Hooniverse Asks- Which Car or Truck Stands in Greatest Opposition to its Brand’s Core Values?
Do you remember, back when you were a kid, hoping against hope that you were going to get something cool for a birthday present – a BB gun or indentured man-servant – and then actually got underwear and socks instead? Remember how that felt? Well, that’s the way it typically feels when you see a car maker that you love for one reason or another bow to the pressure to compete and build something so foreign to their DNA that it makes you wonder if the business has been taken over by evil alien clones, bent on the destruction of that beloved brand. What car or truck stands out to you as a prime example of this?
Jeep has always been known as being tougher than trying to crap a peach pit, but when they introduced the Patriot and The View- oriented Compass – neither of which carried the company’s Trail Rated seal of approval – it seemed that somebody else was at the helm of that slotted-grilled ship. It wasn’t just that the cars were bad, it was that they were targeted at a buyer who wouldn’t even consider a Jeep prior to the introduction of these faux-eeps. That’s one example.
Others might be the Panamera, which is both fugly and sports four-doors, both of which are at odds with Porsche’s previous efforts, or the Corvette-based Cadillac XLR, which still confuses me. There’s a few on the other end as well, the Acura NSX – admittedly a brilliat car, but what does it have to do with a company that produces luxo-barges and mid-size executive sedans?
Okay, maybe some are good cars, and maybe some are bad, but the main criteria here is of course the WTF factor- that brow-furrowing miasma that surrounds certain cars or trucks that appear for no good reason than to confuse and vex those of us who find such things important. So, important people, with that in mind, which car do you think is the most WTF?
Image sources: [wikimedia, Globalmotors.net]
Related posts:
- Hooniverse Asks- What’s the Greatest Celebrity-Related Car, Truck or Bike?
- Hooniverse Asks- Do you Deny Yourself Car Brands Because of their Owner’s Reputations?
- Hooniverse Asks-What Was The Greatest Group B Car of All Time?
- Hooniverse Asks- What’s History’s Greatest AMC?
- Hooniverse Asks- What Was Bob Lutz’s Greatest Achievement?
Gotta go with the Porsche Cayenne.
Tough call between that and the X6M.
I felt so betrayed by both.
You are both correct.
The X6M is awesome, in a completely illogical way. I suppose the Germans aren't known for their penchant for awesome, but I see the original X5 as the bigger betrayal.
It was a shame, but BMW couldn't sit and watch everyone buying Mercedes MLs….
Let's recall that BMW used to own Range Rover.
/bitter pill
//facepalming myself to unconsciousness
Isn't history fun!
But let's also recall that their goal was to make the X5 the mid market and the RR the 4X4 Rolls Royce (RR?).
Cayenne is my top vote, for sure. Bloated SUV from a renowned sports car company? With a VW sourced V-6? Blasphemy!
and Toyota-tech hybrid system.
VW Phaeton.
The people's car, for not very many of the people.
Jinx! Why are you in my head! Get out!
I'll have to say it's because great minds think alike!
(when are we going to see your points at 100? I'm waiting for that!)
It's either that or stupidity comes in pairs. We'll go with your assessment.
I keep trying. Some days I'm just not as witty as others and I don't get many points. I just want to know what my prize is.
First good laugh of the day!
The VW Phaeton. Volkswagen is not an ultraluxury brand, and to try to produce an ultraluxury car — especially when you own Audi, Bentley and Lamborghini — seems like more of a distraction than anything else. Focus on producing fine, [mostly] affordable cars, and leave the high end cars to your other brands.
As an aside, most of the time when a brand in the Big 3 has gone wayward and produced something that isn't in keeping with its core brand image it has been, in part, due to dealer pressure. This is why GM brands have so many of the same vehicles, and why Pontiac, of all brands, was putting out a minivan. The dealers see other dealers selling the hot thing of the moment and want to have one too. It is a natural thing, but can be dangerous and lead to too much brand overlap and dilution of brand image.
I agree with you for the US market. In their home market, Merc has had offerings across many market segments. You can get a stripped out E-Klasse for less than a Ford Mondeo. So, for the Euro market, where vehicles are taxed on mileage and interior volume, offering smaller, cheaper, more fuel efficient vehicles makes sense.
The NSX seems like a car very much in line with the company that produced the S600, S800, CRX, and (later) the S2000. The fact that it was badged as an Acura here makes it seem like a bit of an oddball, but it's a Honda at heart.
