The 100 worst cars of all time

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: addyguy
Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
You know, of all the "best ever..." and "worst ever..." car lists, I probably AGREED with more of this one than any other I've seen.

Just a few notable exceptions. The first Corvette, the Thunderbird SC, the Bronco II. They all had their flaws, but they aren't worthy of the "100 worst" by any means.

As for my favorite maker (Chrysler) I think every single one on that list deserved it.

And the Mustang II should have been number one simply due to the depth of the insult to the name "Mustang." Back in the early 90s when I first got involved in the fledgling internet automotive mailing list/ discussion group scene, there was the Mopar Mailing List (MML- still around last I checked), the Fordnatics List, and a Mustang mailing list among a few others. The intro letter for the Mustang list pointed out that there were two actual mailing lists, the "Classic" list for 1972 and below and the "Modern" list for 1979 and later 'Stangs. It closed with: "Don't even ask about the Mustang II because nobody cares."


If it wasn't for the Mustang II, there WOULDN'T BE a Mustang at all.

Most Mustang owners are too stupid to understand that basic, factual truth.


What did the Mustang II do? It sold. They sold a LOT of them. I'm fairly certain they outsold Datsun's oddly styled bulbous 200SX. Very certain they outsold the rebadged Mitsubishis at the Dodge and Plymouth dealers. Probably even outsold the Toyota Celica. Definitely outsold the Mazda RX-3 and Ford of Europe's own Capri (sold at Mercury dealers here)

And really, when you compare it to what the '71-'73 Mustang had become, it wasn't that bad. It was closer in dimensions to the '64.5 Mustang than the '73 was.

At least it was a Ford. The Sapporo "Challenger" certainly wasn't a Dodge.

The 2.3 was fairly reliable. Gutless but probably not that far off from the L20 Nissan in the 200SX and the 20R in the Celica.
The German solid lifter 2.8 sounded mean. It didn't do much more than the 2.3 but it sounded the part.
The 302 was a disappointment too. It didn't do anything that the 267 V8 powered Monza didn't. But hey, it was a V8. There was a more disappointing version of a Mustang V8 during the Fox body era. The 255.

 

[cchase]

Originally Posted By: mpvue
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
Given the Mercedes wagon, the Aztec is a beauty - just a little to "fashion forward" for its time. I actuall LIKE it and Ive done high end mechanical packaging design and have sophisticated taste. Now that MAzda five minivan makes me regurgitate along with the hideous mercedes R class.

wow.

one of the most ridiculous statements I've read on here in a long time, and that's saying something...
and to remind you how 'fashion forward' Pontiac was, they spelled it 'AZTEK'.

I'll take a picture of my cinnamon red Mazda5 next to my neighbor's pea green Aztek and see if anyone agrees with you.


Now now, differences of opinions don't right or wrong make.

The sad thing with the Aztek is that as ugly as it was when it came out, compared to some new cars it actually looks sort of "middle of the road".

 

[Throckmorton]

That Volvo 262C has the lines of a Chrysler 300.

 

[01rangerxl]

Originally Posted By: Spazdog

The Bronco II earned it's place on that list.

The 60° 2.9 V6 had a nasty habit of cracking cylinder heads. Later versions (ie: the Explorer's 4.0) were better.
Many a Bronco II owner went into shock when they went in to replace a $10 U-Joint and got an estimate for a $500 CV driveshaft. I think those CV driveshafts are still $200 to $300.
Then there was that weird non-transfer case/transfer case thing on the 2WD models. It looked like a transfer case but nothing went to the front wheels. It seemed to exist just to create another place to leak.


World Products sold improved cylinder heads for those for years, so the cylinder head issue can be fixed permanently if it does occur. Lots of 2.9s had over 200K miles without a cracked head.

Not sure how the dummy t-case makes it a bad vehicle. More parts that interchange with the 4WD is a good thing, especially since the small handful of 2WDs are more likely to be junked than a 4WD.

I still see Bronco IIs on the road, so they can't be that bad considering that all of them are over 20 years old now. They did have some weak spots, but almost all of the issues (except the A4LD) were ironed out with the Explorer.

 

[aquariuscsm]

The Mustang II was the biggest piece of [censored] ever made. I know,because my sister had one.

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl


World Products sold improved cylinder heads for those for years, so the cylinder head issue can be fixed permanently if it does occur. Lots of 2.9s had over 200K miles without a cracked head.

Ford had a better casting that solved the problem. It just didn't make it to the production engines. That's fine if your cylinder head cracks when you are under warranty. You get the better casting, but it is of little consolation to the Bronco II owner that had a cracked head out of warranty in the '80s. (and they were short warranties then...Chrysler's 5/50 was better than Ford's warranty)

Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl
[Not sure how the dummy t-case makes it a bad vehicle. More parts that interchange with the 4WD is a good thing, especially since the small handful of 2WDs are more likely to be junked than a 4WD.

