My worst car ever!

kyfdx

I think the Tracker was a Suzuki?

andre1969

the Tracker was a Suzuki underneath, but it was the Chevy dealer trying to do the fixing! Personally, I'd never go back to the dealer unless it was a warranty repair, which is why this Tracker went back to the Chevy dealer the first three times. I have a feeling that they could have fixed it right if they really wanted to, but they just did the bare minimum, somehow, in the hopes that it would make it just out of warranty.

To be fair though, while my buddy ended up buying a Nissan, I don't think he was totally dead-set against ever buying GM again. He did like the Equinox, but the Xterra just had the cool factor going for it, I guess. I thought the Equinox seemed like a competent vehicle, and I didn't even mind the 3.4 engine. I'm a little concerned about those plastic intake manifold issues, though, that seem to plague the 3.1/3.4.

My buddy took the Xterra to the dealer today for an oil change and tire rotation, because he had a coupon, and he said that while he was in the waiting room, there were two other customers in there complaining about their 2007 Altimas already! But, I guess the one place you're going to hear about problems with any given car is in the waiting room at the shop!

Has anybody heard about any teething problems with the '07 Altima? I hope it ends up being a good car...I kinda like 'em, and would consider it the next time I'm in the market for a car.

bumpy

Yeah, but wasn't the Tracker really an Isuzu underneath? I remember Honda had the Passport which was also really an Isuzu and a lot less reliable vehicle than the current Pilot.

Naah, the Geo/Chevy Tracker is a Suzuki Sidekick. Suzuki built them and the Geo/Chevy Metro at its Canadian plant in Ingersoll. I think Suzuki doesn't build anything for itself there now, basically renting the floor space to GM to build Equinoxes or something. The Honda Passport was a rebadged Isuzu Rodeo, done back in the mid-90s when Honda was rebadging all sorts of SUVs for sale until it could develop its own.

andres3

I wouldn't be against giving all the crooks and scam artists in charge of running Chrysler in the mid/early 90's a good hard prison sentence of 10 to 20 years for committing fraud in the sale of the Dodge and Plymouth Neons. These weren't cars, which they implied they were. They were more like ticking time bombs with some other ghastly thing to break down every few months that would cost an arm and a leg to fix.

To sell these as cars or vehicles was to lie to the American public. They should have called them disposable cars, OK for about 3 years or 36,000 miles, then, you just dispose of them or risk running up repair bills higher than it costs to own a luxury vehicle.

I think it would do society good to put all of those Chrysler/Dodge/Plymouth executives that were behind the sale of the Neon in prison for a good long time.

kyfdx

I think it would do society good to put all of those Chrysler/Dodge/Plymouth executives that were behind the sale of the Neon in prison for a good long time.


No room for them.. All of the Renault execs are serving life sentences for the Alliance..

hpmctorque

none other than Bob Lutz, because wasn't Bob a senior VP at Chrysler while the Neon was being designed, and perhaps when it was first served?

carguy58

"2003 Chevy Tahoe. In the shop 12 times for a total of 38 days. Thats in the first 30,000 miles. Left me stranded twice. A real piece of GM junk. Also my last GM vehicle EVER."

Did you file for the lemon law at all? That Tahoe sounded like a lemon. I think in New Jersey you can file the lemon law if the same exact problem in a vehicle happens 3 times in a row. Did GM buy the Tahoe back or at least offer to buy it back? I would have just filed for the lemon law and have GM give me a new Tahoe.

I have never had a car with that many problems that your Tahoe had.

carguy58

"I had a 2005 Odyssey and had nothing but issues for almost a year tried also the lemon law but gave up and got rid of it ASAP (traded it in for a trouble free 2006 Sienna --ohhh, what a relief--)... what a piece of junk, staying away from HONDAs for ever and ever..."