<img src="http://www.garagetorino.com/Recensioni/Immagini/Film/F_and_F_4/F_and_F_4_Lamborghini_LM002_01_big.jpg"width=500>
I can't decide if the LM002 is completely at odds with Lamborghini's history of outrageous supercars, or if its own brand of over-the-top-ness fits right in.
Image from garagetorino.com
Lomb has always been about attitude. As batshit crazy as the L'Moo is, I'd say it fits right in with the rest of their lineup.
Where the hell is the edit button?
Agreed, the "Rambo Lambo" fits in with the company tradition.
It fits with a manufacturer which started life making farm tractors…
Mr Emslie, your assessment of the Acura NSX is somewhat incorrect. It was created by company with a long and proud racing heritage to demonstrate their design and engineering prowess. At that time Honda products really stood out as being cars built for drivers. From the Civic to the Legend, Hondas felt special. The NSX was arguably the logical next step for Honda. In addition, the NSX was sold as an Acura in North America in order to mitigate the sticker shock, but in all other markets it wore Honda badges. What makes no sense is the direction both Honda and Acura have taken since that time. The RSX was arguably the last great Honda and the years of fugly bloated shaving devices since then have perhaps tainted our memories of a once-great maker of joyously light, quick, and clever automobiles.
Agreed. Despite the U.S. badging, it should be considered a Honda. In that context, it was a brilliant extension of the brand's core values into new territory, one that taught the segment's incumbents that a supercar need not be temperamental and uncomfortable. As my NSX-owning neighbor has said to me more than once, in many respects it's like owning and driving an Accord, until you get on it.
In the United States the NSX was branded as an Acura, and at a time when that brand was attempting to minimize the sporting bona-fides of their smallest coupe- the Integra. Your assertion that it comes from a long line of sporting Hondas bares no relevance to the question as the NSX is not a Honda, but an Acura, and while that company is part of Honda, it's still a separate brand, and there's nothing that connects the dots between the NSX and anything else in the Acura line up.
The NSX went on sale in the US in 1991 and the Vigor was being marketed as an alternative to the 3-series at the time. Acura continued to sell R versions of the Integra / RSX until 2007. It's only recently that they've disavowed lightness and fun and the NSX was not an odd duck until this past decade.
edit – As an aside, I was working for Honda in 1990/1991 and we were pissed that they badged the NSX an Acura. We wanted the halo car to be "ours". However, when we got to drive Integras we realized that it kind of made sense. The early Integras sounded like tiny 1960s F1 cars.
Cadillac Cimarron
<img src="http://image.automobilemag.com/f/car-news/cadillac-planning-four-cylinder-vehicle-for-2010-insert-cimarron-joke-here-/10809978+w400+cr1+re0+ar1/1982-cadillac-cimarron.jpg">
I'd slightly disagree, in that Badge Engineering Gone Wild was one of 1980s GM's core values.
Really, almost any Cadillac produced from Malaise through the introduction of the Northstar, and many thereafter. "The Standard of the World"? I think not.
I thought about that too before posting, but it's just so small and so identical to every other J-body, and didn't have really any luxury pretenses. Hell, in typical 80's fashion, it should have at least had some fake wood!
While none of the Cadillac's produced during that period were "The Standard of the World", I still think that the Cimarron holds a special place as the MOST out-of-character vehicle that Cadillac has ever had for sale.
I would put the Catera in the same category – the only difference being that it didn't have other domestic stablemates.
BTW, my grandparents had a Cimarron and while it wasn't luxurious, it was awash in luxury pretense. A thick white landau roof, factory installed fake luggage straps across the trunk (in chrome!), bogus wire wheel covers and bordelloesque navy blue leather interior. Grandpa tended to keep his cars forever (the other one in the garage at the time was a pristine 1970 Skylark) but even he unloaded that turd after two years.
I don't know quite Cadillac did to the Catera, but they must have comprehensively re-engineerd it to make it so sucky for you guys. Nobody in the US seems to like it much, but in Europe the Omega was the only thing GM offered that was worth driving.
I randomly came upon this today and it looks like you might want to read it:
http://www.carlustblog.com/2010/08/cadillac-cater…
Thanks, that makes interesting reading. Looks like an epically ill-concieved product roll out. Shame, the Euro version was nowhere near as bad, and looked better!
The Catera was a decent car, it just didn't fit the brand.