It doesn't necessarily make it a bad vehicle. It was just odd. Especially considering that they had a 2WD tailshaft housing in production for the Ranger. It's a more expensive part that doesn't do anything except weigh more and provide more places that can potentially leak.
And you didn't comment on the expensive CV driveshafts. I think they make a replacement driveshaft now that uses 4 Spicer u-joints instead of the CV joints. It's still expensive but you only have to replace the shaft itself once. After that, it's regular u-joints.

Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl
They did have some weak spots, but almost all of the issues (except the A4LD) were ironed out with the Explorer.

Agreed. The Explorer was much better. It wasn't as tippy, more powerful, comfortable, etc... maybe would high center a little easier but the stability and reliability were more than worth it.

 

[Cujet]

Well, I'm an idiot. Most of the cars I've owned have been on that list. The Bronco II, the Geo, the Chevy Citation, the Mustang II, the 914, Ford Taurus and my current car a Jaguar X-Type! Yup, they are all there!!

Actually, out of all of them, the X-Type has turned out to be a very good car. Weird.

 

[ls1mike]

The GXP, but no Impala SS or Lucerene Super they are all the same car, and the different size tires had a purpose. To combat torque steer.

 

[ls1mike]

Originally Posted By: mpvue
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
Given the Mercedes wagon, the Aztec is a beauty - just a little to "fashion forward" for its time. I actuall LIKE it and Ive done high end mechanical packaging design and have sophisticated taste. Now that MAzda five minivan makes me regurgitate along with the hideous mercedes R class.

wow.

one of the most ridiculous statements I've read on here in a long time, and that's saying something...
and to remind you how 'fashion forward' Pontiac was, they spelled it 'AZTEK'.

I'll take a picture of my cinnamon red Mazda5 next to my neighbor's pea green Aztek and see if anyone agrees with you.

Don't bother they both suck, but I would still rather have the Aztek.

 

[mpvue]

Originally Posted By: ls1mike
Originally Posted By: mpvue
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
Given the Mercedes wagon, the Aztec is a beauty - just a little to "fashion forward" for its time. I actuall LIKE it and Ive done high end mechanical packaging design and have sophisticated taste. Now that MAzda five minivan makes me regurgitate along with the hideous mercedes R class.

wow.

one of the most ridiculous statements I've read on here in a long time, and that's saying something...
and to remind you how 'fashion forward' Pontiac was, they spelled it 'AZTEK'.

I'll take a picture of my cinnamon red Mazda5 next to my neighbor's pea green Aztek and see if anyone agrees with you.

Don't bother they both suck, but I would still rather have the Aztek.

your blind allegiance to the General is apparent in the list of vehicles in your signature, so no surprise in you picking the Aztek.
funny thing is, although the Aztek is WAY ugly and could have been packaged better (it's really just a tall 5 seat hatchback; it should have a 3rd row), for my neighbor at least, it's been reliable for years.

 

[cchase]

Knowing next to nothing about the background of the Aztek, I just spent a while reading about it on wikipedia. It actually doesn't sound that bad when you read through some of what it had:

Quote:
The Aztek had among the highest CSI (Customer Satisfaction Index) scores in its class, and won the appellation of "Most Appealing Entry Sport Utility Vehicle" in 2001 from J.D. Power and Associates, an independent consumer survey organization who noted: "The Aztek scores highest or second highest in every APEAL component measure except exterior styling."


Quote:
The Aztek was able to carry within its interior the standard 4 feet (1.2 m) by 8 feet (2.4 m) sheet of plywood, a common and useful task most of its SUV competitors were unable to perform.


Quote:
The Aztek was also available with two rear cargo area options, a pull-out cargo tray that held up to 400 pounds (180 kg) that rolled on built-in wheels when removed from the vehicle, or a versatile cargo net system that held up to 200 pounds (91 kg) and could be configured a claimed 22 different ways.


Quote:
a center console that doubled as a removable cooler and a tent/inflatable mattress package that, along with a built-in air compressor, allowed the Aztek to double as a camper. Extending this image was a seat-back mounted backpack, and a number of specialty racks for bicycles, canoes, snowboards and other such objects.


Quote:
An optional 10 speaker Pioneer stereo system provided a set of controls located within the rear quarters of the vehicle for tail-gate parties


Quote:
The Aztek was one of the first automobiles to be designed entirely using computerized rapid-prototyping/rapid-visualization tools. The dashboard was designed by NASA contractor Johnson Controls, and featured Pontiac's trademark red lighting scheme along with an optional heads-up display.