Ooooh! you bought a first year model(2005 Oddessy .) You never know whsat can go wrong in a first year(redesign) model of a vehicle. Its always safer to buy a 2nd year model or 3rd year of model because the manufacturer gets most of the mechanical bugs worked out in a 2nd or 3rd year of a model(bodystyle.)

carguy58

"Was made by Chrysler Dodge in 1994, the Dodge Neon, a 95 model.
First morning after picking it up the previous day, the car wouldn't start in our garage (faulty O2 sensor and fuel pump). Warning of lemon sign number 1!. First tow truck call."

Ooooh another first year model. As a matter fact 95 was the first year of Chrysler using the "Neon" name. Again buying a first year car is always a chance. However I don't think CR ever gave the Neon above average reliability ratings. I remember seeing average reliability ratings for the Neon in a 2003 or 2004 issue of CR but than the Neon;s reliabilitythan dropped back down to below average I think.

Anyway a woman I worked with at my co-op job when I was in my senior year of high School back in 1998 had a 95-98(I know it wasn;t a 99 obviously)Neon. I don;t think she ever complained about it having problems. I said its a nice car but her reaction was like its a cheap car.

The Neon was named on Motor Trend Top 10 car list of 1995 I think interesingly enough.

Chrysler has really never been known for making a good small car in my opinion.

snakeweasel

The Neon was named on Motor Trend Top 10 car list of 1995 I think interesingly enough.

Yeah but didn't MT give the car of the year award to such cars as the Vega, Probe, Alliance and Monza?

Chrysler has really never been known for making a good small car in my opinion.

Back in the 80's I had an Omni, that was a pretty good car.

PF_Flyer

I had a '73 Vega that HAS to be part of the "elite" that we're listing here. :P

carguy58

"Yeah but didn't MT give the car of the year award to such cars as the Vega, Probe, Alliance and Monza?"

Sorry that was "automobile magazine" that listed the Neon on their top ten best car list of 1995 and not "motor trend."

snakeweasel

Ah so there is another auto rag we cant count on. :P

gsemike

This is probably atypical but a friend of mine recently put his Neon to sleep after 199,000 miles. The engine was still going but the tranny died.

Another friend traded hers in for an SRT-4. The old one had a little over a hundred and seemed to be pretty reliable but had a weird issue with the brakes. Only when it was wet out, it would sound like it needed new shoes for the rear drums. The shoes were fine and sounded fine when it was dry out.

These are the only two people that I know with Neons and they were both pretty decent. They actually seemed superior to the Ford Escort and Chevy Cavalier of 95.

jlawrence01

I don't know about the Neon. I have had to return the last two rental Neons (both under 1000 miles) to the agency as the hose between the engine and the radiator was leaking antifreeze. Don't they get them right at the factory?

andre1969

was one of those cars that, had the quality been there, it would have been an awesome small car. It came out in early 1994 as a 1995 model, and had something like 132 hp. Standard. This was an era when many small cars didn't even have 100 hp standard, and some optional engines didn't even have 132 hp! They handled pretty well, too.

I think the Neon was also one of the few cars where the "cab forward" hype really worked. They were pretty roomy and comfortable, given their small size. Wheelbase was pretty lanky for a small car though, around 104". That was close to midsize territory just a few years before. The long wheelbase is really what gave you the interior room...all "cab forward" really does is give you a dashboard and windshield that's hard to clean!

I actually came close to buying a Neon, back around late 1996 I guess. I was delivering pizzas in my Dart one rainy night, and the thing just died totally at a traffic light. I had to push it off to a side street and run back to the store. I was so fed up with it that I actually called my grandmother and asked her if she'd co-sign with me on a loan for a new Neon!

She wouldn't, and that probably turned out to be a good thing. The Dart ended up firing right up later that night. Turns out the points had burned down to literally nothing, stuck together, and made the car short out I guess. I usually tried to change 'em every 12,000 miles or so, but lost track of the mileage once I started delivering pizzas, and before I knew it about 40,000 miles had passed. Oops!

