Burn, you over-rated sumbitch!
Yesterday we asked what you secretly craved (automotively speaking- we already know about your passion for Sweatin’ to the Oldies Parts I, II and IV) and you came through in spades, spilling your guts and scaring the crap out of us with your individualistic proclivities.
Today we want to go the other way (and we learned yesterday that wouldn’t be a problem for some of you) and find out what car you really hate.
Now, we don’t give a shit about the cars we all hate- Yugos, Camrys, etc. . . We already know that. What we want to know is the odd-ball stuff. What car is generally accepted to be hoon-worthy that makes your eyeballs itch in loathing? Do you hate the mere mention of Hayabusa? Do Hemis give you hemorrhoids? Do you say eff-you to a McLaren F1?
There may even be entire brands that we’re all supposed to cheer but which you’re flat-lined over. Saab’s born of jets, but maybe you’d rather take the train. Ferrari fail, maybe?
So, what is it, which car, or car company, fails to light your fire, even though EVERYBODY ELSE genuflects in reverence when one rolls by?
Image sources: [TopSpeed.com, eurotuner.com]
Nearly every Lamborghini since 1987…
I'll go as far as '91 – I know the Countach and LM002 (re. the peak of Lamborghini's batshit insanity) made it into the 90's. Once the Diablo came along, I stopped caring.
Yeah, I do honestly like the LM, but when they started to go all Pontiac on the Contach they lost me. And even when it was new I could never get behind the Diablo…
Sent from my iPhone
Especially the Countach. And, what's up with that name, anyway?
Ferrari's. All of 'em.
All Ferrari's? Even these?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/scroggzilla/sets/721...
only these:
<img src="http://wreckedexotics.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/enzo-crash1.jpg">
Personally, I'd have to say yes. I think there's maybe one in there that I don't mind, and I'm just generally inclined not to like it BECAUSE it's a Ferrari.
I'm almost there. I'd save only the 250GT Lusso and the 550 Barchetta from the fire.
The Pontiac Fiero – it does NOTHING for me.
Also… the El Camino (there, I said it).
Oh… and my wife's Altima.
yea but we aren't supposed to like altimas… are we?
His wife seems to think so.
I'm with you on the El Camino. I respect them and have come to appreciate them but I still hate them.
I didn't know anyone liked the Fiero. Really? Do they? I always laugh at them when I see them.
The 88 Fiero may sit a little high in the front, but he'll still whoop your ass.
-300 internetz
Bentley and Jaguar since the 1980's.
Porsche.
911 specifically.
I'm still convinced that there are original VW Bug parts in there somewhere. Every time I see one I think, "Gee a pretty Volkswagen"
Second on the Porsche.
Boxter for me though. Don't like the shape. And that single center exhaust pipe just looks like a gaping asshole staring at me goatse style.
Thirded.
With the exception of the 356 Speedster and 550 kit cars. I have a strange obsession with the kit cars. And the 914/6 ain't too bad.
Otherwise I could give a flying hoot. If I wanted to go fast in a gussied up bug I'd drive off a cliff wearing a suit. it's cheaper that way.
I'm almost on board with the 911 hate, but in a different way. I like the early ones that really were more or less pretty Volkswagens. Those cars were a very simple design, but were greater than the sum of their parts. I guess they really started getting too complicated in the late '70s or '80s, when the turbo and 43 other variations of the same basic car came out. Now it's just a big bloated shell of its former self, and it's far too damn complicated. AWD. Turbo. Water cooled. Giant spoilers that you could serve a 4 course meal on. Blah. I'd love a 911 (or even a 912!), but make it simple, and cool it with air.
I agree on that one. I've always called Porsches "arrogant Volkswagens." The old ones are cool, new ones can't interest me in the least.
Not to just jump on the bandwagon, but I'm in a similar spot, if for a different reason. Some older Porsches are just plain cool, versions of the 911 included (70's-era RS, anyone?), and I can certainly respect the newer ones, but fifty years on from the 911's introduction, seeing a new one just makes me think, "amazing how good it's become for a car whose engine is STILL in the wrong place…"
Agreed. I do have to admit that I like the very latest gen 911, but apparently not enough to remember what that generation is actually called, heh.
