Howdy, Stranger!

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





Cars You Hate/Cars You Would Kill

245

Comments

  • tlongtlong CaliforniaPosts: 4,766
    Gagrice, I'll grant you the suburban. Let's just kill all of the other big SUVs. I hate the fact that now SUVs are an excess version of the 1960's station wagon. The problem is that not only do they increase our dependence upon foreign oil, they make it more hazardous for those of us who want to drive reasonable-sized vehicles.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,048
    I look at vehicles somewhat like houses. One guy builds a house 12 feet tall the next guy has to be 16 feet tall to see over his neighbors house.

    Maybe the price of gas will slow the sales down. I do not see a big need for a Suburban to commute to the office. I personally like the upright seating position in my PU truck vs the lounge chair feel of our Lexus. Most of my trips are about 3 miles to the Home Depot or Costco. So gas is not an issue either. If I felt the environmental community, the EPA and the Government were in the least bit interested in saving fossil fuel I would downgrade to a smaller PU truck. Outside of Edmund's I don't hear anyone talking about conserving at all. Except the bit about ethanol paid for by our friends at ADM.
  • chuck1959chuck1959 Posts: 654
    I agree. Not only that it's WAY overpriced!

    You actually SAW one? I haven't seen a single one on the road yet.
  • tncarmantncarman Posts: 82
    Hmm, 16ft is huge? Wow, Im living in a 18-Wheeler then...

    Anyways, the Buick Lucerne needs a name change. Is it just me, or does "Lucerne" sound like an 80 year old woman? I mean, just think about it...
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,048
    reminds me of cottage cheese or buttermilk, yuck.... The car deserves a better name.
  • hangaralf1hangaralf1 Posts: 107
    i know this comes in a little late, but there is nothing, no-way, no-how, that can make the Aztec look even almost good - this thing should be recalled for offensive esthetics and as a possible cause for eye and nerve damage. and the people who brought this to market should be made to drive one...well, i wouldn't wish that on anyone, but those who bought one should be hauled in and tested.

    btw - i like the name lucerne - i've been to luzern in Switzerland - beautiful, elegant, sophisticated city - i hope the car lives up to the name
  • hangaralf1hangaralf1 Posts: 107
    i agree with you also on the GM minivans - reminds me of when somebody straps on a pig snout for halloween. i figure they had to change it since it did so badly in the crash tests.
  • lemkolemko Posts: 15,196
    Nissan Armada/Infiniti QX56 - thing looks like a 1957 Rambler on steroids. Hideous!

    Hummer H1 & H2: Wasteful monstrocities.

    Hummer H3: Tonka toy for poseurs.

    Honda Element: This grotesquery exists only because it has "Honda" on it. If this were a GM vehicle, it would've long since been laughed off the market.

    Scion xB: Leave postal truck design to AM General.

    All GM "bottlenose" minivans.

    Pig-nosed Camry: Sure, the old Camry was dull, but adding a weird snout is no way to stand out.

    2006 Hyundai Sonata: A fake Honda Accord. I used to like Hyundai until they started copying existing Japanese designs.

    Hyundai Azera: a fake Toyota Camry. See above.
  • 210delray210delray Posts: 4,722
    I agree with you on most of these. Who came up with the retro-Rambler C-pillars? They're popping up on SUVs everywhere, but the Armada/QX56 may have started the trend.

    On the Element, even though it's no beauty, I kind of like it for its functionality. Imagine - a car without carpeting - could never understand why cars must have carpeting (and carpeted mats) when you have to trudge through dirt, mud, sand, or slush sometimes before you get in. It's not like your house where you can take off your shoes at the door.

    I know everyone's criticizing the new Camry, but you ought to examine one up close. It makes a difference. There's a lot of subtle curves there that it didn't have before. But it could lose the Bangle butt! And that snout really isn't one -- it's just the grille has a "hanging" emblem.

    Speaking of emblems, why do they have to be so gigantic nowadays?

    And before I forget, the Buick Rendezvous (son of Aztek) should have been on my list of cars to kill.
  • carguy58carguy58 Posts: 2,303
    Ford Crown Victoria

    Oh yeah on the Element: I don;t see to many of them.

    The Camry: well at least people notice it now even if you don't like it. The last one was so whitebread it wasn't even that noticeable. Its like you saw it(the last generation Camry) for a minute and than you forgot about it instantly because it was just so bland. The new one is still conservative but at least it stands out a little bit. I agree about the pig snout: I think Toyota can address that in a mid-cycle refresh in a few years.