The Cimarron was a totally crap car that didn't fit the brand.
Given what else Caddy was building at the time Cimarron was initially produced, it probably did fit the brand – same cheesy switch gear, same crummy paint and finish materials, same boxy (albeit smaller) styling. It was a smaller package of the same awful.
The support organizations around here don't react too well to (especially low-volume) cars that are even slightly different from the mass. See, Eagle Premier (Renault 25 sedan), Merkur XR4Ti (Sierra), the whole GM diesel experiment 30 years ago, and Cadillac Catera. IMHO, they should have built it using the 3800 OHV six. That would have made it harder to sell as a sports sedan, but the end result would have been a lot better car for the US market.
Those last Omegas did have their own share of quirks even in Europe – that was the car that caused my uncle, who was a hard-core Opel fan for decades, to make the switch to a Toyota Avensis.
Anyone knows if the V6 in the Catera was the same as the one used by Saturn in the L series sedans and wagons? When I had my LW300, I was under the impression that its engine was unique in North America… Thengine was assembled in the UK and the gear box came from Germany, so it was definitely a Voxhaul / Opel power train.
The Catera was quickly called the Craptera. While decently good looking, and rather good driving, it was horrifically unreliable, and plagued dealerships like a bad rash that kept coming back.
The concept might not have been against Cadillac, but the execution surely was. The side profile of a Cimmaron looks a lot like a E30 4-door. The Cimmaron actually came before the E30 4-door. GM COULD have made a small Caddy to compete with the BMW 3 series, but they didn't.
Something about ducks…
What cheapens the brand is how shockingly awful the A and B-classes are. The Mini, for example, is much better engineered, has more refined powertrains, and far superior build-quality.
To be fair, the A and B aren't that bad, they just shouldn't be sold as Mercedes.
My cousins' examples seemed noisier, rougher, less sporty, and quite dowdy compared to their siblings' Minis, etc.
I submit GMC, and how it relates to GM overall. With no brand-specific models, it seems to do nothing more than dilute the other products available sharing the platforms. But, I also understand that as long as they are making money off of the GMC brand, it's not going anywhere. I just thought that it was a shame to see the Pontiac and even Oldsmobile brands die while GMC lived on.
I don't think GMC even has any unique features since they got rid of the 4 wheel steering trucks and the Envoy XUV. Those were sort of unique at least.
Vauxhall, or "Opel with bad dentistry and impunctual trains", had been pushing out bland, market led family hatchbacks for a number of years. There were some rear-drive standouts in the late seventies and eighties, but by and large their bread and butter models took blandness to levels beyond Kenny G.
And then they released this:
<img src="http://www.carforums.net/reviews/makes/pictures/vauxhall03.jpg" width="500">
It was like seeing my Grandmother getting down to The Prodigy. And being very good at it. I had to remind myself that it was just a badge engineering variation on a Lotus riff, but still, the Vauxhall as I knew and loathed it was no more.
For a while there was one of these on display in Seoul Station and another at Incheon Airport with Chevrolet badges on them. I never took pictures of them at the time because in both places I was generally scurrying past with a five-alarm rice liquor hangover and barely keeping down my breakfast lunch or dinner. Nonetheless, I always had time for some serious lust.
Your priorities are bang on, sir.
I've seen one in person…in the US!
It was more interesting to me at the time, than the various Lambos and Ferraris around it.
It wasn't totally without precedent. There was the Lotus Vauxhall Carlon.
<img src="http://images.paultan.org/uploads/2006/07/lotus_carlton_side.jpg"width=500>
Which was well in line with the Lotus tradition:
You want to make WHAT fast? No, no problem, we're quite able to turn it into something legendary.
They even did a one off Lada for top gear:
[youtube AGNqC_9-npY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGNqC_9-npY youtube]
And yes, this is clip is dubbed in Russian.
Yeah, but I don't count that. It's like a trump card, beats everything.
Buick Regal GS. Hallelujah!
<img src="http://www.dubdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/2011-Buick-Regal-GS1.jpg">
The Jeep Compass and Patriot are definitely unworthy. WTH were they thinking?
In the Patriot's defense, there is a Trail Rated version, and at least it looks like a real Jeep.
WRT to the Compass, I can't say nothin' good, so…
While the Patriot still waters down the brand, it's the version of CUV/water-down that would've been tolerable (they're generally well liked by owners). If Jeep was going to be anything but an anachronism, they needed a CUV.