Yup.
Whenever I see 911, I think "dickhead".
As I noted yesterday, pretty much any other Porsche is fine, though.
Guess I shouldn't drive the RS America in your neighborhood. Oh well :^)
Anything with a paddle shift.
The Citroen 2CV. Everybody's always banging on about how it's a charming, quirky, nostalgic symbol of post-war French industrialization that lifted an entire continent towards prosperity, but it's a hideous little shitbox that I want to set on fire (in true French style) every time I see one, both in pictures and in real life.
Flambé the Citroen 2CV!
automatic transmissions–
torque converter/planetary–
automated sequential–
dual clutchAlso, I am puzzled by claims that modern Maseratis are beautiful.
Maserati Grand Tourismo = pure sex
Maserati Quatroporte = Unholy marriage of Buick and an anteater
The Lexus LFA. At least its something everyone can agree on. Maybe we AREN'T supposed to like it…
Me too. It has an interesting shape, and the hydropneumatics are kinda cool, but when all is said and done it's just a front wheel drive luxo-sedan.
Its sad that this thing is already a failure before it's even gone on sale.
I agree. The car itself may be a wonderful hoonmobile, and I like that Toyota is proving that they can do fun. However, it's way overpriced — which, to me, is Toyota's way of saying, "Yeah, we can still can do fun, but it's going to be so expensive nobody will buy it and we can go on making Camrys and murderous Prii."
So, in that sense, I hate the LFA. It's a tease.
Me too! I feel like it's Toyota's way of proving that even a supercar can be yawn worthy.
I can't stand the way they made the rear grille mesh into a pattern of repeating "L" (Lexus) logos. REALLY? Way to insult the intel of the few who can afford the damn things.
FJ Cruiser is a giant bulbous waste of resources.
The new look on the F-series is driving me bonkers, and let's not get started on the grill on the Raptor. Yes we know it's a Ford, shut up and go fast already.
Oh gods yes, the FJ Cruiser.
I love the old Land Cruisers (up to but not really including the 80 series). But the current ones are Japanese Range Rovers with none of the charm, to me, driven by people who are just too chickenshit to accept any quirkiness in their ride.
The FJ was apparently Toyota's way of trying to earn back the favour of those who see it that way… and sure, it's not bad off-road… except that off-roaders inherently need visibility, and the FJ Cruiser is one of the worst vehicles of all time – nearly in Countach territory – in that regard.
So close yet so far. Too big, too cavelike, not enough FJ40 or TJ Wrangler in its design.
I'm an FJ Cruiser apologist, if only b/c on paper they're great.
The 2nd biggest problem with the FJ Cruiser was calling it the FJ Cruiser and giving it retro design cues. It invited all kinds of comparison to the wrong vehicle.
It should've been called the 4Runner Classic, b/c it's about as close to the 1st gen 4Runners as you're going to get these days: 2(ish) doors on a compact(ish) chassis.
The biggest problem with the Cruiser was the size + blindspots that more or less make it impossible to take down a trail.
Not too many other mid-size SUVs out there with locking diffs, a decent V6 and a 6-speed manual. I'd kill for an FJ Cruiser chassis with the body from an 84-89 4Runner dropped on top.
Definitely a great chassis. I'd love a FJ Cruiser with the roof Sawzalled off, for instance… it's the visibility that gets me more than anything else.
If it was a little smaller, wasn't styled like a cartoon, and had a removable roof, I'd love it. Like I said, so close yet so far.
<img src=""http://shows.autospies.com/gallery/auto-show-photos.asp?imageId=48584&galleryId=63" width="500">
Hey, look at that, the enormous blind spot's gone as soon as the top's down. That's more like it.
Don't think I'd daily-drive it, but that really did make all the difference.
