Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Cars That Have Disappointed

hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,201
edited October 2010 in Chevrolet
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.
«1

Comments

  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,689
    Most of the Saturn brand can fall under this.
  • lemkolemko Posts: 15,162
    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.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,806
    one thing that really hurt the Allante was the cheesy, old-fashioned interior. This really turned buyers off, as I recall.

    MODERATOR

  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,201
    edited October 2010
    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.
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 21,959
    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.
  • lemkolemko Posts: 15,162
    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!
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 21,959
    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.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,201
    edited October 2010
    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?
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,201
    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.
  • berriberri Posts: 4,179
    "Well put. Excellent designs, poor execution. The Citation and its siblings were terrible missteps for GM."

    I dunno, it was better than a K car I suppose, but when I got a Toyota or Datsun/Nissan rental back then I think the only real advantage the Chevy had was interior space. Maybe it road a bit smoother, but I didn't think it drove as well overall. Frankly, I thought the J cars (Cavalier) were even worse. If they had more consistent quality I think I would go with the A Cars like Celebrity or Ciera for GM back then despite the pig iron duke.
  • sdasda Posts: 308
    I had a 1982 Buick Skylark with 2.8V6. Very pleasant car, comfortable, quiet, decent power, great a/c. Didn't rattle or squeak. It was a 100K car. At 99K the trans no longer was 'locking up', the a/c leaked freon, the rack and pinion had horrible morning sickness---it was really stiff until you forced the steering wheel back and forth and then the power steering would resume, struts/shocks were gone, etc. Still the paint, interior looked great.

    However, my vote goes to my 98 Cadillac Catera. Again beautiful car, drove, rode great, beautiful interior, neat features, solid germanic feel. But it ate tires, brakes, went thru multiple heater valves, stuttering engine, check engine light triggered at least monthly. Dealer was very sympathetic. Seemed like I had a loaner atleast every other month. After 1 year and 13 unscheduled dealer visits I sold it. Then I bought a new VW VR6. What was I thinking??
  • lemkolemko Posts: 15,162
    edited October 2010
    My local mechanic was just talking about a lady who brings a Catera in all the time. He says it's a nightmare to work on account of all the Opel pieces. My wife wanted a Catera in Wedgewood Blue, but I nixed that because the Catera would sour her on Cadillac and probably make her think I was nuts for having two myself. Cadillac had a long, hard road to bring a decent small car to market. This is my baseball analogy:

    Cimmaron: STRIKE ONE!
    Catera: STRIKE TWO!
    1st Gen CTS: Double
    2nd Gen CTS: HOME RUN!!!
  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,689
    Speaking of Caddy, I saw an oddity for sale. 07 STS-V, claims to have every option and an original sticker over 100K. Ad reads "low miles", but doesn't give a number. Dealer wants 31K for it, which is depreciation much worse than even a German car. Probably a fairly cool machine.
  • lemkolemko Posts: 15,162
    Trouble with the new STS is that it looks too similar to the CTS and costs at least half again as much. I would've purchased a new STS instead of a DTS if they had kept the car similar in size to my 2002 Seville STS. I imagine that STS-V is a brutally fast car! I believe both the DTS and STS will be replaced by the XTS in a few years.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,689
    Yeah, it's a bland looking thing, and even like the car I saw in black with chrome wheels, doesn't really excite. Maybe not bad to drive though, one could probably even get the price down a little more...lots of bang for Camcord money.
  • toomanyfumestoomanyfumes S.E. Wisconsin Posts: 894
    My dad bought a new Renault Alliance in around 1984. Car of the year and it was built in Kenosha near where we lived and where my uncle's worked.

    After about a year the tranny was slipping, the rear brakes were shot and it was traded on a Plymouth Turismo.

    On a side note, the Kenosha AMC plant became a Chrysler engine plant when they bought AMC, it shut down this week ending a long period of Auto manufacturing in Wisconsin. (Two GM plants, one in Janesville and one in Oak Creek closed in the last few years.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,806
    No, no, that was "Car FOR a year".

    MODERATOR

  • isellhondasisellhondas Issaquah WashingtonPosts: 17,679
    edited October 2010
    The early Northstars would eventually develop an near impossible to fix oil leak. The dealers called it " The Northstar Leak". In order to fix this the engine had to be pulled and disassembled to the tune of around 4500.00.

    Fixing this leak would often exceed the value of the car.