    The Sonata: if people wanted a Honda or a toyota they would have bought one. People want a Hyundai not a Honda or Toyota.
  • lemkolemko Posts: 15,196
    ...that the GM SUVs and minivans should be found only at Chevrolet and GMC dealers. GM tries to make its minivans stand out from the others, but everything they try doesn't work. Remember the dustbuster minivans? Maybe they should just benchmark a Sienna and leave it at that?
  • bottgersbottgers Posts: 2,027
    ...the Element and its liner, the Scion xB. Both are silly designs. The Cavalier and Neon need to go. Both are very cheaply built disposal-mobiles. Any vehicle that gets less than 30 MPG highway.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,048
    the Scion xB

    That is the only vehicle I would buy from Toyota today. It has great headroom front and back. Plus you can see out of it. You cannot say that for most of the stuff Toyota builds today. Great vehicle for short trips to the store. Too bad it is not all electric, then it would be perfect.
  • pernaperna Posts: 533
    the Scion xB

    That is the only vehicle I would buy from Toyota today.


    It looks like a milk delivery truck, and has the acceleration of a pallet of bricks. Looking at your profile, let me assure you that the xB is not a vehicle you would enjoy.

    At least the Element caters to a very specific group of people (surfers).. but at least it does cater to SOMEBODY.

    Although, I'd just as soon own either vehicle than buy a Subaru Tribeca. It is, without exception, the ugliest car I have ever seen. I actually wince when I see one on the road. Those cars make pea-soup green Azteks look like Enzos. The front end is simply the most vile thing ever attached to a motor vehicle.
  • bottgersbottgers Posts: 2,027
    The xB is probably the only Toyota product I wouldn't buy. It is hidiously, ridiculously ugly. Did I mention I don't like its looks?
  • lemkolemko Posts: 15,196
    You already got your wish - the Cavalier and Neon are no longer in production.
  • carlisimocarlisimo Posts: 1,280
    Nice to see a "I don't like it so no one else should be able to own one" thread. Describes our society very well.

    There's plenty that I'm happy to hate though. Number one on my list is anything lifted. Next is anything tall. I wouldn't kill them, but I'm not going to respect them either.
  • lemkolemko Posts: 15,196
    Shoot, if CR ruled the world, we'd all be driving boring low-end 4-cylinder Hondas and Toyotas and nothing else.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,955
    I'd kill the 97-01 Camry with the carriage roof I spotted yesterday (not a vinyl top either, a full on puffy roof). Nice to see GM isn't alone in attracting stupid owners.
  • prosaprosa Posts: 280
    At least the Element caters to a very specific group of people (surfers).. but at least it does cater to SOMEBODY.

    Honda may be marketing the Element to trendy Generation Y surfer dude/dudette types, but in fact it's quite popular among senior citizens. Its seating height and wide-opening doors make it easy for people with limited mobility to get in and out of the vehicle.
    I believe the xB is also popular with seniors, for the same reason.
  • chrisducatichrisducati Posts: 394
    This is off topic for a second but I wish I could find someone to bet me money on the fact that GM will screw up a good thing with the Astra. The Ion has both a four door sedan and technically 3 door sedan/coupe . I am counting the small suicide door behind the driver on the coupe. Opel has a 2 door hatchback and a 4 door hatchback. Now we can call them that or a 3 door or 5 door. I hope we get both. I have this ominous feeling that U.S. Management is going to try to delete features and change tail lights and headlights ect... Some people have said they doubt that but look at GM's past Americanization of European products.
  • harrycheztharrychezt Posts: 405
    I agree. From more recent news, and pictures, if they are true, we will see 5 door versions, but not the 3 door versions, of Opels on Saturn lots. I agree, why not have both?
    I know a lot of people who are interested in the 3 door versions, but if the 5 door versions get here, and look like "me-too's"(like other 5 door "wagons", and 5 doors suvs, for the Vue replacement/Antara)almost no one(I know, who also is interested in the Saturn/Opel cars) is going to even bother going to the lots.

    Let's just hope they decide to Not mess them up!
    take care/not offense.
  • marikamarika Posts: 39
    >Are you implying general public should only buy Honda and Toyota?

    No. I think that all cars intended for the general public should have efficiency as one of the highest priorities. It hasn't been a priority for any of the domestics.

    GM could bring us that cute little Opel Corsa as a rebadged Saturn. I could go for something like that.
  • bumpybumpy Posts: 4,435
    GM could bring us that cute little Opel Corsa as a rebadged Saturn. I could go for something like that.

    Same here. Put the 1.7 turbodiesel in this and I would actually go take a look at it, which is more than I can say for anything GM offers to the US market now.

    Cars could also stand to lose about 500 pounds across the board, but there's no way around that short of building your own tube-frame kit car.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,048
    It hasn't been a priority for any of the domestics.