What is it with Toyota's marketing of the FJ that made it absolutely irresistible to some of the worst drivers on the road? As a truck-driver you need to identify threats/bad drivers instantly, because while your reactions might be quick, your vehicles' is anything but. You learn tricks/skills (some from cops!) that help you quickly decide who to watch out for and who's probably O.K. When the Truck behind you hollers over the radio,"Toyota coming up on your left" (or right, I've been passed in the breakdown lane before by one of these), you know they're not talking about some wide-open Camry or Prius with no brakes. Even my wife picked up on it:
"How come every time you see one of those, they're doing something stupid?"
But maybe it's like New Mexico plates or a skunks stripe, if you communicate the risk/danger effectively, all the other drivers will give you plenty of room, thereby making you safer…… "I needed to cross the median at full-speed Officer, to communicate the risk.
I shouldn't admit this, but I got one back once… had it try to pull out of its driveway right in front of me (here I am doing 30 down a dirt road, clearly visible). It stopped just in time, fell in behind me… and I slowed to 18-20 MPH until the end of the road, just for them.
Here's some extra reaction time for you, buddy. Looks like you need it.
Mercedes. They are just too … established, too reliable. They are like super man. I need some fallibility or some challenges from cars. I like an underdog. They could make up for it with great character but I just find their modern styling boring. They make amazing cars but they just don't tingle the nether regions.
Porsche and Ferrari touch on that same thing a little for me. But that has more to do with a homogeneous line. I like/hate/am indifferent to every car each makes for the same reasons (mostly).
I get really facepalmedly annoyed when I read "BUSA MOTOR!" for the most part. There are a few cars where I'm inclined to agree with the swap, but it'll just be a loud, torqueless turd in anything over 2000 lbs.
reconcider your self <img src="http://pictures.topspeed.com/IMG/crop/200802/ariel-atom-500-v8-in_460×0w.jpg">
BTW it's a BUSA V8
Mustangs. All of them.
Thank you
Mustang, who cares
Ford Mustang and Chevrolet Corvette. Before you flame me, I get what they represent and what they've achieved, and pay my due respects for credit where due.
However, I am tired of them being the sole raison d'etre for their respective companies' performance divisions. Too many people think they're "good enough", too many people buy them bone-stock and think that's enough to demand genuflection at the local cruise-in.
I say "meh". America used to do better, with more variety and imagination. The Corvette and Mustang are fine for what they are… but they're nothing truly earth-shattering. Enough with the same-ol'-same-ol'. Tell Shelby to take his overpriced gewgaws and STFU, Tell GM to quit teasing us with new incremental LSx tweaks. Go big enough already, or better yet federalize the mothereffing Focus RS, and fix the damn Cobalt SS already.
At least GM has the CTS-V. Ford's got nothin' (yes SHO, I am glaring at you).
Thanks for taking the time to write the comment I planned to write.
+1 internets for the use of "genuflection" in a comment
o hurr durr! I'm here to flame you.
Honestly, I don't have any big gripes with your reasoning or opinion. But, if the goal of the Mustang and Corvette is to be the affordable ponycar/sportscar, then it's kind of hard to be earth-shattering at the same time. The CTS-V is a great car, but I think I've seen maybe two, ever. I can understand the negativity toward the Shelby variants, they are a bit overpriced for what they offer. But still, anyone can buy either of those cars and build up with aftermarket geegaws in whichever direction they want and make that car of variety you're looking for.
I don't have a problem with them being the "affordable everyman's sportscar"… as I said, I acknowledge those roles and they do fill them quite well.
What I'm sick of is they've become the be-all end-all of Ford's (and to a lesser extent, GM's) "speed" programs.
Think about it. Instead of the Focus RS, or Fiesta RS, or a proper SHO – ford killed off the SVT program for too long, while spitting out endless Mustangs-o-the-month. GM, instead of offering a wide range of cars that handle well, bastardized the "Z" and "SS" monikers, in favor of incrementing the number behind "LS" for the 'Vette.
