Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Classic Cars 50 Worst Cars of All Time
298 messages, Last post on May 11, 2009 at 1:53 PM
You are in the Classic Cars Forum. Your Host is mr_shiftright
|
Replying to: texases (May 07, 2009 10:33 am) Oh, I just meant that in the sense of how Honda was able to evade the catalytic converter for a few years, because of their CVCC...not necessarily that the converter was the root of all evil. Sorry if it sounded that way. |
|
|
Either way, you don't need the worst 50 cars of all time. I have the NOMINEE for THEEE worst CAR of all-time. Not just the worst 10, or worst 5, or even worst 3, but the worst one (1)!!! The Dodge/Plymouth Neon. No doubt about it, it is inarguably in worst vehicle ever produced. Here is my logic and reasoning process: No doubt, there are lots of lemons from many manufacturers that all had tons of design and durability flaws throughout the years. We could argue endlessly about which cars cost the absolute most to run per mile and keep running and functioning over time. Or which were the slowest and most gas guzzling, most uncomfortable, and most ugly. The Neon is bad in all of those categories, and especially pathetic in terms of quality, build, fit & finish, and reliability. However, what cannot be argued is that the NEON was an all new DESIGN and car from the BRAIN TRUST at Chrysler as recently as 1994!!!! The car was BRAND NEW never before released in 1994 as a 1995 model!!!! That is recent history, and recent effort of what Chrysler is capable of only little more than a decade ago. Not to mention the fact that they showed little improvement until their discontinuation about 5 years (?) ago? You can go around town today and see a bunch of 2000+ late model Neons still on the road, but with faded mismatched colored bumpers, and trust me, it's not from an accident that the paint isn't matching. Chrysler used a defective primer and paint on the bumpers, which didn't work on plastic as well as on sheetmetal. They refused to cover this under warranty, and that refusal is a good walking and running advertisement all over town!
|
|
|
Replying to: andres3 (May 07, 2009 11:42 am) Hondas and cat converters - I do know that starting with MY 80 they required them to run on regualr unleaded. There was still not a catalytic converter on them that year. I had one and no cat but it had the narrowed filler neck so you couldn't put leaded gas in it. The service guy at Honda would tell me ways around it but I never took him up on it. |
|
|
This guy has an interesting take on what happened with the Neon. He was a Chrysler engineer on the project. Designing the Neon at Chrysler and why it can't happen any more He's quite proud of the design and damn furious about the execution.... and what the Germans did to the design staff. Unfortunately, Eaton had replaced Iacocca before the launch of the Neon, and demanded several changes that were the undoing of the car in the public eyes including the exhaust donut and head gasket. About $2 saved per vehicle (over $2,000,000 total), but more was lost in customer value. Interesting reading. When the Neon first came out I thought it was an interesting design. A little coarse, but -finally- a fun-to-drive made-in-America small car. Later, of course, things starting leaking, peeling, and falling off in traditional Detroit fashion and my interest faded below zero. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: lokki (May 07, 2009 10:24 am)  NEON--my biggest disappointment in a decade. I had hopes for this car to be the next Alfa Romeo Sprint--an inexpensive, *really* fun to drive sport coupe for the common man. But noooooooooo--Chrysler suddenly forgot how to make a head gasket. ARGHHHH! And then they took away the larger displacement engine (oh, swell). Well that was the end of Shifty's dream.... |
|
|
That's just the start: 99% of all Neons seemingly had head gasket failure, but it seemed 99.9 % also had Air Conditioner failure and Auto Tranny failure. You couldn't count the amounts of rattles and squeeks by the time you reached 40,000 miles you had more rattles than miles. Leaky glue under the window trimmings, leaky gas tanks, faulty parking breaks, bad belts, bad starter wires and cables, corrosive wires and cables and batteries, and on and on.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: andres3 (May 07, 2009 2:42 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (May 07, 2009 2:29 pm) I thought the Neon had a lot of promise when it first came out, and I liked it a lot. Finally, FINALLY, a little car that I felt comfortable in! And it came with 132 hp, standard. Sure, there were other small cars that had stronger optional engines, but I don't think anything in the Neon's class had that much power standard. Heck, even today, the Corolla only has 132 hp standard, while the Civic is only 140. Shifty, what larger-displacement engine went in the Neon? I was under the impression that the only engine was the 2.0, although it came in several configurations. 132 hp was base, with a 150 option, and yet another that was 175 or something like that. Supposedly, the Neon's platform couldn't handle the extra torque of the 2.4 engine. It is a shame that they rushed out the 2000 version, just so it could be the "first new car of the new millenium". What a flash in the pan that turned out to be. They dumped the coupe and the hot engines. And worse, I don't think they even offered a 4-speed automatic until something like 2002. Oh well, at least by this time the 3-speed automatic, which dated to the '78 Horizon/Omni, had most of its kinks worked out. And as non-competitive as the Neon was, considering where fuel prices went, I bet they would've done better if they just kept it in production, rather than bringing out the Caliber.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (May 07, 2009 5:51 pm)
|
|
|
|
|
Like you, Andre and Shifty, I also had great hopes for the first generation Neon, and was disappointed, for the reasons already mentioned. I liked the styling of the first generation Neon better than the second. However, once it adopted the 4-speed automatic, I thought the Neon performed competently, and was a decent car. I rented three of them, and that was my conclusion. Then, just when the Neon was reasonably competitive, Chrysler replaced it with the Caliber. I've also rented three Calibers, and, contrary to what one reads, I found that they were okay. The two improvements I'd recommend would be a better interior, and more communicative steering. I didn't mind the CVT transmission. In fact, the driving experience is kind of interesting with the CVT. I understand that Nissan sets the standard, in terms of CVT refinement. I think that Caliber sales would have been better if it had also been offered in a sedan. Although I like the Caliber's hatchback configuration, I imagine they lost a lot of former Neon owners by not also having a sedan. By the time the Neon had the 4-speed automatic, it may not have been among the best cars in its class, but it was definitely not among the worst cars. I think the same applies to the Caliber. Unfortunately, neither has the "gotta have it" factor, so, as mediocre entries they have to sell on price. Would I buy a Neon or Caliber? Sure, but only a used one. They may be bargain used cars. I hope Fiat will change this, and doesn't disappoint us, as the first Neons did. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Classic Cars 50 Worst Cars of All Time