But the Compass was brand-damaging, redundant and awful. One of the few cars whose very existence makes me angry.
The Compass Rallye version is especially egregious. Ground effects on a Jeep?!?!?
<img src="http://www.jeep.com/carryover/image/compass/rallye/compass_rallye_main.jpg" width="500/">
<img src="http://ned.ronet.ru/0/1988%20Cadillac%20Cimarron.jpg">
Cadillac Cimmaron, anyone…?
yep, about 15 minutes ago.
*sigh* I got distracted while searching for a decent image to hijack, and neglected to refresh the page, so my idea wasn't as original as it started out as…
I tried to choose the crappiest looking image I could find…. your image paints a much nicer picture of the Cimmaron then mine does.
Quack-quack…
Landcruiser. Not only inconsistent with decades of Toyota heritage but an affront to what the LC used to be. For that matter, the Armada is almost as bad.
The thing is, it can still do the things it used to be able to do.
Problem is, it should cost $20k less.
I don't doubt its capabilities, at least 'til the going gets tight. I guess I'm just an old fart – the LC didn't used to be a bloated, rolling living room.
Thing is, It has been since the 80s.
Starting sort of with the FJ50 series, and definitely with the FJ60.
That said, let's just say it's a good thing for Toyota that Jeff reviewed the LC.
(I do love the 4Runner Trail, though).
got to be the Saab 9-7X
Its was clear before rebadged Chevrolet TrailBlazer that GM did not understand Saab but that was even crazier than the VW Routan
<img src="http://www.thetorquereport.com/saab.9.7x.500-thumb.jpg">
But i still wouldn't mind having one. At least for a family SUV/wagon. I actually like our current '04 Trailblazer and would consider replacing it with a used 9-7X AERO.
DISCLAIMER: The Trailblazer is the wife's daily driver and the nice family car.
Yeah, that was saad.
The whole Lexus IS line (particularly the ISF). I love this line, but the front engine/rear drive compact sport sedan does not fit with either the Toyota or Lexus brand identity (at least in north america). Great cars though.
I couldnt figure out how to post a photo (noob to this site).
Welcome…. and for reference:
http://hooniverse.com/2010/08/03/how-to-embed-ima…
First, your username is awesome.
Secondly, I have to agree. Great car, and it proves that Toyota can do fun, but that it doesn't want to.
Finally, use the standard HTML code of *img src="photo url"* replacing the stars with brackets. Be sure to add a width=500 either between img and src or at the end for wide pictures, or you'll be made fun of and Mad_Science will beat you up and steal your lunch money.
<img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a1/09_Lexus_IS-F_Mercury_Metallic.jpg/800px-09_Lexus_IS-F_Mercury_Metallic.jpg" width="600">
Thanks, I've always been a big fan of the Empire.
Testing this whole image embed thing.
WTG!
(now because I'm lazy and stupid, I just keep the HTML code that worked in a 'notebook' file on my desktop, then cut and paste in the new image location part)
HAHAHAHA
Such a fun car to drive
http://hooniverse.com/2010/05/11/2010-lexus-is-f/
Aye. I'd love the IS if it wasn't a Lexus – honestly, it seems like Toyota/Lexus comes up with a few great products, but can't seem to spread any of that goodness around as Mazda and even Ford can.
Not as bad as Honda/Acura, which takes its sporting traditions, sets them on the ground, and actively urinates upon them.
I'm Han Solex and I approve this username.
Not content to be in opposition to its brand, this is in opposition to all the holy in the Church of the Hooniverse……the proposed Alfa Romeo Kamal
<img src="http://www.thetorquereport.com/2010_alfa_romeo_suv.jpg">
Ah, the next generation of the Subaru B9 Tribeca! Hopefully Alfa has the sense to pass on this one too.
Aston Martin Cygnet.
<img src="http://www.dr1665.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/aston_martin_cygnet_rendering.jpg">
(Picture from DR1665)
I understand why they are doing it, and if they stick to their original plan of only offering it to purchasers of their other cars it shouldn't dilute the brand much, but a tarted up Toyota city car is very un-Aston Martin. I blame the greenistas.