In retrospect, I imagine that had I bought a Neon, it probably would've fallen apart pretty quickly, especially with the abuse that pizza delivery could put on a car.

Oh, and as for whomever said Chrysler never built a good small car...well, there was the Dart! :P (well, once upon a time they were considered small...probably be "full-size" today!)

wale_bate1

Neon was a great platform, and probably the first decent compact designed domestically, though years of Mitsu collaboration definitely influenced.

Neon suffered a design flaw that amounted to one of eight bolt holes being tapped 1/32" too shallow on the block with the result that the head gasket would warp at a corner after about 30K miles or so (YMMV). Replacing head gaskets on any of the models from the first two years of production (4-banger Avengers too IIRC) became task of the day at all the shops). I believe I have the facts straight. Any Allpar fans here can correct me if I'm wrong (and you know you will :P ).

You could perhaps call it a sin that it wasn't revised until the third model year, or that they first tried to fix it by simply upping the gasket thickness, and I could maybe agree, but the platform was a major step forward in domestic compact design, and its more aggressive iterations over the years have been a serious hoot to drive. It also translated well to other concepts, IMO. I think the Cruiser was a hugely enlightened approach to platform sharing, and the success of both the model and the function made some pretty big waves.

So I could easily see where it could be someone's personal worst experience, but frankly I'd blame the dealerships for not offering up the free fixes the company authorized them to make starting in '96.

What I personally thought was criminal was the lack of attention to materials inside over the years...

carguy58

"Oh, and as for whomever said Chrysler never built a good small car...well, there was the Dart! (well, once upon a time they were considered small...probably be "full-size" today!)"

I was the one that said I didn;t think car Chrysler was ever known for making a great small car. I mean even in the 80's and 90's didn;t the Escort and Cavilier outsell Chryslers small cars like the Sundance and Neon? BTW, was the Lebaron ever considered a Compact Car? I think the Lebaron was around the same time as the Sundance wasn;t?

lemko

My Mom had a 1987 Dodge Omni. Maybe that could be considered a "good" Mopar small car. It was homely and the interior was a joke, but that car could handle snow better than most SUVs. It was cheap to purchase, cheap to service and repair, and really easy to work on.

snakeweasel

I had an Omni from the mid 80's. It wasn't much to look at, but then again neither were many small cars then. But you are right, it was great in snow and it rand and handled very well, especially for the price.

fintail

My dad had a Horizon when I was little, and his experience was the same...cheap but relatively perky little car, and excellent in the snow. The fact that it is still positively mentioned over 20 years since he had it says a lot. It may have only been competent, but at the time many cars weren't.

wilcox

Back to the Neon... Our Taurus station wagon got totalled and the rental car was a purple Neon. Gawd, what a awful vehicle. We refered to it as the "Barney-mobile". It's surprising how folks would actually buy something like that!

But, back in the 70's (just like pf_flyer's experience) we had a lemon yellow Vega. The worst american made car in 50 years. And GM/Chevy would not honor their warranties on the Vegas. Turned me against most GM products at that time. It was a clear case of customer "no service"...on a 50,000 warranty.

Makes you wonder what this "new" 100,000 mile GM warranty will turn out to be like... :confuse:

andre1969

I meant that mainly as a joke, because once upon a time, Darts and Valiants were considered to be small cars, and they were often regarded as the best of the breed.

The Cavalier and Escort would usually outsell their Mopar equivalent by a large volume, but at the same time, Mopar didn't have the production capacity or dealer network of Ford or GM. So while a Cavalier or Escort may have had to sell, say, 300K units to be considered even a mild success, it may very well have been impossible for Chrysler to even build and sell 300K Neons or Sundances in a single year.

