Take a Daewoo, slap on a badge from a Vauxhall/Opel and sell it as a Holden. Horrible, horrible car, which can only sell to bogans whose blind faith to Holden compels them to buy anything badged as a Holden because it "Australian".
My fave? Probably Buick just because they are good cars and I drive two. Styling and powertrains have taken a dive since better times, but I feel good about their cars to come. Especially bringing back the GS moniker, finally.
The only one I'm not on board with is the Enclave. Admittedly an upgrade from the Rendezvous but it's still a chunky/awkward/useless SUV. The drivetrain isn't bad and the styling isn't horrendous but it's just the worst car they got.
-
See, and I actually like the Enclave, strangely enough. I think it's a big step forward for Buick, and the only really good example of that platform in the GM lineup.
-
I think it's just that I am a car guy. An suv, especially a faux-suv doesn't do it for me. I'm happy with the Regal and love the LaCrosse. Bring back a wagon or better yet, a beautiful Riviera [rwd perchance?] and life will be sweet.
-
MINI Countryman. Not at all a looker, not really that useful, portly, expensive, and doesn't even have the performance chops to make up for the drawbacks.
I don't know who is driving MINI off a cliff, but they're doing it very well. Of course, the Countryman is already selling like gangbusters.
It seems like all the SUV models are getting the disdain from all of you, especially the ones from BMW, Porsche, and Subaru. So, it's time to bring up why they are being offered in the first place.
You can blame our archaic Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards for this. You see there are separate CAFE standards for cars, and for Trucks. If you don't meet the CAFE Standards, there is a hefty fine that manufacturers have to pay to the Feds, sort of a Payola scheme in my opinion. The 2010 Cafe Standards were 27.5 MPG for cars, and 23.5 for vehicles classified as trucks.
One of the easiest ways to meet these standards is to move "car" based vehicles to "truck" based vehicles. A BMW 3 Series Wagon will be classified as a car, and a BMW X3 is a truck. Since BMW has a group of MBA's sitting around analyzing everything, they can't justify offering a 3 series wagon and an X3. The 3 Series wagon will have limited sales, and might hurt their overall CAFE requirements on the car side. The X3 will get similar fuel mileage to the 3 Series wagon, but it will offer BMW a way of obtaining credits that can be used for the future because of the trucks lower standards.
Therefore, we will see no more Legacy Wagons (Outbacks are classified as trucks), Volvo V70 Wagons, Mazda 6 Wagons, Honda Accord Wagons, or anything the rest of the world might get, but not the US. Until CAFE is fixed, we will be getting more crossovers than wagons in the near term.
On another subject, all of those cars labeled "Flex Fueled" have their own loophole in the CAFE system. While the formula for CAFE Standards is pretty complex, the results are not. Basically, the Flex Fuel vehicle (the ones that can burn E85) are calculated as burning a percentage of Gasoline over the course of the service life of the vehicle. Therefore, a Chevrolet Tahoe, that gets a real world fuel economy figure of 15 MPG City or 21 MPG Highway, will have a fuel economy number of 30 to 33 MPG because it is a Flex Fuel Vehicle. Practically any large SUV or Van being produced in the US is a Flex Fuel Vehicle to get under that loophole.
-
At least in Subaru's case, it's relatively easy to revert to the Outback to its Legacy Wagon roots, so if you really want one you have the option to do it yourself. Haven't seen one yet, though…
-
I am seriously considering doing that when I need a new vehicle.
-
It's a convincing case, eh? Sedan front bumper, sedan suspension, delete roof rack, cladding, and done! And you could even go for the arguably more attractive JDM front bumper and it'll fit right on! There is no turbo model, but the 2.5 does come with a stick. And that's not even going through the STi parts catalogue.
In other words, DO IT.
-
-
-
Dodge Magnum was classified as a SUV at fueleconomy.gov, even though it looks like a wagon. I believe that's one reason why the Charger later came out as a separate model; you can't call a sedan a truck and expect to get away with it.
-
Not even for the Magnum? One of the few Chrysler products I can appreciate?… Pretty please?
-
-
I believe that you are correct, but I noticed something odd whilst perusing the fueleconomy.gov site. The Dodge Magnum is listed as a sport utility vehicle, although it bore no crossoverishness. Now, I don't know how official that designation is as far as CAFE, but if Dodge managed to get a Chrysler 300 classified as a sport utility by doing nothing more than grafting on a wagon ass, I don't see why these other "crossovers" need a tall stance and goofy cladding.
If the Magnum is indeed an SUV according to the feds, perhaps it is truly nothing more than market forces that are killing the wagon to birth the crossover.