Man! I was just about to go there! I just saw that Aston is bringing this, uh, thing to the US market.
http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/09/aston-martin…
There was some egregious badgeneering in the early SUV-as-Family-Truckster days:
Mazda Navajo:
<img src="http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/vehicle-pictures/1994/mazda/navajo/91807111990410-480.jpg" width=500>
Honda Passport
<img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f2/1st-Honda-Passport.jpg" width=500>
I think they're both pretty affrontish.
For years, I've been wanting to make a four-door Navajo as a winter/plow truck.
Lincoln. All of it. They haven't built a car worthy of the name since the '60s.
Still, I'd like to have a mint Versailles.
me and my '90 towncar will respectably disagree with that
however once the towncar is gone, There will be no more Lincolns; just "lincolns"
The Mk VII and MK VIII were pretty good "Hot Rod Lincolns". My Dad had one of each.
+1 for the 80s-90s MKs. A friend's family had a MKVIII (8) when I was growing up, and it was a template for everything they should've been doing.
Lexus LFA:
<img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/82/Lexus_LFA_001.JPG/800px-Lexus_LFA_001.JPG" "width=500"> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thu…
Saturn Sky:
<img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b7/2009_Saturn_Sky_Redline_Ruby_Red_Limited_Edition.jpg/800px-2009_Saturn_Sky_Redline_Ruby_Red_Limited_Edition.jpg" "width=500"> <a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b7/2009_Saturn_Sky_Redline_Ruby_Red_Limited_Edition.jpg/800px-2009_Saturn_Sky_Redline_Ruby_Red_Limited_Edition.jpg” target=”_blank”>http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b7/2009_Saturn_Sky_Redline_Ruby_Red_Limited_Edition.jpg/800px-2009_Saturn_Sky_Redline_Ruby_Red_Limited_Edition.jpg
Sometimes when a brand goes against everything it stands for, the results are close to miraculous.
GMC Typhoon, Syclone, and VW Phaeton are good examples.
And I may get pilloried for this one but the Cadillac STS-V is so stupidly weird that you've got to love it.
Hyundai Genesis sedan, anyone?
I think I'll go ahead and say if the Subaru version of the new Toyobaru coupe isn't AWD, doesn't have a boxer, and isn't oddly styled, it's a WTF car to its brand. I love my oddly-styled, boxer-engined, AWD Outback too much to see the family grow in the wrong directon. The Toyota FT86 is awesome, though.
The wrong direction? Subaru no longer sells a station wagon here – that counts as 'the wrong direction' to me.
(The Impreza/WRX is a hatchback, albeit an excellent one. The Outback is a crossover. Forget it.)
Austin Mini, probably the only British Leyland product that worked.
I'd say things were the other way round. Before '59 British Motor Corporation (as they then were) were pretty successful with the Minor, Oxford etc… it was shortly after Leyland was created later that things went pear shaped.
When they were launched they were pretty good. For the segment the A had the best interior, the best performance, bigger interior space… and bigger price.
Ha-ha-ha, Brand Core Values… still cracks me up every time I hear that…
It wasn't always a laughable matter though… I remember way back in the olden days when….
Your secret's safe with me. I harbor the same unhealthy fetish.
Blasphemous as it might sound, and someone has already pointed this out elsewhere, I'm gonna go with the Corvette. I mean think about it: You've got your corporation's flagship in terms of performance and right up there in price being sold by your highest volume, lowest priced division.
But, it sort of explains the value and relatively cheap interiors.
Been a problem for GM for years, obviously for Pontiac most of all.
No other division's been allowed to make a sports car that's remotely competitive with the Vette or in that price range.
As such, it crippled Pontiac, Olds or Buick from ever making the premium (ish) sports cars they should have.
In a New GM world, it's refreshing to see that they recognized that CTS Coupe (particularly the -V) can exist in the same universe as the Vette.
Everyone's gone all sporty and stuff… but what about the Pontiac vans? <img src=http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQp6jHIpInGIee4Jxg7kZpuTlMuqIZ1g_rrfLqRM4bLCtkdlnI&t=1&usg=__z-cLle9UEfYvIy6oorHvxTvOqnU=>
No shame to be had here…it's a GREAT car.
Without echoing engineerd (who I agree with), I buy into the idea of the premium small car, that refinement and amenities don't have to be tied into size necessarily. That being said, the A and B-Class would probably be a better fit with Smart.
Aye, the A-Class at least should never have worn a three-pointed star. The B-Class I can't speak for – I haven't had any up-close time with either.
