Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Ugliest Cars of All Time
I think that the Mercury Turnpike Cruiser was the
ugliest looking car of all time. Close runner-up
would have been the Isetta.
ugliest looking car of all time. Close runner-up
would have been the Isetta.
Tagged:
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
1960 Plymouth Fury - gosh what an ugly car! Chrysler made some stylish cars during this period too - the Fury wasn't one of them.
1974 AMC Matador Coupe - the overall design really wasn't bad, but those ridiculous head/tail lights? Blew the whole design.... yuk!
1958-1960 Lincoln Continental Mark III - thank goodness for the clean lines of the 1961's. It's predecessor was huge, had lines which were out of proportion, and again - ugly. Lincoln buyers at that time must of dropped their lower jaws after seeing the change from 1960 to the 1961 models.
1959-60-61 Chrysler Imperial
1958 Oldsmobile
Daimler SP250 Roadster
The Henry J
Not just ugly but distinctively ugly.
What about the Citroen 2CV? They built it for years in France, and it resembled the look of a dehydrated VW Beetle.
Some others... 1978-79 Buick Century and Olds Cutlass Salon fastback coupe/sedans... suddenly switched to notchback 4-door in 1980 after realizing the 'faux pas'... the 1980-84 Cadillac Seville 'bustleback'. 1971/72 Olds Toronado - what's the deal with that front end?
The original Bettle is cute.
The VW Thing was cute.
The Nash Metropolitan was cute.
IMO, the 2CV does not qualify in the cute category. It apparently does though in Europe - they sold them long enough.
Metros are cute, I'll agree, even if they are faily dismal failures as cars...they would make excellent coffee tables and yes, if I saw one cheap, I'd buy one just so I could pretend I was Donald Duck for a day. I actually like Mets, but driving one is quite scary. I did know a guy who bought one, lowered it, put on Bilstein shocks (from where, I don't know)an MGB 1800 cc engine and disk brakes and front end from something. Enormous job and the car was still scary, but in a different way. Some people.
Oh, yeah, the Trabant is very ugly...good suggestion!
- The AMC Gremlin (especially mid '70s models with the huge bumpers). You get the rest of the car when you make the last payment.
- The Bricklin. The mid '70s strike again.
The Gremlin has a horrible reputation - but honestly, despite its appearance, it was one of the better cars I had. (No snickering, please). Rust was it's biggest malady, but with a 258 6-cyl and automatic, that car was a tough, practical daily driver to and from school. And in fairness to the massive bumpers - it was hit at least once from every side, and it proved its durability.
On the flip side, I never got many dates due to driving it though. (!)
Speaking of AMC, what about the '74-'77 Matador SEDAN (I already spoke of the coupe in a previous entry). What's up with the protruding grille and front-end? How was that 'stylish'? Were they out of their mind?
I had a Checker, 1963, and prior to their use of Chevrolet engines they used Continental sixes that they bought over the counter. What was unusual about the six in my car was that it was a flathead with an OHV conversion that the factory did to "keep up" with modern times, at least in Checker's capacity to do so. You could literally see the conspicuously wider engine block that used to accept a flat head, now with an overhead valve cylinder head bolted onto it. Looked that two different motors stuck together. The car had a Studebaker overdrive (well, B-W), idled at 300 rpm and was a torture to drive. I used to enjoy hiting the brake and gas and making the car hop up and down. It was terrible in snow but an excellent cross-country (literally) vehicle, and it was often driven through the woods in the Colorado mountains...great ground clearance and a very low rear end ratio.
Thanks for the info on Checkers. They always looked like they were a little cobbled together to me anyway, and based on the mechanicals you describe, I was right! I remember as a kid when we visited my grandparents in NYC, that it seemed that all the cabs were yellow Checkers. We used to ride in them a lot and remember how big the back seat area was and the jump seats in them. Even at a very tender young age I remember thinking how really awful looking those cars were, though today they are so rare that it's kind of cool when you see one. My wife loves them and thinks they are wonderful (then again, she thinks Studebakers are good looking cars-only the Avanti was), so she was a little disturbed when I told her about my nomination of the Checker. I do take her to car shows and point out the really beautiful cars to try to educate her a little! She is slowly coming around.
The Citroen may not have appealed to everyone's aesthetics (you either like 'em or hate 'em) but when the DS came out in 1955 it was truly a revolutionary car, arguably the first truly innovative car (from top to bottom) after World War II.