I mean, I'm not trying to sell anyone on the car as it was pretty ugly for its time (although as I mentioned before, there are far uglier cars out nowadays - the Aztek basically just looks like a Prius SUV with body cladding. But it does seem to have been fairly innovative for its time and be genuinely useful.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontiac_Aztek

 

[cadfaeltex]

List seems hit and miss to me. I'd like some of these cars but some are definite stinkers.

A comment on the Mustang II, my mom traded a new one in on a more reliable Fiat X-19. That's not something you hear every day. Looking back on them however, they did keep it alive and the styling wasn't that bad. Were there any American cars built in the seventies that had build quality worth a darn?

 

[mpvue]

my Dad had a '78 MustangII for a little while; metallic blue, white vinyl top, white leather(?) interior w/ blue carpet, V6 and a 4 speed.
1st stick car I ever drove. when you popped the clutch, the steering got all floaty and the rear tires just spun, but not in a good fun way, just more of a 'this car is totally out of control' sort of way.
in snow, you could let the clutch out w/o throttle and the wheels would still spin!
to me, ALL mustangs have always had terrible balance. I drove a '64 coupe once, same thing, lots of axle hop and no traction, even w/ weak engines.

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: cadfaeltex

A comment on the Mustang II, my mom traded a new one in on a more reliable Fiat X-19. That's not something you hear every day. Looking back on them however, they did keep it alive and the styling wasn't that bad. Were there any American cars built in the seventies that had build quality worth a darn?


No, not really.

The Mustang II did not really drive any better than a Pinto. It essentially was a "Pinto in drag". But none of the cars really drove that well. I might be a bit biased, but the Celica was probably the best of the RWD "sporty coupes" and it wasn't very good. If I'm being honest, my mom's old MKI Rabbit 5-door was probably nearly as quick, as fast, and handled quite nearly as well as my Celica in spite of giving up 800ccs displacement and being shod with 13" tires. (The Rabbit may have actually been quicker 0-60. I remember a commercial that proclaimed the Rabbit to be fast FAST FAST then showing it drag racing a host of domestic full-size cars and just laying a beat-down on them...anything is fast compared to a '76 Buick with a 231 or a Chrysler with a slant six...

)

If you are competing with the reliability challenged Vega or some rebadged Mitsubishi (Dodge Colt/Plymouth Arrow) in the '70s, you don't have to be that good. Just show up.
Besides, even with the inline 6 or the later 229, the Camaro couldn't touch the Mustang II's mpg and the Z/28 went on hiatus for awhile. So you had expensive Trans Am, or less expensive and more decal clad CobraII.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
Originally Posted By: addyguy
....
It bugs me that the GM X-bodies end up on these lists at all - they were actually quite reliable vehicles...
GM x bodies are good cars. The citation x11 I owned would be quite competeive today and was actually raced sucessfully due to the exceptional chassis and balance. The last of the decent GM platforms before the long downfall....


Are you serious?


Yes. BTW, PT cruiser (dodge neon in disguise) is the worst car Ive driven in the past decade. Terrible.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

Ive had 7 mustangs and my rebuilt Stang II cobra was the best handler - MUCH MUCH better than the garbage fox chassis strut car. The Modular SLA on the stang II was very well engineered. Rule of thumb on American cars in the 70s and 80s = always option a handling package or youll get a rolling sofa. Days are gone, the rule is gone.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
The biggest joke were those 4 banger Camaros and Mustangs. A bicycle would out run those things!
4 banger Camaro? Did I miss something?

 

[ARCOgraphite]

Originally Posted By: mpvue
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
Given the Mercedes wagon, the Aztec is a beauty - just a little to "fashion forward" for its time. I actuall LIKE it ... Now that Mazda five minivan makes me regurgitate along with the hideous Mercedes R class.

wow.

one of the most ridiculous statements I've read on here in a long time, and that's saying something...
and to remind you how 'fashion forward' Pontiac was, they spelled it 'AZTEK'.

I'll take a picture of my cinnamon red Mazda5 next to my neighbor's pea green Aztek and see if anyone agrees with you.
Oh come on, drop the "team mentality" and just try to be unbiased, could you? My new '12 Honda Fit is hideous also. I dont defend it. The Mazda 5 is Ugly. Real Ugly. Post Menopause caked on U-G-L-Y.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

2001 Aztek:

 

[01rangerxl]

Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
The biggest joke were those 4 banger Camaros and Mustangs. A bicycle would out run those things!
4 banger Camaro? Did I miss something?


Yes, you could get the 2.5L Iron Duke in a Camaro when it was redesigned in '82, but I think they dropped that option after a couple years.