Either way, it is a sad day when I can choose from seemingly hundreds of SUVs, but my choices in a wagon can be counted on one hand.-
You can't use the same nameplate for "Car" and "Truck". Remember the Taurus? The "Truck" was badged as a "Taurus X". That's why Europe received the Chrysler 300 Touring, and we had the Dodge Magnum.
Same for the Volvo (V-70 vs XC-70), Subaru (Outback vs Legacy), and other wierd vehicles (Chevy HHR, Chrysler PT Cruiser, and others) -
The dealership network actually suggested this to Volkswagen: Offer the Golfwagen in all-wheel-drive, and list it as a sport-ute. Even if only 5% of the cars are actually all-wheel-drive, you can call it a sport-ute and you're golden.
-
I believe the Magnum would've had a flat floor with the rear seats down – it's the same reason cars like the PT Cruiser and HHR are classified as trucks in the EPA's eyes.
As far as the goofy cladding goes, it's about the same as wearing a Mountain Equipment Co-Op jacket to Starbucks, and the extra height is because the general public sadly doesn't give a rat's ass about centre of gravity, but likes being able to see over all the other crossovers.
-
![http://www.automedia.com/New_Cars/honda_pilot_2010_photos_SUV_Exterior_1-Front-Right.jpg">](http://www.automedia.com/New_Cars/honda_pilot_2010_photos_SUV_Exterior_1-Front-Right.jpg">){kind=link}
![http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5050/5352376690_efa1f75570.jpg"](http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5050/5352376690_efa1f75570.jpg"){kind=link}
![http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5042/5352373868_4071a171a5.jpg"](http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5042/5352373868_4071a171a5.jpg"){kind=link}
![http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5286/5351793129_8b4a793c67.jpg"](http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5286/5351793129_8b4a793c67.jpg"){kind=link}
![http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5243/5351765985_b86865b954.jpg"](http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5243/5351765985_b86865b954.jpg"){kind=link}
![http://5o55y.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/aston-martin-lagonda-concept_31.jpg">](http://5o55y.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/aston-martin-lagonda-concept_31.jpg">){kind=link}
![http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b6/Aston_Martin_Cygnet_%2882%29.JPG">](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b6/Aston_Martin_Cygnet_%2882%29.JPG">){kind=link}
![http://www.dymee.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-o-matic/200909-2/83bda_mitsuoka-viewt-f3q-a.jpg"](http://www.dymee.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-o-matic/200909-2/83bda_mitsuoka-viewt-f3q-a.jpg"){kind=link}
![http://store.ferrari.com/upload/img/0/0/0/0/8/8/B/D/260_13031_1.jpg">](http://store.ferrari.com/upload/img/0/0/0/0/8/8/B/D/260_13031_1.jpg">){kind=link}
![http://www.blogcdn.com/translogic.aolautos.com/media/2010/12/autostranslogic901videostill480.jpg"/>](http://www.blogcdn.com/translogic.aolautos.com/media/2010/12/autostranslogic901videostill480.jpg"/>){kind=link}
![http://www.thetorquereport.com/2009_vw_routan_red.jpg"](http://www.thetorquereport.com/2009_vw_routan_red.jpg"){kind=link}
![http://www.cartype.com/pics/2929/full/lincoln_new_1.jpg"](http://www.cartype.com/pics/2929/full/lincoln_new_1.jpg"){kind=link}
![http://www.luxurylaunches.com/entry_images/1006/31/pink_veyron.jpg">](http://www.luxurylaunches.com/entry_images/1006/31/pink_veyron.jpg">){kind=link}
![http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/64/2010_Mazda_CX-9_Grand_Touring_–_08-25-2010.jpg/800px-2010_Mazda_CX-9_Grand_Touring_–_08-25-2010.jpg"](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/64/2010_Mazda_CX-9_Grand_Touring_--_08-25-2010.jpg/800px-2010_Mazda_CX-9_Grand_Touring_--_08-25-2010.jpg"){kind=link}
![http://wallpapers-diq.com/wallpapers/17/Mazda_Mazda8_MPV_Black_2009.jpg"](http://wallpapers-diq.com/wallpapers/17/Mazda_Mazda8_MPV_Black_2009.jpg"){kind=link}
![http://www.insanelimos.com/wp-content/gallery/fleet-pictures/escalade-hummer-limo02.JPG"](http://www.insanelimos.com/wp-content/gallery/fleet-pictures/escalade-hummer-limo02.JPG"){kind=link}
![http://cdn.wn.com/pd/7f/b2/c42deb5655ef005f83e78d1109c2_grande.jpg">](http://cdn.wn.com/pd/7f/b2/c42deb5655ef005f83e78d1109c2_grande.jpg">){kind=link}
![http://www.flightstosydney.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/RollingStones-TW-3-2-10.jpg"](http://www.flightstosydney.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/RollingStones-TW-3-2-10.jpg"){kind=link}
![http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b2/2006-2008_Holden_CG_Captiva_LX_02.jpg/800px-2006-2008_Holden_CG_Captiva_LX_02.jpg">](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b2/2006-2008_Holden_CG_Captiva_LX_02.jpg/800px-2006-2008_Holden_CG_Captiva_LX_02.jpg">){kind=link}
Lotus Elise "California"- an Elise for people who should have bought a Boxster.