The cars (Mustang, Corvette) themselves are fine… in fact I would say "hate" is too strong a word to represent my general feelings of indifference toward them. I don't hate the cars, per se. I hate what they've come to represent for each builder: "We generally don't do better than this, why would you want better than this, if want to go fast or have fun, this is all we've got". And everybody has them, so in stock form there's nothing really special about them, really.
I always admire a Corvette or Mustang that has been cared for over years, or modified sensibly.
Otherwise, tell me why a local corvette club – full of mostly stock late-models – has any business setting up display near the grounds of a concours full of rarities and true exotics? THAT's the kind of mentality that I loathe.
well said. And I like how you like teh Cobalt SS.
Ugh, I was at a Corvette show this past summer – most the owners spent far too much time polishing them. The only really interesting one was a '61 or '62 with Centerlines and a whole lot of patina.
On the other hand, GM and Ford have tried to offer alternative performance models – I blame a combination of customer apathy and poor marketing.
Ford went all in, built the GT.
The difficulty for Ford lies in the lack of a platform. Mid-to-high-end performance cars can't be based off of FWD platforms. Thus, while GM can offer a CTS-V, Ford has no RWD platform anymore. Look at Chrysler: a company in shambles, but still able to offer a full line of SRT vehicles. This is precisely why Ford needs to work with their Australian branch on a Falcon (or something, anything, RWD) for the rest of us.
///Melting!
Most Porsches and Ferraris are pretty meh in my opinion.
Don't care about Saab, never have.
French cars are weird, but for the most part I'm not a fan.
+1 on Saab and most Porsches.
I like the fully hydropneumatic Citroens for being the engineering equivalent of monotremes, but would never really want to own one.
Audi. Like, every damn one. Glorified damn Volkswagens as far as I'm concerned! Don't get me wrong, I like Volkswagen a lot, I don't like Volkswagens that cost 15 large more than they should because there are 4 rings on the grill. They're not up to the performance standard of BMW, and they're not up to the luxury standard of Mercedes, but yet everyone praises them because they have the greatest interiors ever. I know there have been some truly legendary Audis, like the killer Quattros in the '80s, but by and large Audi is overrated.
If it were the years from about '95 to '05, I'd totally agree with you. Now I transfer everything you said (except the "glorified Volkswagen" part) over to BMW. They're nicer, better quality BMWs for a few bucks lower price, now.
Yup, agreed. Overpriced and self destructive (plastic impellers in the water pumps FTMFL). Oh, need anything repaired? Let's just take the front end off first. Too expensive to buy, way too expensive to maintain.
I still love to see me some hot Avant action out in the world, but you'll never see it in my garage.
Given my tendency to own or buy cars out to over 100k miles, Audis are pretty much off my list, despite being quite fond of many of them.
My mom had a 98 that we bought new, and it was great out to about 40k, then things started going downhill, with repair costs going uphill. Same with my dad's 02 A6 2.7T.
Those cars are clearly not engineered with long-term ownership/serviceability in mind.
Lambo's have never really done anything for me, I couldn't care less about any of the front engine Porsches.
I don't like the new Challenger, and can't really give a reason why.
As I've mentioned previously, the new Camaro already seems dated.
I loved the idea of the BMW 1 series, but think the execution failed.
The Lambos really lose something for having nearly ZERO racing heritage.
Ferrari I at least respect for the original attitude of: "We will sell some street cars to pay for the race team"
Most new Mercedes and Bimmers do nothing to me. Not a Ferrari fan either.
The new generation of "pony cars", all three. Too big, too heavy, poor visibility.
I agree they should be smaller and weigh less, but I've never bought a car or not bought it because of poor visibility.
Go sit in a new Camaro.
I literally laughed when I first did.
Volkwagen Beetle.
you sound like a Toyota man
Worse, I am a DSM man.