The FWD LeBaron, which came out for 1982, was considered a compact car. It was basically an Aries/Reliant with more expensive looking sheetmetal, a more pretentious looking front-end, and nicer interior appointments. Oh, and blanked-out quarter windows in the back door that tried to give it a resemblance to the RWD NYer/5th Ave, and probably made for a horrific blind spot. The convertible may have actually been classified as a subcompact because of the smaller back seat. The Later LeBaron sedans that were rebadged Spirit/Acclaim models would have been considered midsize.

As for the RWD LeBaron, they were marketed as something of an upscale compact for 1977-79, in the same fashion as the Ford Granada. However, for EPA classification purposes, which are based on interior volume indexes, they would have been classed as midsized cars. For 1980-81, the RWD LeBaron got a formal restyle, and they moved the coupes to a stubbier wheelbase that gave them a cramped back seat, and they were re-marketed as Chrysler's midsized offerings.

I think the Shadow/Sundance were offered from 1987-1994. They were intended to be a replacement for the Omni/Horizon, although they were popular enough (or cheap enough to produce that they were still profitable) to hang on until 1990. Then, the Neon sort of replaced the Shadow/Sundance, being introduced as an early 1995 model.

gsemike

I definitely think that a 95 Neon is better than a 95 Cavalier or Escort. A 95 Civic would smoke any of them.

jlawrence01

The issue isn't "smoking" the Cavalier or Escort. The issue is whether the Neon could make it to 70k without blowing a head gasket. And many didn't.

lemko

...about early Neons is how the paint failed to adhere to them. I'd see a lot of those early Neons with huge patches of spots down to the bare metal! What the heck were they using for paint - kids' water colors?

wale_bate1

They lifted the formulas from GM...

fezo

I can't begin to think of the number of GM cars I knew with experimental paint jobs. Last one I had was in the late 80s - an old 77 Nova that got a Maaco special paint job....

I think these days that paint is another one of those areas where it has gotten harder and harder now to buy a truly bad car.

andre1969

and for the most part missed that era when they started experimenting with those environmentally friendly paintjobs. IIRC they switched over from oil-based to water-based primers in 1987, which made it harder for the paint to stick. Around that time I think clearcoats started becoming common as well, and they had a tendency to burn off.

I had a 1986 Monte Carlo and a 1985 LeSabre, bought bought new by family members and then handed down to me. Their metallic paints were horribly faded and crows-footed, but still intact. They weren't about to peel off any time soon. I still have a 1985 Silverado that my Granddad bought new, and its red paint is still shiny, but it's non-metallic. It is getting weak, however. I remember the last wet snow we had, when I went to push the snow off the hood, the snow picked up a reddish tint!

I also had a 1989 Gran Fury, but by the time I bought it, 1998, it had just been repainted. And it was repainted the old fashioned way, so while it wouldn't peel off, it did fade out pretty quickly. Silver had a bad habit of doing that.

My Intrepid is pushing 7 1/2 years now, and its metallic silver paint is still nice and shiny. I've been impressed, considering that the car has never been garaged, and I'm not that religious about washing/waxing it. Heck, there's even a spot in the front fascia, where I bumped into something when the car was only a couple months old. The fascia rebounded, but it left some slight stress cracks in the paint. However, they never got worse, and nothing ever peeled off.

I think Ford might be kinda weak in the paint dept, though. At least, I remember reading about some test of a Taurus where a stone chipped the paint in the fascia, and from there it just kept peeling and the bare spot spread faster than bed sores in a substandard nursing home.

Come to think of it, one of my friends has an '04 Crown Vic, and its front bumper/fascia is peeling pretty badly, too. He thinks somebody bumped him in a parking lot, and that set off a slow chain reaction.

Oh yeah, almost forgot (but always remember, no matter how hard I try to erase that memory)...I also had an '88 LeBaron turbo coupe. My uncle bought it in 1990, and sold it to me in 1995 after I got married. I gave it to the ex in the divorce, and after she killed it, I bought it back from her for like 90 bucks, so she could get some tickets to go see Faith No More or someone like that at some club in DC. Its champagne/brown paint was still nice and shiny, but there were a couple spots around the top of the roof, top edges of the door, etc, where the paint had worn down to bare metal, but hadn't started to rust yet. This would've been around 1997 I guess, so if nothing else, the paint did last 9+ years.