I have a friend with a Multipla with the license plate SLUG (short for Banana Slug).
How about some bad looking concept cars? The Pontiac Rageous (sp?) is one of the worst looking and stupid show cars ever. The Chrysler PT Cruiser, which is supposed to go into production, looks like a bread box on wheels. Chrysler has been light years ahead of Ford and GM on styling, but they pulled the cork out on the PT Cruiser. Going retro is OK with the New Beetle and upcoming T Bird, but Chrysler has got the concept wrong. It seems to me that a lot of cars I have seen in auto show coverage in car mags are getting uglier. No more smooth flowing lines, but weird contours and odd creases etc.
One new car that I do not like at all, though it may be a fantastic machine, is the Audi TT. Does anyone else out there think it is really bad looking? I think they took the New Beetle and squashed it a little and gave it some ugly pills. While we're on a roll here and talking about German cars, I do not like the Z3 roadster either. The proportions seem wrong to me...the back end is too short and the front end is ugly. This is coming from a long time BMW owner too! Porsche got it right with the Boxster. What a great looking car. The only thing I would change is the shape of the headlight assembly....look like Basset Hound eyes.
The "retro" look gets old fast, I think...like my dad used to say when he saw something designs in the "new" form of Art Deco Retro...."Oh, great, I got to be sick of this stuff twice."
No one admires old cars (well, most of them) more than I do, but I like to see stylists and engineers push out the envelope to new things, taking old themes and shaping them for the future, like the Miata did, a very successful design that called on the past but not too heavily.
I agree, the Boxster is lovely, and the Z3 a bit too-too-tonic for my tastes...but some people think a camel's nose is cute, and if you gave me one, I'd sure drive it.
The Z-3 has evolved into a better design as they have beefed up the looks as they have added performance (such as the M version). As in most BMW's, I'm sure it is a great performer and handles beautifully and I'm sure I would love it if I owned one. I wish BMW's would go back to the front end look they had in the seventies and eighties....the wide grills on either side of the kidney. I had a 3.0CS and I think the front end, and the overall design, was one of the best ones BMW ever had. The older front end is not as aerodynamic as the newer BMW's, but the older front end design is better looking.
Oh, really, a person with a '58 Buick calling the kettle black? Amusing....
true, the current Taurus has such a look, but Ford outdid themselves with the Mercury Sable - now THERE is a catfish. Just needs whiskers. And this from the same company that brought us the '58 Edsel - a car so ugly htat it almost retires the title....
Arlene
By the way, is it me or are some of the styling cues from some of the classically ugly cars showing up in more recent models - such as the Edsel mouth on new Jaguars, a 90's version of the old Edsel "eyebrow" tail lights on recent Bonnevilles and the Gremlin back window that started showing up on late 80's - early 90's Camry wagons?
Ugly, ugly. And expensive to replace?!!
1) Citroen - an art professor had one; looked like a cockroach (the car, not the prof).
2) AMC Pacer - bulbous hot-house on wheels; lots of usable space, though.
Not-so-distant past:
1) Chevy Caprice - can't believe that Motor Trend anointed this as "Domestic Car of the Year."
2) Camry S/W - ugly rear end; no wonder Toyota dropped it.
Current: Taurus/Sable - pushing the limit on the "wide oval" aero-look; Chrysler did a better job with the Intrepid; what was Ford thinking????? hopefully, the 2K model will be an improvement!
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
By the way what is it with the tall tail lights on the older GM minivans and recent Volvo wagons?
Are tailfins making a comeback??
this year before it needed any major engine work! It had great ride and handling, firm supportive seats that were next best only to those in a Volvo or Audi, an extra-low gear for use in 4WD, and was as tough as nails. Yes, it was underpowered and prone to rust (I had a complete "rust makeover" done in 1992) but it was a pleasure to drive and dirt cheap to run. It handled icy roads, deep snow and mucky construction sites with ease in 4WD.
With due respect to Subaru, the 1983-1988 Tercel 4WD was the first of a tall-wagon breed that has evolved into the car-based sport utility vehicles around today. What's the quote about those who invent something aren't the ones who make it beautiful?
a car that was - came close to buying one myself.
I also agree that it was ahead of its time in concept. Unfortunately it was ugly then as now.
Like those Volvo wagons with the new age tailfins it's another example of a good but ugly car.