The upcoming Mini Countryman seems like a winner (loser?). Expensive, not really sporty, and not really mini. I know there's precedent for it, and minis are not cheap in the USDM, but it fails at being sporty too.
I'm surprised that no one has mentioned that God awful four-door Wrangler. It goes against everything that a Wrangler is supposed to represent…a basic, nimble, trail-worthy workhorse.
A Wrangler should never have heated seats, A/C, leather wrapped steering wheels or more than two doors…period!
It could even be debated whether a Wrangler should have any doors at all.
As long as the doors are easily removable, I think we're good.
Dilution, maybe. But completely out of place? Not so sure about that. The four door Wrangler is Jeep filling the void left by the exit of the Cherokee (even if that was supposed to be the Liberty's turf.) The vehicle is working on becoming an underpowered behemoth, but who is going to accuse any Jeep of being overpowered? For something of it's size it's still reasonably nimble. If you want to talk about being able to fit in small spaces and turn around trees and boulders, neither versions of the JK are as small or nimble as the TJ, which is far larger than the YJ and the CJ before it.
As for penis leather and the such, the pickups, commuter beaters, and low end cars are just as guilty.
When I think of a Jeep at its "core value" I think of a tub with seats and a steering wheel that you can reach out behind you, and touch the rear tire without your butt leaving the seat. I think that most all of the crap that Jeep pushes out these days is exactly that…crap. The vertical grill of today is, more or less, a symbol that pays homage to a once stout image that was attached to a vehicle that was at the forefront of off-road utility. JK, TJ, YJ…they can all give me a BJ.
But, this, of course is all my personal opinion, just like my original post to the very opinion-oriented question. People can drive whatever the Hell they want, and tell me whatever they think…it will not, however, change my opinion that Jeep has veered away from their core, and turned into a luxo-box to please the average yuppie.
I was coming back to counter your argument, but it looks like many others joined in. I agree that it has changed and become more modern as the time has passed, but it can still perform the way it was originally designed for. Could it have been done better? Yes. Could it be a stripped out shell? Yes. Would it alienate the sheep, probably.
Does it really piss me off when I see them all over malls and "bling'd out" hell yes. But I blame the taste of the owner.
I respectfully invoke my right to disagree with your very good points.
Disagree.
First of all, "Wrangler" didn't exist until the 80s. Prior to that, they were all CJs (or Wagoneers). To many old-schoolers, the Wrangler represents a watering-down of the Jeep brand, as compared to a CJ. Having owned two, I find that pretty laughable…but whatever.
Jeep's been in need of a "bigger CJ/Wrangler" forever. Hence, the CJ6 and CJ8. Jeep had a 4-door TJ concept called the Dakar back in the late 90s/early 00s. Seemed like a good idea at the time.
Fact of the matter is, the 4-door JK is the most capable 4-door SUV out there, and it's really effing capable in Rubicon trim. They've sold like crazy, and anything that keeps Jeep going as a viable business is fine by me.
I'm getting ready to sell my '00 Wrangler because I'm not using it enough, because it doesn't really have room for two + baby + dog for a weekend of camping. A 4-door JK would work, but it's been vetoed for having an interior made of sadness (compared to my TJ) and being grotesquely underpowered.
I really can't defend Jeep's refusal to put a diesel or the excellent 4.7L V8 in the Wrangler, particularly the Unlimited.
The Wrangler is definitely good with four doors, and needs the Pentastar V6 (and possibly 4.7 V8) more than anything else. What it doesn't need is anything (save for a radio and a couple of speakers in the dash) that can't survive an assault with a garden hose.
Well, agree to disagree then, because I think that the four-door wrangler is nothing but shit. Any vehicle that was born with two doors, and gets another one added in order to expand the sales market has officially lost all "core value" in my opinion.
AvtoVAZ makes a four-door Niva as well as the two-door version that I own, and I think that it is in the same category as the four-door Wrangler. I would rather have my shit-box, rusty, mismatched panel-colored, barely stays running without a degree from MIT and an auto parts guy on speed dial two-door Niva…than some four-door, sell out, trying desperately to be a trail runner wannabe fluff-mobile…even if you offered to trade me a brand new faux-door Niva for my pile, I would still not take it.
I figure if the Scrambler is accepted as pretty badass, the 4-door Wrangler gets a pass at least. Especially when you look at the two main foreign copies of the original Jeep, the Land Rover and the Land Cruiser. Each, even in their utilitarian configurations, have about a gazillion different body styles available – hard and soft tops, pickups, short and long wheelbases, troop carriers, etc.
