Ugliest Cars of All Time

lasher5

The AMC Pacer. All time ugly car. However, AMC had an excuse. They were a small struggeling company and even ugly cars get noticed. Few were made and thankfully few are on the road. The Ford Taurus however. This thing's out there every day making millions sick at the sight. Huge numbers have been hearded off to rental fleets and we will have to look at them for the next decade or more. Believe it or not; the car was toned downed before production. The original had rearview side mirrors on the forward front fenders. It seems this car is universally disliked. I travel a lot and have witnessed heated arguments between business travelers and car rental agents when the business guy was told that the only cars left were Tauruses. It seems some people don't even want to be seen in this car. This car is ugly even in the dark.

fezo

Do you think that the younger collectors (and maybe even older) are shying away from American 50's cars in general or just Edsels?

While things like 55 Chevys still seem to command respect it doesn't strike me as being like 20 years ago. Certain things, like 57 Chevys or mid 50's T-birds (back when they were really T-birds)seem to go on and on.

Mr_Shiftright

Oh, it depends....the 50s T-Birds have pretty much topped out, they aren't going up and up anymore (except for a few very rare supercharged ones), most models settling in aroung $27K for nice ones. But the 55-57 Chevys, especially the fuelies or converts, are still climbing.

And, of course, the 60s muscle cars, IF they have the big engines, are very hot right now.

But I do think that many 50s 4-doors sedans and most 4-door hardtops are not of much interest to the majority of collectors anymore, and will bottom out pretty hard in the future, yes. But 55 Chevys, Buicks, Caddies--you know, the mid-50s GM flashy cars, they will do well in the future, because their images are part of American culture.
Prior to 1955, most American cars were not very attractive or interesting, with a few rare exceptions.

Hammertime

I used to drive a '75 AMC Hornet station wagon which had the same front end but was longer, of course. I never had to worry about being the designated driver because everyone would say: "Don't wory, Gary, I'll drive." It had the sam

AMC did make a FEW good looking cars: the AMX and the Javelin I've put a link below to see on of Alabama's finest standing next to one.

<<A HREF="http://www.javelinamx.com/JavHome/copcar/">http://www.javelinamx.com/JavHome/copcar/&gt;

Mr_Shiftright

Yes, that is a nice looking car...but they also made the Marlin, and who can live that down?

alext

AMC Pacers have been called everything from half watermelons on wheels to bubble cars to pregnant rollerskates, but I still love them. Growing up in Kenosha, WI, home of AMC until '87, I was surrounded by pacers, gremlins, ambassadors and ramblers. And I still think that the pacer's beauty lies in its ugliness. It has a unique and endearing quality that only a few can appreciate. As for the Gremlin, it's even better. I'm now in the process of restoring a '74 Gremlin with only 50k miles on it's tough little 4.2L 6-cylinder. I'll probably be the first person to put modern alloy wheels on a Gremlin.

carnut4

Interesting footnote on the Pacer--the car was designed to use the Buick V6, which GM had sold to AMC a few years before. Somehow, GM was smart enough to buy back the V6 design from AMC , before the Pacer was introduced in 1975. That's why that long I6 had to be stuffed into the Pacer's V6 designed engine bay. Just think-if AMC had refused to sell back the V6 rights, how that might have changed GM's current engine program! Not to mention the survival of AMC.... Speaking of current ugly cars, I think the Mercury Sable has to take the big prize-I MEAN-take a butt ugly Taurus to start with, throw in some 48 Stude and 60's AMC-and look what you get. Everytime I see one, I look with curiosity at the driver-wondering who buys these things-and why.

button

I have to agree with you guys for the most part when it comes to the late model Taurus and Sable. And AMC certainly had their share of failures. The Marlin certainly had problems, but I couldn't help but notice quite a bit of similarity to the Dodge Charger at the time.

As for the late model Ford and Chevy pony cars, I really think that both manufacturers have taken nice looking cars, and made them ugly. The Camaro of recent years was quite a nice looking car. Nice clean racy lines and an aggressive stance. Lately however, GM has managed to ruin the nicely tapered front end, with one of those succerfish style grills that we all have detested so much. Honestly, they couldn't have made it much worse if they had simply applied one of those Rolls Royce look alike fake grills that they used to sell for VW conversions.