    Are you implying fuel economy is a priority for the Japanese? You should compare the 2006 Camry and the 2007 Camry 4 Cylinder cars. The 2006 is larger and gets better mileage both rated and according to owners. Only one person has posted his mileage on the 2007 Camry and it is 19.5 MPG. Pretty shabby for a car that is EPA rated 27 MPG. the average for those posting on the 2006 Camry are averaging 27.2 just below the EPA rated 28 MPG. Notice the smaller 2007 Camry gets a lower rating. Actually the 2006 has a better emissions rating also. All that and the 2007 is not as attractive as the 2006 Camry. What's going on Toyota?

    http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/findacar.htm
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 22,051
    how the 2007 Camry ended up having less interior and trunk space than the 2006 did. Isn't the 2007 actually a bit bigger on the outside? This sounds like shades of the 70's to me!
  • 210delray210delray Posts: 4,722
    The 2007 has only fractionally less total interior space than the 2006, and I think this is because the roof (overall height) is a little lower (3/4 in). The trunk however did shrink from around 16.5 cu. ft. to 15.0 cu. ft. (14.5 cu. ft. for the SE and XLE). Still large by midsize car standards.

    Overall length is essentially unchanged, but wheelbase has increased by 2 inches.

    I've been following the gas mileage board, and the numbers for the '07 are all over the map. The same person that reported 19 mpg ("mostly city" only) said her husband got 32.5 mpg on a highway trip. She also said, "I DO sit at stupid red-lights in this town a LONG time."

    Since I have an '04 4-cyl. 4-speed auto and an '05 4-cyl. 5-speed auto, here are the EPA ratings:

    2004: 23/32 (I get 23 to 35-38).
    2005 (& '06): 24/34 (I get 21 to about 32).
    2007: 24/33

    Emissions: no change between 2004-07 for all 4-cylinder models (the biggest sellers by far), according to the EPA link.

    Styling: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
  • marikamarika Posts: 39
    No, it has not escaped my attention that they (Toyota, Honda) are going backwards with many models.I'm not very happy about that. I would expect a continual, gradual increase in efficiency across the board for all models with each successive model year. We don't get that. But at least they offer a few choices in the tolerable range, which is more than what GM, Ford, and Chrysler have done.

    I don't think Yaris has anything over Echo in the efficiency department. The new Civics are worse than the old ones, and the Fit's mpgs are nothing to write home about.
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 22,051
    Yeah, I looked up the specs for the 2006 and 2007 Camry, and it looks like the '07 is actually up a bit in legroom and shoulder room, both front and rear. But headroom is down a bit, enough to offset the gain made by the increases in the other dimensions.

    To me the '07 actually did feel bigger than the '02-06, probably because I noticed the slight increases in shoulder/legroom, but the decrease in headroom wasn't enough to bother me. Also, where they measure headroom isn't necessarily where you sit. I remember the '00+ Taurus had something like 40.6 inches of headroom in the back seat. That's like 2.8 more than the '07 Camry! Yet in the back seat I have to slouch over, because otherwise the curvature of the sides of the car put the ceiling right into my head! I have no such problem with the Camry though.

    The EPA also rounds to the nearest foot, I found out. For instance, I remember their interior rating for my '00 Intrepid was 104 cubic feet, while the '00 Impala and Taurus were 105. However, according to the Dodge website, the Intrepid was actually 104.4 and the Impala was 104.6. I forget what the Taurus was, but no doubt its figure was inflated by that silly rear headroom measurement.

    Still, nobody's going to notice a difference of a cubic foot, let alone 1/5 of a cubic foot! What they're going to notice is if their shoulder rubs against the door or their knee hits the steering wheel when they go for the brake. Or if their leg cramps up because of an awkward seating position, or their head brushes the ceiling, etc.

    I found out years ago that if you multiply front headroom X front legroom X front shoulder room, and then do the same for the rear measurements, add them together, and then divide the total by 1728 (the number of cubic inches in a cubic foot) it gives you a number very close to those published interior volumes.

    plugging in the numbers for the Camry, I got 101.9 cubic feet for the '06 and 101.8 for the '07.

    And since they round off trunk volumes as well, that 17 for the '06 and 15 for the '07 could actually be 16.5 and 15.4, a difference of only 1.1 cubic feet. Or it could have been 17.4 and 14.5, a difference of 2.9.

    Rounding off can do funny things, sometimes.

    BTW, why do the SE and XLE lose half a foot of trunk space over the other models? Is there a CD changer or subwoofer in the trunk or something similar?
This discussion has been closed.