Ask the Car People.SM


Cars That Have Disappointed

57 messages,  Last post on Feb 09, 2011 at 9:34 AM

You are in the Classic Cars Forum.

What is this discussion about? Chevrolet, Ford, Chrysler, Coupe, Convertible, Truck, Sedan, Wagon

Messages Page 1 of 6

#1 of 57 Cars That Have Disappointed by hpmctorque

Oct 25, 2010 (8:30 am)

The list is long, and includes the Vega and Aztek from GM, the Edsel and recent two-seater Thunderbird from Ford, the Airflow and Aspen/Volare from Chrysler, and the Pacer and Alliance from AMC. Every manufacturer has had models that have fallen far short of their promise. Many came close to being big hits, but had one or two fatal flaws. For example, if the Vega had only had better rust proofing and a well developed engine, it probably would have given Toyota, Datsun and Honda a good fight.
 
Here's your chance to add to this short list of examples, or to elaborate on my examples.

#2 of 57 . by fintail

Oct 25, 2010 (9:48 am)

Most of the Saturn brand can fall under this.

#3 of 57 Re: Cars That Have Disappointed [hpmctorque] by lemko

Oct 25, 2010 (12:26 pm)

Replying to: hpmctorque (Oct 25, 2010 8:30 am)
I'd like to add the Cadillac Allante. The last year - the 1993 model - is the one to own as it came with a respectable 4.6 Northstar V-8. The remainder came with an underpowered 4.5 V-8 and a manual top is inexcusable at this price point. Too bad, because the Allante was an attractive car.

#4 of 57 Re: Cars That Have Disappointed [lemko] by Mr_Shiftright HOST

Oct 25, 2010 (12:30 pm)

Replying to: lemko (Oct 25, 2010 12:26 pm)
one thing that really hurt the Allante was the cheesy, old-fashioned interior. This really turned buyers off, as I recall.

#5 of 57 Re: Cars That Have Disappointed [lemko] by hpmctorque

Oct 25, 2010 (12:54 pm)

Replying to: lemko (Oct 25, 2010 12:26 pm)
The Allante is indeed attractive. Insofar as the 4.5 engine, it's my understanding that it was much improved over the 4.1, on which it was based. Reliability and power were both up. While I agree that the 4.5 wasn't the engine the Allante deserved, I wouldn't call it underpowered for its day. I say this because, unlike the Corvette, the Allante was a luxury cruiser. The 4.9 would have been better, but, yeah, the Northstar was well suited to the Allante's purpose and image.
 
I never drove a Cadillac with the 4.1, but I did drive an Eldorado with the 4.5 and a DeVille with the 4.9. I thought the DeVille was quite quick for a '90s car.
 
Similarly to the Allante, the 4 cylinder Pontiac Fiero excelled in the looks department, in my opinion, but the agricultural Iron Duke didn't fulfill the mission.

#6 of 57 1980 Chevy Citation and its siblings... by andre1969

Oct 25, 2010 (12:57 pm)

I think if the quality had been there, these cars could have been something really good. They seemed like the right car at the right time...fairly roomy interior in a small-ish package, decent fuel economy, and their light weight let them get better performance out of 4- and small V-6 engines than the old-school intermediates were getting out of bigger V-6 and V-8 engines. And the Buick/Olds/Pontiac versions, if you picked the top trim level, were downright luxurious inside.
 
Unfortunately, they were rushed into production, debuting in April of 1979, and would quickly become the most recalled car in history, displacing the 1976 Aspen/Volare, which previously held that title.
 
In later years, they did improve them, and by 1983 the 4-cyl models were rated "Average" by Consumer Reports....about the best a domestic brand could hope for in those days. But, it was too late, the damage had been done, and before two long, the names Citation, Phoenix, and Omega would be retired in shame. Only the Buick Skylark seemed to escape the bad rap that the X-body endured. It sold fairly well right through the end in 1985, when about 90,000 were sold, and the name was used well into the 1990's
 
I think these cars really hit GM where it mattered too...the bread and butter of the market. Nobody expected GM to make a good small car, and in that respect, buyers were rarely disappointed. But, in the past, GM had always done pretty well with intermediates and old-skool compacts. The old Chevy II/Nova had always been a reasonably good car, as was the Chevelle/Malibu. And in 1980, a LOT of people bought Citations...something like 800,000, and Chevy outsold Ford by something like 2:1 in that model year.
 
Alas, 800,000+ is a lot of people to piss off, and needless to say, GM did that to most of them.

#7 of 57 Re: Cars That Have Disappointed [hpmctorque] by lemko

Oct 25, 2010 (12:58 pm)

Replying to: hpmctorque (Oct 25, 2010 12:54 pm)
I had a 1994 Cadillac DeVille with the 4.9 V-8 which was rated at 200 hp. Though that seems very modest by today's standards, the car was hardly a slouch. It would do 100 mph effortlessly and could get away from you on the turnpike if you weren't paying attention to the speedo as it rode so smoothly.
 
I drove a 1983 Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham with the 4.1 and it was a dog! Zero-to-sixty could be measured with a calendar. I think I could've travelled faster walking briskly alongside the car rather than driving it!

#8 of 57 Re: Cars That Have Disappointed [hpmctorque] by andre1969

Oct 25, 2010 (12:59 pm)

Replying to: hpmctorque (Oct 25, 2010 12:54 pm)
I never drove a Cadillac with the 4.1, but I did drive an Eldorado with the 4.5 and a DeVille with the 4.9. I thought the DeVille was quite quick for a '90s car.
 
I test drove an early 80's Coupe DeVille with the 4.1 years ago, when I was looking at used cars. I never took it out on the highway though, or got into a situation where I had to floor it, so I didn't get to experience the full disappointment in all its glory. In stop and go traffic, it was fine.

#9 of 57 Re: 1980 Chevy Citation and its siblings... [andre1969] by hpmctorque

Oct 25, 2010 (1:11 pm)

Replying to: andre1969 (Oct 25, 2010 12:57 pm)
Well put. Excellent designs, poor execution. The Citation and its siblings were terrible missteps for GM.
 
Similar comments could be applied to the VW Dasher and Renault Medallion. Remember those?

#10 of 57 Re: Cars That Have Disappointed [andre1969] by hpmctorque

Oct 25, 2010 (1:18 pm)

Replying to: andre1969 (Oct 25, 2010 12:59 pm)
I think with the 4.1 the poor durability was the biggest disappointment. Sure, it was somewhat weak on power, but, then, it was designed for downsized FWD applications, where power expectations were relatively modest in the mid '80s. The goal was much improved fuel economy, with adequate power.

Messages Page 1 of 6

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement