News:

Due to a technical issue, some recently uploaded pictures have been lost. We are investigating why this happened but the issue has been resolved so that future uploads should be safe.  You can also Modify your post (MORE...) and re-upload the pictures in your post.

Main Menu

Dishonorable Mention: The 10 Most Embarrassing Award Winners in Automotive Histo

Started by David #19063, January 26, 2009, 09:48:00 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

David #19063

Article with pictures:
http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/846/dishonorable-mention-the-10-most-embarrassing-award-winners-in-automotive-history

Dishonorable Mention: The 10 Most Embarrassing Award Winners in Automotive History

Don’t tell anyone, but we’re not always right. Neither are those other magazines.print send e-mail this page

Here and now, in vivid HTML, Car and Driver formally apologizes for naming the Renault Alliance to the 1983 10Best Cars list. For the last 26 years, it’s been gnawing at our collective gut like a shame-induced ulcer. The car was trash. We should have known that back then, and it’s taken us too long to confess our grievous mistake. Let this frank admission be the start of our penance.

It’s not the only blemish on our record, and we’re not the only publication to recognize a few stinkers with its highest honor. The history of automotive journalism has seen flaming piles of poo named “Car of the Year” even as they attract product liability lawsuits by the acre-foot and hunks of crud honored as “All-Stars” at the very moment buyers are seeking reimbursement under lemon laws.

It’s always a risk making judgments based on the initial exposure to a car, and sometimes a vehicle’s ultimate crappiness only reveals itself with the fullness of time. We’re all subject to hype for something that seems new, different, and maybe even better, and in this business, we all feel the crushing pressure to be timely, amusing, and authoritative. Being wrong is always a risk. Still, here are ten award winners for which somebody needs to apologize.


1983 Renault Alliance: Car and Driver 10 Best Cars
“If we were some other magazine,” our ancestors wrote, honoring the Renault Alliance as one of 1983’s 10 Best Cars, “this would be our car of the year.”

The Alliance was misconceived during that period (1982 to 1987) when France’s Renault owned American Motors. The idea was to take the front-drive Renault 9 sedan, redecorate it with American-friendly elements like whitewall tires and a monochrome interior, and assemble the whole shebang in an old Nash factory in Kenosha, Wisconsin. While the Alliance rode and handled okay for the time, the standard 1.4-liter engine croaked along with only 60 hp.

The Alliance proved that Wisconsin workers could assemble a Renault with the same indifference to quality that was a hallmark of French automobile industry. By the late ’80s, the sight of rusted Alliances abandoned alongside America’s roads was so common that their resale value had dropped to nearly zero. When Chrysler bought AMC in 1987, its first order of business was the mercy killing of the Alliance.

For the record, that “other magazine,” Motor Trend, did in fact name the Alliance its Car of the Year for 1983. We share the shame.


2002 Ford Thunderbird: Motor Trend Car of the Year
Ford’s re-launch of the Thunderbird as a two-seater in 2002 seemed like such a good idea. The styling was gorgeous, the concept car had earned raves at every car show, and nostalgia for the 1955â€"1957 two-seat ‘Birds was at a fever pitch.

Unfortunately, Ford went cheap engineering the new T-Bird, grabbing most of the chassis pieces and many interior elements straight out of the lackluster Lincoln LS sedan’s parts bin. The result was an overweight, softly sprung roadster that looked great outside, was agonizingly boring inside, and dreary to drive. And at about $40,000, it was stupidly expensive. If anyone was going to drive this T-Bird, it was platinum-haired women prone to carrying small dogs wherever they go. It turns out there aren’t that many of those women out there.

Only 19,085 Thunderbirds were sold during the 2002 model year and sales dwindled from there. Mercifully, 2005 was the two-seater’s last year of production.


1971 Chevrolet Vega: Motor Trend Car of the Year
The Chevy Vega is on everyone’s short list for Worst Car of All Time. It was so unreliable that it seemed the only time anyone saw a Vega on the road not puking out oily smoke was when it was being towed.

That’s not to say the choice of the Vega as 1971 Car of the Year doesn’t make sense in context. This was the year Ford and Chevy introduced new small cars and compared to Ford’s Pinto, the Vega at least seemed better. The Vega handled more precisely, was available in more body styles, and, with styling cribbed straight off the Camaro, looked more attractive. The Vega’s aluminum engine block even seemed like a technological leap forward.

However, the aluminum block’s unlined cylinder bores scored easily and the (usually misaligned) iron cylinder head let oil pour into them. Every element of the Vega’s chassis was built about as flimsily as possible and the unibody structure’s metal was usually attacked by rust mere moments after being exposed to, well, air. It’s been 38 years since the Vega appeared, and the stink still won’t wash off.


1997 Cadillac Catera: Automobile All-Stars
By the mid ’90s, Cadillac was sick of being kicked around by European competitors like the BMW 3- and 5-series and Mercedes C- and E-classes. No matter how hard Caddy tried, it always seemed that the Germans were cooler. So Cadillac looked at GM’s international portfolio of products, came across the rear-drive Opel Omega MV6 that was then being built in Germany (perfect!), and decided that, with a little bit of redecoration and a name change to Catera, it would make a great Cadillac.

Despite an ad campaign that featured both Cindy Crawford and animated versions of the ducks found on the Cadillac crest, there was just no way to hide that the Catera was a snoozer. The styling was generic and gelatinous, the interior bland, the chassis response lackadaisical, and the 3.0-liter V-6’s 200 hp had to strain against a nearly 3900-pound curb weight. Ads for the Catera said it was the “Caddy that zigs,” but what’s the point of zigging without zagging? About the only thing truly interesting about the Catera was its calamitous reliability record.


1985 Merkur XR4Ti: Car and Driver 10 Best Cars
In 1985, Merkur was such a peculiar name that anyone writing about Ford’s new brand of vehicles imported from Europe had to resort to phonetic spellings. “The Merkur (‘Mare-coor’) XR4Ti is about the slickest thing to ever come out of a Lincoln-Mercury dealer’s showroom,” C/D wrote while enshrining the car as one of that year’s 10Best, “maybe the slickest thing ever to come out of the Ford Motor Company.”

To create the XR4Ti, Ford took Europe’s bulbous three-door, rear-drive Sierra, excised its V-6 engine, and replaced it with the turbocharged 2.3-liter four out of the Thunderbird Turbo Coupe and SVO Mustang (albeit without the SVO’s intercooler). The result wasn’t a terrible car, but it sure was odd-looking.

With its biplane rear spoiler and slick contours, the XR4Ti was aerodynamically slippery and looked European. The turbo four’s raucous 170 hp managed somewhat sprightly performance, but no matter how giddy C/D’s editors were back then, buyers found the XR4Ti highly resistible. It was, in sum, peculiar.


1997 Chevrolet Malibu: Motor Trend Car of the Year
There hasn’t been a more generic or uninteresting car made in America than the 1997 Chevrolet Malibu. “Chevrolet decided that unlike its crosstown rivals at Ford and Chrysler,” wrote Motor Trend as it assigned the Malibu its highest accolade, “it wasn't interested in pushing the styling envelope with its new sedan.” And push it, General Motors didn’t.

At least the 1997 Malibu drove blandly, too. The front-drive chassis was tuned for banality. The two engines offered were a 2.4-liter DOHC four making 150 hp or a 3.1-liter V-6 rated at just 155 horsepower. And both were lashed to a somnambulant four-speed automatic transaxle.

Moments after the Malibu went on sale, it became a fixture in fleets; it was the perfect car to buy when you’re buying 600. It became such a staple with rental companies that when the next Malibu was ready for launch during the 2004 model year, Chevrolet simply changed the name of the one introduced in 1997 to “Classic” and restricted sales to fleets. The Classic remained in production through the 2005 model year. It was America’s plain brown wrapper.


1990 Lincoln Town Car: Motor Trend Car of the Year
The 1990 Lincoln Town Car was barely more than a re-skinned version of its immediate predecessor, a lame tub designed to wring a couple more years of profits out of decades-old technology. Sure, the 1990 Town Car’s wheelbase grew an entire tenth of an inchâ€"from 117.3 to 117.4 inchesâ€"and overall length was up 1.2 inches, but virtually every mechanical element was carryover. That included the float-tuned suspension, the Nimitz-class steering circle, the arthritic 150-hp 4.9-liter V-8, and the slough-shifting four-speed automatic transmission. At least the looks were marginally improved and, if you’re going to pass out drunk on the floor of a car, it’s hard to think of a better machine than a stretched Town Car limo.

The Town Car got better in 1991 when Ford’s then-new 190-hp V-8 replaced the old pushrod engine, but after that it remained technologically stagnant until it was once again superficially redesigned for 1998. It didn’t even try to be new.


1980 Chevrolet Citation: Motor Trend Car of the Year
When GM’s front-drive compact X-cars--the Chevrolet Citation, Buick Skylark, Oldsmobile Omega, and Pontiac Phoenixâ€"went into production in April 1979, everything seemed foolproof. The X-car was front-drive, the two available engines were old-school pushrod designs, and the interior was Detroit chic with flat seats and plastic door panels. At the time, it seemed like a breakthroughâ€"finally, an American-made Honda Accord.

Things started going terribly wrong as soon as the X-car got into the hands of consumers. While staring down 60 -month payment books, Citation owners were having trim bits fall off in their hands, hearing their transmissions groan and seize, and finding that if they listened closely enough they could hear their cars rust. At times it seemed the suspension in some X-cars wasn’t even bolted in correctly, as the ride motions grew funkier and funkier while the steering developed an oceanic on-center dead spot.

As GM’s first front-drive compacts, the X-cars were significant vehicles: They slaughtered GM’s reputation for a whole generation.


1974 Ford Mustang II: Motor Trend Car of the Year
The Mustang II was a direct response to the energy crises brought on by the OPEC oil embargoes of the early ’ 70s. Looking at the bloated 1973 Mustang, Ford was sure the way to go for ’74 was smaller. So they slapped a new body atop the Pinto to create the Mustang II, and skipped V-8 engines altogether.

Even as the Mustang II went on sale, purists were crying that it represented a betrayal. Instead of the powerful car the Mustang had been, here was a poseur with wheezing four- and six-cylinder engines under the hood. And, except for slightly better fuel economy, there were no compensating virtues.

Styling cues from earlier poniesâ€"the “C” indent along the flanks, three-section taillights, and the corral shaped front grilleâ€"were cartoonish on the misshapen Mustang II. And no other Mustang is quite as despicable as the 1975 Mustang II Ghia notchback coupe with the half-vinyl roof. Ford shoehorned a V-8 into the Mustang II during 1975â€"a strangled, two-barrel 302-cubic-inch rated at a pathetic 129 hpâ€"and that only further proved how ludicrously fragile the car’s structure was.

Today the Mustang II is the Mustang only the most socially inept enthusiast loves.


1995 Ford Contour/Mercury Mystique: Car and Driver 10 Best Cars
For three years from 1995 to 1997, this magazine tried to convince the rest of the world that the front-drive Ford Contour and Mercury Mystique were worthy of 10Best status. It didn’t work.

“[T]hese replacements for the Tempo and Topaz are very different than Chrysler’s Cirrus,” we wrote in the 1995 10 Best issue. “The Contour is a smaller, tauter car. It has a tighter back seat but more aggressive road manners. In fact, if you didn’t see Ford’s oval logo, you might easily mistake it for a much more expensive European sports sedan.”

Hey, compared to the Tempo and Topaz, a wheelbarrow seemed refined. The problem was, as we should have understood back in ’95, that the Contour and Mystique really were too small for their class. Priced alongside the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry, the Americanized versions of Europe’s cramped Mondeo never stood a chance.