Then there is the Mustang. I kind of liked the recent style especially the convertible. I thought it was a nice evolution of the 65-70 models, and didn't waste much trying to update the painful era of the eighties. The latest however looses all of that. For some reason, whenever I see a new Mustang, I can't help thinking of one of those Destructo Robots like you see on kids cartoon shows these days. You know the ones, they take the shape of a car, then turn into a robot monster and destroy the city. Then they turn back into a car, run into a wall and all of the body panels fall off.

bobbob

Now I am not sure if I am just weird or if I just can't see properly. but I really like the new taurus look(i am not a huge fan of the sable though......)I think it looks interesting. I think it has a cool looking front end. the one thing about the car that I hate though is that the whole car is oval but the rear view mirror is a rectangle. now that drives me nuts. I will agree with you though about the new camaros. they look too much like sharks with their weird front grill. but I love the new stangs. they look a lot meaner and more serious than the 94-98 model years. now if I were to give a vote on the ugliest car ever i would definetely give a vote to those 1980's cars, you know the era when there were all of those boxes running around every where. there just wasn't any style going around back then. (hint...hint...the old honda accords etc.)
there was no thought or effort put into the design. so there was no chance that they could be really ugly. at least ford makes efforts at designing their cars to make them different and interesting looking (and that includes taurus and the current mustang)

well that's just my $.02 worth and happy driving to all

fezo

I semi - agree on the Taurus. If you want really ugly you've got to fork up the extra money for a Sable... The Mustang ain't bad - I like what they
already had better but both are a quantam leap over the late 80's early 90's jobs.

80's styling mad teh Accord look radical.

carnut4

Never understood why Ford hung on to that trunkated-Fairmont-derived Mustang so LONG! I mean it went from what-1978 clear through till the early nineties with that same, ugly body. And to cover the rear window hole with glass to make it look better-why? And then all that boy racer garbage they stuck on those last few years. Seems like the Mustang was due for an all new body back in the mid eighties.

bobbob

the 80's stangs may have been butt ugly but I think the only reason that they sold well was the 5.0 engine. ford really did well on the performance platform though the looks were a whole other story.

fezo

You hit the nail on the head. One could consider buying a current Mustang for styling but the only reason to buy those ugly eighties jobs was performance.

bubukitty

Things have slowed down a bit! Just was looking at the latest issues of the car mags and saw the 2000 Hyundai Tiburon. The front end of that sucker has to be one of the ugliest things I have seen in awhile! I think they were trying to make it look like the Acura Integra and got the concept wrong. The Tiburon wasn't too bad with its prior front end, but I think Hyundai just speared their little shark and it's going to sink!

esneed

My sentiments EXACTLY! IMO, that is the ugliest 'new' car for 2000 - despite it just being a front-end freshening, they could have used a little more restraint in the appearance.

jei

How about that 2000 Chevy Monte Carlo?
It's a porky combination of ungainly side bulges in the area of its C pillars, strange "speed line" creases above each wheel well, and headlights inspired by some creature from Jurassic Park. What was that particular GM styling committee thinking?

classic1

Those are real dogs, if you ask me. I've spoken to many an officer of the law that was totally mortified to be seen in one of those Chevys. Turned some of them into motorcops riding on the BMW bikes. Sure they tore up the road leaving 1/4 inch of rubber behind which flames belching from the asphalt that was previously occupied by the vehicle, but there's something to be said for catching the "bad guys" in style.

As to the AMC Pacer....."gagggggggg". It was sooooo ugly that I thought it was cute. Kind of like that little dog. You know the one with the pushed in face and one of his teeth poking out from his upper lip, but the sweetest personality you'd ever come across. That's how I felt about my Pacer. OK, so it looked like a pregnant roller skate, but I liked the concept. The only unfortunate thing I thought was that AMC said it was a compact (or sub-compact..I forget which), because of it's wheelbase, but the insurance companies said it was a mid-size sedan for it's curb weight. I liked the idea of the passenger door being 4 inches wider than the driver's door. I liked the idea of no blind-spots. I liked the idea of putting a V8 in the car. Not in my model year, but in the next ones, the V8 was an option. I had just traded in a 1974 Pinto for a brand new Pacer and going from a 4 to a 6 cylinder engine made me feel like Parnelli Jones.

isellhondas

Old Citroen Station Wagon.

Redefines the word UGLY!

carnut4

What about the Taurus station wagons-somehow thgey remind me of the Citroens.

prophet2

Isell, I have to disagree with you on Citroens. They ORIGINATED, not redefined, the word "ugly."