It wasn't that long before that many cars would have been rusted out hulks in 9 years. The difference I guess, is that those rusted out hulks would have still been able to move under their own power...this LeBaron wouldn't!

iluvmysephia1

about some very upset Mitsubishi owners who were experiencing paint fade-out on their late 90's and early 2000 model cars. The predominant color, even though its technically not a color, was black. Mitsu is irritating them when they go try to get reimbursed for the repainting or try to get them repainted at the dealer, too. Thing is, most of their rust-out warranties had run out and as a good-faith settle-maker Mitsubishi probably is tightening up on that sort of thing. Right now they are really most interested in making money. They may be leaving it up to dealers to make the decision but I have a feeling they're not compensating dealers if the dealers are doing any repainting.

I took note of this since I'm considering buying a 2008 Mitsubishi Lancer. I am thinking of getting Rally Red or Electric Blue or Apex Silver, though, so this would not be a potential problem for me.

Oh, I am quite sure Mitsubishi has fixed this problem, too, since late-model black Mitsu's were not mentioned in the complaints I read through. The test study sample was around 25 complaints, and so far I haven't found any other information to look at regarding this problem that I was not aware of.

andre1969

Maybe my standards are just too low, but if I had a late 90's/early 00 car that was starting to have paint problems, I wouldn't be too pissed off. Unless I always kept it garaged and went overkill on washing and waxing, I guess!

I know black paint tends to really show the slightest bit of oxidation, though. And that spiderweb effect that you get around the reflection of lights and stuff. Black is also notorious for showing orange-peel.

iluvmysephia1

very true, and, maybe it's just me but black is the kind of car aplique that I sometimes get an itch to buy but always come to my senses and nix it when the bullet hits the bone at purchase time.

I just prefer Red or Blue or Silver. The Scion tC was the car that started me being interested in Silver as a car color. The '08 Mitsu Lancer looks stellar in its Apex Silver. It gives the car a bold, aggressive, stellar kind of look that says to other cars, "OK, just floor it and let's get this thing going!" I'm doing it again, getting the itch to trade in. I thought I would trade in for a 2007 Suzuki SX4 but stopped short on that. We'll see what happens this time. Me's thinking pull the trigger!

Oh, and speaking of car colors, I'm starting to fall for Mitsubishi's Rally Red for the Lancer. It shines so well and it looks...umm...well coated, know what I mean? It looks like it's painted thoroughly and thoughtfully. At first I wanted more orange in their Rally Red but now it's looking more Candy Apple to me and I want it. :P

andre1969

In spite of all the disadvantages of black, I'll admit it's still a color that really catches my eye, too. I'm lazy about washing my cars though, so I know I wouldn't be ambitious enough to keep up on all the washing/waxing/detailing that black seems to require. A buddy of mind had a black '98 Tracker, and that thing would sometimes look dirty 15 minutes after he washed it!

Back in 1992, after my '69 Dart got wrecked, I actually looked at three black cars. One of them was a 1980 Olds 98 coupe that was probably the best of the bunch. The other was a ratted out 1980 Mirada. The third was a black 1968 Dart hardtop with a killer sound system and an aftermarket sunroof. I first saw it in the rain and fell in love. It was nice and shiny and kinda evil looking.

I took down the number on the for sale sign and called the owner. Turns out the car was originally white, but had been painted in black primer. It took a real nice shine when it was wet, but when it was dry it just had a dull, satin-type finish to it. Still looked kinda evil. And for better or worse, I bought it.

Ultimately I just painted it back to its original white, but sometimes I wish I'd painted it black!