“For the serious driver who wants a compact, affordable sedan,” we wrote to justify selection of the Contour and Mystique to the 1996 10 Best list, “these Ford products deserve a long look.” So buyers gave them a long look and then muttered to themselves, “That thing is just too dinky.”
David #19063
1996 DeVille Concours

Brian Daum

That was really a load of (s*) cars. But Motor Trend has never been my choice of reference when it comes to judging cars.

When it comes to the Chevy Citation, it reminds me of a funny story:

A friend of mine had a Citation once (nothing but problems) and another friend of his actually had one too. My friend went into a parts supply store to buy two identical parts for both cars.

After the parts guy came up with the part, my friend said, "No, I need another for one more Citation"  The guy broke out in laughter shouting to the others back counter, "Hey, Guys, Here`s a fellow that has TWO Citations!"

(Modified due to questionable term as reported by members.)
1956 Cadillac Fleetwood 60 Special
1959 Cadillac Coupe DeVille
1998 Cadillac DeVille d`Elegance

buicksplus

At least the Cimarron made such a  bad first impression it never managed to get any sort of award, hence it's not on this list.

Lots of cars get great initial press but end up turkeys.  How about the Pacer, Pinto,  Maverick, etc.
Bill Sullivan CLC# 12700

Brian McKee

A friend of mine bought a new Cimarron, put 400,000 trouble-free miles on that car, and sold it on to another owner who drove it for a long time beyond that.

How many cars can you say the above about?

The press belittled the Cimarron, but those who owned them, loved them.  They were a great little car.
Cadillac could do far worse than creating a good quality small car like that again!  Just, please, give it a nice wreath and crest on the hood and make it look like a Cadillac.
Brian McKee, CLC #24993
1989 Eldorado Biarritz Coupe
1993 Fleetwood Brougham
1995 Sedan DeVille

Otto Skorzeny

My mom had a 1972 Vega that she bought after selling her beautiful 1964 Ford Galaxie 500 2dr hardtop for $50. I was just a kid then. I remember going to the dealership with her 6 months after she bought the car so she could ream the guy out about the rust on the fenders.

When she pounded her fist down on the fender, her hand went right through it! The owner of the dealership was so embarrassed , he immediately offered her a loaner car and took the Vega to put two new front fenders on it.

My parents unloaded it shortly after that and got a '73 Super Beetle. That was a great car.

My best friend in college had a 1981  $hit brown 2 door Chevy Citation with a manual 4 speed. It was 4 or 5 years old when he bought it. He and I put a fuel pump on it across from the campus police station using the sidewalk as a lift to raise up one side. Amazingly that car lasted him all through college without any other serious trouble. He sold after graduation in about 1992 with about 250,000 miles on it!
fward

Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for YOURSELF

HUGE VENDOR LIST CLICK HERE

Chris Conklin

Oh my! The worst of the worst and the exceptions to the rule all in one!! I've been lucky with some pretty bad cars.

I was actually shopping for a Vega in '72 and heard too many horror stories. Looked at a Datsun B210 instead, ended up taking a '71 Opel wagon from my grandmother. The Opel had an aftermarket oil filter that was a canister that you stuffed with a roll of toilet paper, anybody know of that? I can't remember the name of the company, they were one of the early "multi-level marketers". Had to buy their paper rolls from a local rep. Anyway, drove that with very little trouble (did replace three water pumps) until after I married in '78. Traded up... hahaha... to a '79 Fiat Brava. Very little trouble with that car either. As a matter of fact it is still on the road, the current owner lives nearby. And the topper, a '79 Triumph Spitfire! A friend of the family sold it to me in '84 with 9,000 miles on it. Wrenched that thing more than the '73 Sportster that I owned at the time. In replacing a bad clutch I had to go to Lockheed Aircraft to get the slave valve for the Triumph. The cars hadn't been imported for a while by then. I sold it with a bad generator, the buyer tried three times to get the right replacement. Had to get one from a '78 TR to fit.

Good times! Thanks for the memories.
Chris Conklin

Walter Youshock

I can recall when I had my '93 60 Special Ultra.  Gorgeous car, but, when my dad got in it, he said: "Gee, nice car.  The dashboard is the same as my ('84) Cavalier!"