<img src="http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezwebin_site/storage/images/news/autoshow_articles/2008_lotus_elise_sc_220_and_elise_california_auto_shows/2008_lotus_elise_california_gallery/2008_lotus_elise_california_gallery_2008_lotus_elise_california_interior_image_002/846968-1-eng-US/2008_lotus_elise_california_gallery_2008_lotus_elise_california_interior_image_002_cd_gallery.jpg">
![http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezwebin_site/storage/images/news/autoshow_articles/2008_lotus_elise_sc_220_and_elise_california_auto_shows/2008_lotus_elise_california_gallery/2008_lotus_elise_california_gallery_2008_lotus_elise_california_interior_image_002/846968-1-eng-US/2008_lotus_elise_california_gallery_2008_lotus_elise_california_interior_image_002_cd_gallery.jpg">](http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezwebin_site/storage/images/news/autoshow_articles/2008_lotus_elise_sc_220_and_elise_california_auto_shows/2008_lotus_elise_california_gallery/2008_lotus_elise_california_gallery_2008_lotus_elise_california_interior_image_002/846968-1-eng-US/2008_lotus_elise_california_gallery_2008_lotus_elise_california_interior_image_002_cd_gallery.jpg">){kind=link}
Dons flamesuit
Lotus Elise.
I know, I know, I know. The Elise is one of the finest sportscars ever built, it has turned Lotus from a company persistantly on the brink of bankruptcy, to a household name that even high school kids in Mobile, Alabama have probably heard of. Not bad for a quaint little old factory in Norfolk.
But, for entirely selfish reasons, It's my least favourite Lotus. I love all the old Loti, from Elite through Esprit, they were brilliant yet had a slightly home-built, underdog feel to them. Then the Elise erupted and, despite it's absolute brilliance, its incredible popularity (the fact that there seems to be one on every street in my town) means it doesn't have quite the mystique of its forebears. For the same reason, "Money", which gets played on TV whenever something comes up about finance, is my least favourite Pink Floyd track.
Yet for prolonging Norfolks status as premier league sports-car makers for nearly two decades, I disagree with myself on all counts and will henceforth shut up.
-
I want to argue this, because the Elise/Exige (I can never make up my mind) is my attainable dream car, but you're factually correct on all counts. That said, I would not accept a free Esprit, much less buy one- I'd never drive it for fear of not completing the journey.
But I would buy a Tamora/T350/Sagaris, given the chance. So I too will disagree with myself and shut up.-
If you're ever offered a free Espirit, please let me know. I'll be happy to free you from the burden of ownership.
-
-
"For the same reason, 'Money', which gets played on TV whenever something comes up about finance, is my least favourite Pink Floyd track."
Couldn't agree more – it's been horrible overplayed. Therefore, I have some real Pink Floyd for your listening pleasure.[youtube lVUJMKgGyzo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVUJMKgGyzo youtube]-
Tonyola, are you, in fact, me? If, as I suspect, you are, what was the last thing I drank before I went to bed?
-
-
+1 if only for using the word 'loti' in a sentence.
Saab 9-7, god I hated that thing.
I know it's out of production, I just hated it so much.
The only way I'd take one would be as a 9-7x Aero.
Even then I'd debadge it. http://www.businessweek.com/autos/autobeat/archiv…
-
Same way I feel about the Trailblazer. SS or nothing baby.
But I still like a regular 9-7 better than a regular Trailblazer.
Sunbeam Minx.
<img src="http://www.build-threads.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Sunbeam-01.jpg">
I've nothing against the Hillman Minx, but when Chrysler started doing straight rebadges of Hillmans without even adding go-faster bits it really was Sunbeam's nadir.
![http://www.build-threads.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Sunbeam-01.jpg">](http://www.build-threads.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Sunbeam-01.jpg">){kind=link}
-
How about the North America-only Sunbeam Arrow?