When I was a part-time gas-jockey as a student, an art professor was a regular customer. I concluded that ART is a very subjective topic and that there's no accounting for taste. :>)

rea98d

First, the Taurus. You've never seen ugly until you've seen a taurus with a spoiler! That thing is barely over a foot wide, and shaped just like Ford's logo! I'm glad they're killing that body style.

Second, the Caprice/Roadmatser. I happen to like the roadmaster. The Caprice, however, is rightdown strange. Looks like something off of Star Trek. My mom, a cop in Hampton, VA, likes her caprice though. She claims it's so much better than the Department's Crown Vics. She'll probably cry when the department takes it away (if they haven't already).

THird, the Monte Carlo. Okay, so I'm not a Chevy guy, but the new Monte Carlo's look awesome. The old ones were Luminas minus the back doors. While a Lumina's not ugly, it has no personality either. The new Monte recaptures the spirit of the GM coupes from the Late 70's, early 80's in a thouroughly modern way.

Finally, computer keyboards need cent sign keys.

FREDERICK

AMC always made the ugliest version of any modern desing theme currently on the road.

Chrysler, even with their current sexy curves, make some of the worst mechanically engineered automobiles I've ever sat in. The cheese of the 70's still lingers with this company.

reBMW

not one person (i scanned the previous 124 posts) has mentioned that truely disgusting attempt to be supremely stupid that was the Daytona Superbird made out of a Charger (i think) so petty could have a faster car. think mid 70's and bright (and i mean BRIGHT) orange, tall skinny useless rear spoiler and that stupid stupid stupid "aerodynamic" nose cone. truly an american original in the yukky annals of ugly cars from the past.

gasp!

rea98d

Actually, the rear wing and nose cone did serve a purpose. The wing made the cars much more stable, and the beak cut way down on drag. They weren't just styling cues gone loco, just ask Richard Petty. They were modifications of regular Chargers (and Plymouth Roadrunners) designed for one purpose only: To compete with the Ford Gran Torinos that were ruling the Nascar circuits of the day (A job regular Chargers weren't up to). Only about 500 models of the Charger Daytona were sold to the public in 1969, the minimum to allow competition in Nascar.

Mr_Shiftright

And worth a cool $60,000 today, I might add.

crosley4

with a Hemi motor is worth far more than $60k.

Ugly cars???? how about 1960-62 Plymouth Valiants or Dodge Lancers?

AMC Matador comes to mind too.

New Ugly cars??? the rear of a 2000 Monte Carlo! It makes the rear of the 2000 Impala look good and I own a 2000 Impala LS......LOL

Mr_Shiftright

Nope, $60K...I double checked, for a correct #2 car, in real money, not asking prices of course. Maybe a show winner could pull some more, I think so, maybe $75K to the right well-heeled buyer. But who knows for the near future?

ranchero

if you limit ugly to the usa, there are three classics:
- 1962 plymouth &/or dodge full size - 1 year failure that chrysler had to rescue with cobbled together dodge 880, etc. mid year.
- the first barracuda - a valiant wagon receiving the first blow from the crusher - that was their response to the beautiful ford mustang?
- the horrible mustang II, introduced in 1974 as a response to a "fuel crisis". took all the best design cues from the original mustang and made them unpalatable.
- however, as suggested before, the french maker citroen leads the pack in ugly creativity. while the ds-19 & id-19 can by reasonable people be considered attractive, no one has ever made that claim for the citroen ami-6. it was ugly as a wagon, but wait till you see the pictures of the car as a four door sedan. think half size mercury breezeway, gone french.
finally - as my moniker suggests, the ranchero was a thing of beauty. grudgingly i admit the el camino was also a wonderful (though belated) design.

stickguy

The 1960 Plymouth Fury featured in the latest Autoweek has to rank right up there with the all time uglies. Hard to believe someone collects these.

Mr_Shiftright

I think some of the late 50s and early 60s cars are collected for their outrageousness--that's the whole idea behind their desireability to some folks. I mean, the '58 Buick? '59 Cadillac? You're not going to collect them as prime examples of styling triumphs or engineering tour de forces. They just scream EXCESS, POWER, CHEAP GAS, AMERICA! They are cultural icons more than cars, really.

prophet2

My uncle had one of those gaudy '58 Oldsmobiles. The excessive body chrome overpowered the black paint. You were almost required to wear sun glasses to view it.