Actually, the ride was better in the Cavalier.
CLC #11959 (Life)
1957 Coupe deVille
1991 Brougham

Wayne Womble 12210

Lets see, by my count in about 20 years, they admit they were wrong 10 times. The caption should be " We are almost never right". Thats why I dont read these rags. I will make my own decisions about what is good and what is not.  I`m not very many times in agreement with them anyway.

Ted in Olympia WA

What I remember about the Vega is that everyone of them for sale in the paper had a new engine.  "For Sale, Vega, New Engine", the paper must have got really tired typing this.

The only car I disagree with on this list is the Town Car; the 90's Town cars were great cars that went for many miles in comfort.

Now that Chrysler teamed up with Fiat you are going to see a car that makes every one of them on this list look good.

TED
Selling used Eldorado Parts from 1971-1978.  Member Number 25659.

jaxops

My mother bought a 1974 Ford Maverick.  It held out pretty well until the electrical system failed and the car literally rusted from the bottom up.  It was like scraping rust off of a ship, except that the panels were so thin they kept rusting even with the primer on them.  She got about 5 years out of it.

My in-laws sold their beautiful Ford LTD to buy a 1980 Chevy Citation.  Yes, it was brown too!  Buffalo was none too kind to it and it was rusting faster than you could scrape!  Unfortunately it was T-boned by a large American car and bent in half.  Instead of chucking it, they had it fixed and it drove obliquely down the road.  I drove it once and that was it for me. 

My mother continued to have trouble with the cr** cars made in the 1980s.  She bought a 1979 Ford Granada that rusted to oblivion in less than 3 years.  Her 1987 Oldsmobile had the paint peel off in large masses until it was almost bare primer.  She used to park a block from school because it was so junky looking.  Her 1991 Oldsmobile 2-door junker was "new" and lasted about 4 years.  Again the paint flew off in chunks as well as the exfoliation of the landau top.    Her last car is a 1997 Dodge Shadow.  It is to say the least a "shadow" of its former self.  The paint burnt away and again peeled off in layers...alright, noticing a trend here?  Either these cars spent too little time in the paint booth of Mom has the reverse-Midas touch!!!!   This one looks hideous, but amazingly, despite volumes of leaks from the valve cover, it turns over and runs well.  Sounds like a popcorn machine but it still runs.  She keeps it despite a tree trimmer truck impaling it on the front forks, and then driving away like nothing happened.  Nice, huh?  The township said no one saw it, and please disregard those matt-white paint marks on the forks of the truck!  So  there it is at my sister's house with 2 oblong holes in the door and front fender, with a flat spray-painted finish on it.  Poor Mom, she never gets a break!
1970 Buick Electra Convertible
1956 Cadillac Series 75 Limousine
1949 Cadillac Series 75 Imperial Limousine
1979 Lincoln Continental
AACA, Cadillac-LaSalle Club #24591, ASWOA

Rusty Shepherd CLC 6397

Quote from: Chris Conklin #25055 on January 26, 2009, 08:46:27 PM
The Opel had an aftermarket oil filter that was a canister that you stuffed with a roll of toilet paper, anybody know of that? I can't remember the name of the company, they were one of the early "multi-level marketers". Had to buy their paper rolls from a local rep.
That aftermarket filter was the Frantz.  The company claimed that oil never never wore out, it just got very dirty and if you changed the "toilet paper" at the regular oil change intervals you never had to change the oil. When I was growing up, a neighbor sold them and tried to get my dad to buy some of them for my parents' two cars and the trucks at our lumber yard.  He called his brother who was a motor oil research chemist for Humble/Exxon who said that the oil itself never technically wore out, but the additives did and advised continued oil and factory filter changes.  Another neighbor bought one for his Valiant and one for his wife's Imperial. A couple of years and a lot of miles later, the usually bulletproof Slant Six in the Valiant had to be replaced. He blamed the Frantz filter and had the one taken off of his wife's low-mileage Imp.