I've always been a sucker for a nice shade of green, like the various shades that Nissan has offered on the '02-06 Altima. I guess if I buy a green car though, I'd better be ready to hold onto it for awhile, because I think green tends to be a killer when it comes to resale.

iluvmysephia1

mention resale, andre. Because(who said never begin a sentence with because)my '01 Kia Sportage 4x4 returns a KBB dealer trade-in value of $3,875. That is for my own version of the Sportage 4x4, with an added tow package, AM/FM/cassette stereo radio and factory air conditioning installed after the purchase. We moved to Missouri from Washington state. Funny because one day my wife goes "you know we'll melt in MO without air conditioning." I looked at her and, even though I dreaded having to do it I knew we had to have A/C to live in Missouri. Came to $1,500 to have the dealer in Washington state install it.

Anyway, if I really do go get a '08 Mitsubishi Lancer, I am going to have to get top dollar in trade. That means $3,875. Or I won't go for the trade. I've pampered the little SUV and it runs like a top, I'm just ready for a different ride. It'll be interesting to see what their sales and finance people say. Since I don't have to trade in it really gives me the power in this deal, eh?

Back to black. It seems there was a Mitsubishi in the past that looked awesome in black. Was it an old Eclipse, around a '95? An Eagle Talon, really a Mitsubishi Eclipse in disguise. Sound familiar? It was a little two door coupe and it looked good in that stellar black.

rockylee

I like the Red or Blue on the 08' Lancer. Both look great with that new body design.

Rocky

bumpy

Here you go, second-gen DSM.

lemko

Nah, the Neon's paint problem is WAY BEYOND the problem GM had with their paint in the late 1980s. I have a dark blue 1988 Buick Park Avenue with the paint fading in spots and am aware of the problem they had back in the day. No, the Neons' clear coat, color coat, and primer would disappear in huge chunks off the car as if none of it would adhere to the metal.

bumpy

I've seen more than a few GMs with the automotive equivalent of leprosy, usually cars and trucks built within a year or three of 1991.

rockylee

Well the 91' GMC syclone was awesome and so was the 92' and 93' GMC Typhoon. I wished GM, would bring both of them back because they were so darn cool

Maybe I should look for a low mileage 93' Typhoon :shades:

Rocky

andre1969

Nah, the Neon's paint problem is WAY BEYOND the problem GM had with their paint in the late 1980s.

I've noticed that about the Neons in particular, too. They seemed to lose their paint much quicker than other Chrysler products. As I recall, it seemed to afflict mainly white cars and the ones in that purplish-blue color. It just seemed to peel off just about anywhere on the car. Roof, hood, decklid, didn't matter.

With GM cars, the most common problem I'd see, when they peeled, was that they'd lose a strip right down the center. Would usually start with the roof, but with time it sometimes carry over to the hood and decklid. Gave the car kind of a mohawk look. One of my friends has a grandmother who had a '92-93 Olds 88, in white, and it had this problem. And a few years back, one of my neighbors had an '88-90 Cavalier coupe that was a light silver, and it did the same thing.

I remember my one friend's 1995 Grand Marquis started to flake its paint off at the unfinished seam where the top of the C-pillar joins the roof. Seems like Ford does a sloppy job of getting the paint down into this spot in the first place, but it also tends to hold moisture. My buddy's car had some light rust in this spot by the time it was about 8 years old.

It's irritating how, as a whole, it seems like they are building cars better nowadays, but on the flip side a whole new crop of problems comes up, like peeling paint, orange peel, rust in places that you never would have seen it 20 years ago, etc.

jlawrence01

Nah, the Neon's paint problem is WAY BEYOND the problem GM had with their paint in the late 1980s.

One of the problems with the GM late '80s was the amount of rusting. My car - '89 Cutlass Ciera was seriously rusty after seven years. The paint - what remained - was not much of an issue. I can usually guess the model year by the amount of rust.