    Cadillac mechanics just HATED Allantes and would almost refuse to work on them.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    edited October 2010
    In my GM-buying lifetime, I'd say the two cars that had such great promise (and reviews) when new, but didn't have the quality to back it up, were the Vega and the X-cars. I liked them both as new cars. I would have liked an '80 Citation X Club Coupe when I graduated college that year, but glad I didn't get one. Five years later, after it had been announced the Citation would be discontinued, I entertained the thought of buying a new "X" model, as it was quite a bit cheaper than a similarly-equipped Celebrity Eurosport. Afraid of the resale hit (back then I tended to trade every three years), I instead ordered a Eurosport coupe with the 2.8 MFI V6 and attempted to spec it out like the highly-acclaimed 6000 STE.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,806
    My favorite disappointment is the Dodge Neon. I thought maybe we would finally once again have in America an inexpensive, fun to drive, quick, cute little sport sedan like the Alfa Sprint Type 101 of old, or the original CRX.

    But noooooo......Chrysler yanked out the optional higher HP engine, and managed to turn a promise into a head-gasket-blowing, wheezy little Nothing of an automobile.

    MODERATOR

  • bumpybumpy Posts: 4,435
    I thought the clear lens taillights of the European STS helped to dress the car up a bit, and distinguish it from the CTS and DTS.
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 21,959
    But noooooo......Chrysler yanked out the optional higher HP engine, and managed to turn a promise into a head-gasket-blowing, wheezy little Nothing of an automobile.

    Actually, when it first came out in early 1994, the base 132 hp 2.0 in the Neon pretty much blew away the base engines in all the competition. Until the head gasket blew, that is. :blush: Unfortunately though, time marches on, and so does the competition, and when the final 2005 model years Neons were rolling off the assembly line, they still only had 132 hp, plus probably a few hundred lb more weight to lug around.

    Although even today, that's still in range of the base engines of most cars in this class, which put out around 130-140 hp.

    I first drove a Neon right around the time I got hired full-time after graduating college, in early 1994. I was impressed mainly by two things...the performance and the interior room. Finally, a small car that didn't feel like a dog with the base engine, and finally a small car that I could fit comfortably in, AND you could get someone my size to fit behind me. It would definitely blow away the 1994 Civic EX sedan that my friends had at the time.

    But, then the Neon started falling into the same trap as GM's 1980 X-bodies...it showed promise, but the quality wasn't there. And by the time they made them more or less reliable, the competition had moved on. I kinda wish they had kept the Neon around though, and improved upon it, rather than replace it with the Caliber. The Caliber was bigger, heavier, slower, less economical, and felt more cramped inside to me. About the only advantage, I guess, was more cargo area/versatility, since it was a hatchback.

    FWIW, in later years, with the 2nd-gen Neon, they did start offering the turbocharged 2.4, so they did put the performance back. But it probably wasn't as fun to toss around as that hot little 2.0 that the first-gen offered.
  • lemkolemko Posts: 15,162
    I believe you might be referring to a "lower block seal." The part is only $44, but the labor costs are around $2,300 because the engine must be removed to replace it. The problem could be minor seepage or a major leak. Not impossible, but it could be cost-prohibitive if the car is older and/or high-mileage.
  • texasestexases Posts: 5,567
    I was disappointed by the Pontiac Solstice - not a terrible car, not even bad, but disappointing. They had decades of Miatas to study, and what did they come up with? The original one was overweight/underpowered, with a bad-fitting top that was hard to operate (compared to the Miata). The fix wasn't to lose weight, but to add power. It's just hard to understand when a clean-sheet design misses the target like this.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    When I mentioned Citation "X", I meant "X-11"--duh!
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,806
    Well the Solstice came to the party after the dance was over.

    MODERATOR

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    The Solstice looks nice, though, and had more dealer sales/service availability out in the small towns....until last year (sigh).
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,806
    The Solstice had to do what the Miata did in the first place---build a much better Lotus than Lotus.

    I was rooting for the Solstice, although I thought the front end regrettable. It would be nice if Chevy picked it up.

    MODERATOR

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    edited November 2010
    Boy, I agree it'd be great if Chevy picked up the Solstice. Maybe call it a "Monza" or "Spyder".
  • lemkolemko Posts: 15,162
    Any news about Chevy picking up the G8 and making it a Caprice?
«1
Sign In or Register to comment.