<img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3239/3075175334_58299a9336.jpg" width=400>
![http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3239/3075175334_58299a9336.jpg"](http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3239/3075175334_58299a9336.jpg"){kind=link}
I do not have a favorit brand but more more favorit models form several brands, but the Volvo 340 sedan does not fit at all with Volvo
<img src="http://www.custojusto.pt/images/8275661635.jpg">
The Bangle butted BMW also do not share my taste.
<img src="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/41/86801156_cf3a6cfcc3.jpg">
![http://www.custojusto.pt/images/8275661635.jpg">](http://www.custojusto.pt/images/8275661635.jpg">){kind=link}
![http://farm1.static.flickr.com/41/86801156_cf3a6cfcc3.jpg">](http://farm1.static.flickr.com/41/86801156_cf3a6cfcc3.jpg">){kind=link}
-
The DAFt Volvos were always the odd ones out – I'd drive a 66, a 440 'Estate' or a 480 for its novelty value, or a later 460 to see everyone's wait-that's-not-an-S70 reactions, but the 3-series cars I don't get. They're rear-wheel-drive and redblock-powered (sometimes), though, so they're not the end of the world.
I don't hate any of the new Volvos; I just don't care at all about them. The new S60 is probably the worst to look at, to me, and the original S80 was the least reliable thanks primarily to the tight engine bay that required a 4T65-E transaxle instead of the actually-strong-enough 4T80-E (as used in various Northstar-powered cars); as RWD American-market cars go, the '90-92 naturally-aspirated 740 sedan gets the nod for its (in my eyes) unattractive new head- and taillights and its non-standard ignition and fuel-injection systems. Yes, I drive a 745 Turbo wagon of the same vintage ('92), but the 744's C-pillar has always bothered me.
I believe your post picture is worth my thousand words.
Although I do like the though of a Porsche being assembled by fairly attractive women dressed like Mario. "I'ma gonna screw in you sparka plugs!"
I'd mention a certain Chrysler, but I remember the crossfire that occurred the last time that car came up.
Then there's a certain Jeep with an oxymoronic name, since it's the wrong direction for the brand (or maybe they had the circle-drawing tool in mind?)
But in the end I'll go with the Dodge Nitro, which seems to exist solely to tap into the tremendously underserved market for compact SUVs with hideous 20" wheels and no low-range 4wd.
-
But the Nitro appeals to a man who keeps his grip on the situation even if people are looking down on him. A guy who doesn't spare the rod and isn't afraid to milk every drop of pleasure out of life. http://jalopnik.com/5242358/remember-to-close-you…
<img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/stills/Sunroof-Masturbator.flv.jpg">-
So that's what they meant by "Grab Life By The Horns".
-
![http://cache.gawker.com/assets/stills/Sunroof-Masturbator.flv.jpg">](http://cache.gawker.com/assets/stills/Sunroof-Masturbator.flv.jpg">){kind=link}
Any front wheel drive MG.
-
First the KV bashing and now this? Sigh. Well, who's next with a condemnation of the P4 as the worst Plymouth ever made?
-
I was just about to add that I hope mdharrell reads this, but then I made a coffee instead.
-
I'd left out Plymouth since I was sticking with Chrysler's current brands, but now that you mention it…
(…though, my choice of worst Plymouth would have to be the early Volares, from the time when a Volare might turn up on a showroom floor with Dodge Aspen badges on one side.)
-
See I would agree with you if they did reform the factory racing team and got back into competition, but they didn't. They continue to only support private teams (albeit support them very well, even providing drivers on occasion). All the money they made off the Cayenne went into the failed coup against VW instead. As competent as the Cayenne is, it isn't particularly helping their racing unless you count the whole Transsyberian Rally entry as more than just a PR thing.
This question is really hard. All the car makers in the running for my favourite are actually terrible. I'm supposed to figure out which Dodge is the worst? Which Toyota? (They used to be cool. Really!)
Needs no explanation…
<img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5c/2008_Jeep_Compass.jpg" width=500>
![http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5c/2008_Jeep_Compass.jpg"](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5c/2008_Jeep_Compass.jpg"){kind=link}
That concept is so cool, I think it deserves a picture of itself here:
<img src="http://blog.betabong.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/2001-vw-microbus-concept-side-1280×960.jpg" width="300">
![http://blog.betabong.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/2001-vw-microbus-concept-side-1280×960.jpg"](http://blog.betabong.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/2001-vw-microbus-concept-side-1280x960.jpg"){kind=link}
Lotus Eclat.
Leave a Reply