My '96 Ciera has little rust which is a major improvement.

iluvmysephia1

that's the one. I actually liked those mid 90's Eagle Talon's a lot. I have never researched their reliability records so I don't know much about them but they looked sharp IMHO.

rockylee...yeah, the more I look at that Rally Red on the '08 Mitsubishi Lancer the sharper it looks. The Electric Blue also looks great and darkhorse candidate Apex Silver gives the new compact 4-door sedan a bold, forged and stellar look that, if they had one in stock the day I test drive I would buy. So, really, all three of those are in the running as potentials.

jdwksu

1996 Pontiac Sunfire GT... I have never wanted to drive a car off a bridge until I owned this heap.

tjc78

1998 Olds 88. Bought brand new off the showroom floor. Leaked water inside from day 1 (day 2 technically). Kept it for 11 months before I couldn't take it anymore. I lost count at over 60 days in the shop. The dealer practically destroyed the interior working on it, I had them replace several trim pieces, the carpet, etc. GM wouldn't do anything to help and basically said all they can do is fix the car. I should have persued the lemon law, but was totally frustrated and dumped it.

Karen_S

A reporter is interested in talking with "baby boomers" about their relationships with the cars they have owned over the course of their lifetimes so far. Did you love or hate your first car? Did you do something especially fun with or in your car? Did you buy a modern Edsel you were later embarassed to admit you ever owned? How did your cars define your lifestyle and/or your personal image at a point in time? This is an opportunity to share your favorite car stories, boomers! Please respond to jfallon@edmunds.com no later than February 21, 2007 with your daytime contact information and a brief summary of the memory you care to share.

spoom

worst I've ever owned. Tranny failed twice, gas gauge worked when it felt like it, check engine light came on more than the dome light, wipers cut out all the time, ball joint failed and the tire/wheel jammed up into the wheelwell, can't remember the rest

sean418

My worst vehicle was a pickup truck. A 1986 Ford Ranger with the 2.3 4 cylinder. At nearly 50k two of the cylinder heads were blown and the engine needed to be rebuilt. If it rained, the vehicle would not start . If you ran through a puddle, it would stall. Funny thing was at the time I had it, I also had a 1965 Chevy Malibu which you could run under falls and it would keep going with its 230 inline 6. The Ranger was replaced by a 1992 Ford Explorer which was a far better vehicle.

railroadjames

This piece of dog do-do was just a major mistake in so many ways. Dealer was just as bad. 1st the heater-core blew and they replaced it. 2 weeks later it blew again. Then the muffler blew out @ 5 months. Dealer said that was normal??? Ha!!! Heater core blew on a trip to Florida 3 wks later. Car wouldn't start worth a dang in cold winter weather. Bumpers rusted out less than a yr later. Got rid of one month later and was told the heater core went out again just b/4 tranny went. V.W. ....never again!!!
2nd worst car was fun but serious electrical problems and winter no/start issues. It was an Opal G.T. (poor man's Vette)

Mr_Shiftright

Seems like I must have owned or tinkered with well over 100 cars....so let me think...what really stands out as among the worst?

Well one that comes to mind right away is the Saab Turbo. I had an 86, an 88, and a 91, and they were all pretty awful. I just couldn't keep up with the stuff that broke on those cars. It never ended. And these were NICE used cars, not high miles beaters. Head gaskets, bad transmissions, rattles and leaks....gruesome experience.

Next up? Ford Escort. Just couldn't get that car to run right no matter what.

AFter that, Jeep Wrangler, 1991, with that very odd computerized carburator. REALLY BAD idea!!!

After that, a '96 BMW 325. What a shameful spectacle of German engineering. Bursting radiators, failing trailing arm bushings, electrical glitches galore, bad water pumps----and these are very well known issues, not just me.

hpmctorque

No wonder you switched to a Toyota.

Of the cars you mentioned, the BMW 325 is the most disappointing because, (1) the premium price BMW charges should include reliability, and (2) BMW had lots of time to perfect this generation 325, which was introduced in '92. No excuses.