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
| ...does it really keep drinks cold? | |
|
Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (May 07, 2009 8:10 pm)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: lemmer (May 08, 2009 6:27 am) OR she could be the luckiest woman on earth.
|
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (May 07, 2009 5:51 pm) One wonders what they did for the turbo 2.4 in the Neon SRT-4, then? I used to see those around, but they've pretty much vanished in the last few years. I suppose the fall-apartitis that claimed the more pedestrian Neons got to those, too.
|
|
|
Replying to: lemmer (May 08, 2009 6:27 am) And heck, I even knew someone who had a 1994 Eagle Vision, who got about 160,000 miles out of it, original engine and tranny, before giving it to her kid. I think he ultimately wrecked it. She was always griping about it being a piece of crap, but she and her husband weren't exactly religious about maintaining their cars. Plus, I think that whatever the issue was, the dealer just wasn't fixing it properly. So sometimes, there is a good one in the bunch I guess. But anyway, my guess is that with the Neon, after a few years they started improving them, as they got the kinks out. And when the 2000 came out, I don't think it was a horrible car, when it comes to reliability/durability. It's just that it didn't do anything else all that well. It was bigger than the 1995-99 model, which hurt performance a bit And they got rid of all the fun engines. And didn't bother to put a 4-speed automatic in it. It's like they just did the bare minimum to get the car built and out the door as fast as possible, without any real effort. The last time I rode in a Neon was a few years ago. A friend of mine, who has a 2004 Crown Vic, had his car in the shop and he had a Neon as a loaner. It seemed competent enough for the most part, but was no great shakes. I'd personally rate it more desireable than a Civic or Corolla of the time, simply because it felt roomier inside and fit me better...so it would be a more useful car, for my needs...but not necessarily the majority who buy these types of cars. Really though, all they would've had to do was throw maybe 50 bucks more into the interior quality, and it would've been a respectable car. One thing I remember about it was that it had cloth inserts on the door panels, which I normally like. However, they were so rough to the touch and so thinly padded, it was like why bother? |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: lemmer (May 08, 2009 6:27 am) Aren't those the same 4 cylinder engines the Neons used? PT Crusers are nothing more than a Neon with a retro body. Are those ever dogs to sell now!
|
|
|
Replying to: bumpy (May 08, 2009 6:43 am) I had totally forgotten about that. However, wasn't that the 2nd-gen Neon? The 2nd gen was based on the same architecture as the PT Cruiser, and was beefy enough to handle the 2.4. However, I don't think the first-gen was. I guess it's always possible to beef them up though. Heck, I saw a PT Cruiser with a 426 Hemi in it once! I wonder what all they have to do to accommodate that? 
|
|
|
Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (May 08, 2009 6:43 am) |
|
|
|
Maybe I'm just not noticing them, but for a car that was in production only a few years ago, and was produced in large numbers, you don't see too many Neons on the road anymore.
|
|
|
Replying to: isellhondas (May 08, 2009 6:46 am) Aren't those the same 4 cylinder engines the Neons used? The Acclaim used a 2.5 4-cyl that was a slight enlargement of the old 2.2 that debuted in the 1981 K-cars. It had around 100 hp I think, and was a good, simple, sturdy engine. Easy to work on, cheap to fix. I think it was designed by the same guy who did the slant six. Now the turbo versions had considerably shorter lifespans. Especially that hot 224 hp engine that Spirit R/T used, I imagine. But the regular engines were pretty durable, if uninspiring. The Neon 2.0, as well as the 2.4, were derived from the old 2.2/2.5, but they cut corners here and there, cheapening them no doubt. Plus, I'm sure upping the hp probably put some stress on them. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Classic Cars 50 Worst Cars of All Time
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