Now, if they drop the two-door Wrangler, then we'll talk.
The Cadillac XLR actually made a fair bit of sense – it was considerably more relaxed than the Corvette it was based on.
I suppose the Prowler only made sense to budget-oriented Plymouth if they had Stan Lee and his love of alliteration in product planning.
<img src="http://ploader.net/files/67c03473002228a8d55d4c93b2db8c5b.jpg" width="500">
I'm building up quite a dislike for the new Mini brand.
so ugly it broke the link?
Spot on. MINI and SUV should never appear in the same sentence.
At least you people only have to look at photographs. Every time I see these drive around in my town (BMW NA HQ is in the same town as me, about a half mile from my house), I vomit in my mouth. Seriously, these things are everywhere, or at least noticeable because of that ridiculous camouflage they wear.
Chevy has the most brand recognition. For the "all in" that they're doing with this car and tech platform, they need it to come from a brand that doesn't generate a "who?" response.
Buick and Caddy have too much "old man" baggage hanging around, still.
Well they could have put it with the "high tech" division Oldsm… no, wait…
When you don't take into account the "gee-whiz" factor, you end up with a damn expensive midsize. I suppose if this works, it gives them the opportunity in a few years to build a "Cimarron d'electrique Brougham" with leather seats and 15K more margin baked into the price.
If they still had Olds, in an incarnation that actually made sense, that is, the Volt would be a great match. They've stated there are more Volt-based cars coming, most likely a Caddy at some point.
The cost is an issue, but no one's really pitching this as a car for the masses just yet. For some time, the Volt will be an early-adopter only vehicle.
When you factor in the tax credits that take it down to more like $35k, the fact that the interior is way above typical midsize Chevy quality, and the money you save in gas, it's not that, ridiculous of a value proposition, particularly if fuel prices go up again.
Also, don't forget that the Volt is a marketing tool for Chevy as well. Rewind to 07-08, and there wasn't a Chevy worth mentioning that wasn't a gas guzzling beast of some kind. They needed something to build their image as more than a maker of sports cars and trucks, which is why we've been seeing as much Volt publicity as for their actual vehicles.
The same goes for Holden down here. Anything which isn't Commodore related is pretty much a re-badged Daewoo, but people are dumb enough to buy them because they are "Holdens". Dopey bogans.
To paraphrase Mark Lamarr, the Countryman is a real country member.
And we do remember.
Plymouth Prowler.
<img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c3/Plymouth_Prowler.jpg" width="500">
Here's a brand that had been selling low-cost/high-value, rebadged Dodges and Mitsubishis for 20 years… then along comes a RWD, completely impractical convertible that looks like something from Chip Foose's shop.
Strangely enough it was based on a Chip Foose design. I think it was "inspired" from something he did as an undergrad. It is also a crime against humanity that that didn't get a V-8 or better.
Lamborghini 350GTV. Before that, Lamborghinis were tractors.
The Dodge Viper. While Dodge had made musclecars in the past the closest they'd come to performance cars in my lifetime were rebadged Mitsubishis. They hadn't had anything interesting and unique from a performance perspective in decades, then, out of the blue, comes one of the most insane vehicles ever put into production. The Viper not only lacked basic driver aides, by most accounts it actively tried to off its occupants, it was a giant rolling middle finger to the Ralph Naders of the world… as much engine as physically possible mixed with as little safety as legally allowable.
The Cayenne has already been mentioned repeatedly.
GMC's costlier drivetrain components are introduced in the upmarket brand, and work their way down to Chevrolet. For instance, the 6.0 and 6.2 along with the 6spd trans was exclusive to Cadi and GMC initially. Introducing new things in the upmarket brands makes it cheaper when it trickles down to Chevy.
GMC for the longest time had a very specific set of options unique to it, being the more heavy-duty work truck while Chevy was for the average truck buyer. It wasn't until the 90s that it moved as an upmarket brand with nicer interiors, suspension setups, and other small details.
Anytime GMC did anything unique (I want to say they developed the quadrasteer, and it too trickled down), people don't buy it. You only have the market to blame for such innovations.
Pontiac Minivans & the Aztek
I think we could start a new Hooniverse Asks – What is the weirdest car from the most unlikely source that did it SOOO right.