Mr_Shiftright

I think I read somewhere that there was 44 pounds of exterior chrome trim on that car, not including bumpers of course.

carnut4

At a recent collector car swap meet, I noticed a chrome taillight housing for a 58 Buick. I picked it up and...my god, I almost fell over! The thing must've weighed at least 20 pounds. Just think of the entire bumper-tailight assembly from one of those things! Speaking of wretched excess, how 'bout that 59 Mercury Parklane? Check the glass area, the chrome, and the mass of those huge rear fin/taillight jobs! I remember looking at those on the showroom floor, as a kid, and thinking, WOW!

Mr_Shiftright

It was not exactly the Periclean Age of American car design, no.

rea98d

If they have 44 pounds of trim on the car, imagine what the entire thing weighs! Three tons? Of course, if one were to put some modern engineering under the hood, would 15 or 16 mpg be too unrealistic, and have a car built like a tank? I guess I'm the only one who like the styling of the 50's, but then I grew up looking at the wonderful, groundbreaking styling of the 1980's, so something kinda outlandish speaks to me. Gotta love those 59 Impalas!

fezo

Oh my goodness, it's the Batmobile!

Mr_Shiftright

I think at 4559 pounds, with 371 cubic inches and the aerodynamics of a cinderblock that this car would not deliver any kind of decent fuel mileage short of rolling it downhill with the motor off in neutral. Then, of course, you'd still have the problem of stopping.

These cars are great fun as "ice cream cars", as we say in the collectible car game, meaning that you pile the neighborhood kids in them and drive to the ice cream shop once a week. I know, it all sounds so Leave It To Beaver, doesn't it?

So if you like 'em and can get a good deal on one, don't worry about things like fuel mileage..just use it for fun now and then and enjoy yourself.

pomy11

The very last desperation "Packard" tacked on Packard junk to a Studebaker, awful ugly ending to the most good looking vehicles ever built, shy of Duesy's, but hey they were on of a kinds. If you can research this car, see if I'm not right. Saw it in Car Colletor mag.

Mr_Shiftright

Yes, you're right, it is just a Studebaker with a fiberglass hood on it, and it is profoundly ugly, I would agree. Amazingly, some people do want them, but to call them "last of the Packards" is insulting and really untrue. The 1956 cars were the last ones. The books say they're worth around $12K, but I would think that a difficult price to achieve in real life. But they are a curiosity, so always worth something to someone on that basis.

crosley4

We saw a new Monte Carlo on the showroom floor when we bought me a new truck.

The rear of the car is very fugly to us!!

A future uglyest car of all time

fezo

That this, even in its beautiful condition, is one ugly car....

fezo

prophet2

You have just won the grand prize for being the most dedicated poster on this thread. The first is like a well-groomed hog! And the second: was that a "screaming yellow zonker" or what??? :>)

stickguy

call me crazy, but I always kind of liked the Pacer (at least the X model with sport(mag?) wheels. Although I don't understand the fender mirror addition on the sample above.

I remember years ago one of the car magazines doing a test of a Pacer one-off with a worked 401 in it. Any car is better looking engulfed in a cloud of tire smoke.

The truly ugly AMC was the '74 (or so) Matador banana car (remember the tag line, "what's a Matador?" Well, What's a matter is the car was butt ugly)

Mr_Shiftright

Okay, we'll call you crazy then.

fezo

THIS is a Matador!! And plenty ugly, too!!
The problem, though is that it has a lot of competition just to be the ugliest AMC car....

fezo

I got your ugly car right here. I'd certainly sooner be seen in a Matador....

1963 Citroen Deux Chevaux

reBMW

since you went back to france for that last one, i believe we should review the Le Car R5 Turbo. it went fast, but, in all sincerity, it looked exactly like someone made a bet about who could make the biggest roller skate and, viola, the R5 appeared.sorry folks, but when I was little someone in my neighborhood had an orange superbird and it was UGLY then just like it is now.

fezo

Now I'll grant you this one isn't a turbo, but it's a Le Car all right - and plenty ugly, too. But right now I'd have to say the Citroen is in the lead....

Mr_Shiftright

You know, every woman in the US would argue with you about Le Lemon...they LOVE them, and I've spent many a time talking the ladies out of buying this disaster...(they usually don't listen, probably because men have given them such bad advice in the past

Can you guys dig up a picture of a Marlin for me? (but after I've eaten lunch, please).

Shifty