-Nissan 370Z (looks like a brontosaurus sat on its ass)
-Modern AMG Benzes (too many chassis gizmos and slushbox-only even when Cadillac – freaking Cadillac! – offers a stick)
-Current front-engined Ferraris (meh styling and not much soul compared to their predecessors)
-New Challenger and Camaro (elephantine, poorly-packaged – though admittedly faster and better handling – caricatures of their forebears)
The AMG Benzes are a fantastic engine with a car thrown in. Ultimately, they're luxurious muscle cars, that can sort of turn. I don't know if I'd ever buy one, but I like the thought of them. And the sound is pants-tightening.
Beemers have done nothing for me for the last 10 years or so;
The new GTR… sorry, too cold for me (and I drove it to be able to say this);
New Camaro and Challenger are too big and bloated, look too fat;
Recent Ferraris.
My thoughts, exactly! I'm not too fond of the a-holes who drive them, either.
Mustangs: because they are like assholes, they're everywhere, usually driven by assholes.
Honda: Yes the whole marquis mainly because their fanboys spam the hell out of craigslist. Seriously, why do you have Bronco as a keyword for a B16 head?
Jeeps: Like mustangs they are everywhere and again, usually driven by assholes.
Early Bronco People: Because they are turning into Jeeping Assholes.
Z cars. Any of 'em. Yes, even that one.
Front-engined Porsches. And most rear-engined Porsches, for that matter.
Pretty much every post-W201 Mercedes.
3rd & 4th Gen Mustang
Syclone/Typhoon
I have no logical reasoning for any of my choices, except for the fact that my twin brother was mauled & killed by a pack of wild 928s when we were just wee children.
I think Syclones/Typhoons are really cool, but since playing Project Gotham (4?), I have the nagging fear that they may be that narcolepticly dull to drive in real life as well.
Toyota Supra – not a fan of their Dyno-Queen by default status.
Also, the Viper, glad it's finally going away – it's been ugly as sin since the very start and was only mildly helped by the redesign. Plus, who want's all of those upside-down Ducks on their car?
Any modern Lambo or Ferrari.
If only because they're too easy, too obvious. They're track-engineered cars that–at best–get used as grand-tourers. Get a Bentley or Aston or Jag and quit being such a poseur.
Next up: Porsche 911s.
I appreciate them, but they scream "asshole" as much or more than Corvettes. Think they also sound like crap.
Saab.
Just…don't…care. They haven't been technologically interesting or commercially relevant as long as I've been alive. Jack Baruth wrote a great writeup as to how they missed the boat when premium brands went from just being imported and different to being actually good. Namely, no one's going to pay 45k for a car just because it's from Sweden.
90% of muscle/pony cars after about 1967. What at the time was curvy now looks fat and bloated. Don't care how much HP they make.
90% of British sports cars from the late 50s to the 80s. Triumph? MG? Austin? Meh. You can keep your 90 wheezy hp and shitty engineering; I'd rather drive a fast car fast.
90% of pre-war anything.
Aside from the novelty factor of them lasting that long, they all look the same and look like no fun to own or drive. "This 1918 Daleghey was restored to factory original over the course of 8 years at a cost of $120,000"…uh…good for you, dude. For the time and money, there are more interesting things to find in a museum.
No love for the current Challenger or Camaro. Challenger's 15% too big and I wanted to like the Camaro until I sat in one. I can't believe someone green-lighted a car with those sight lines. Yes, I'm cool with the Mustang. Preferred the lines of the 05-09 ones to the current gen, but there's no arguing with the potential the 2011 shows.
I agree on the prewar stuff. I can appreciate it, sure, but most of it doesn't really move my needle. Hopefully there are people of our generation who do dig it, though, as the current owners won't be around forever.
Killer ZomBee will eat your brains.
"911…Think they also sound like crap"
Thank you, I second that. I can't stand the way the 911 sounds.
At least they sound like that for a mechanical reason. Unlike new cars that have such things as "induction sound tubes" to better match the opinions of the focus groups.
compare the average Porsche
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HgTERMmEec
to this (be careful at 00:50)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8br0BHXqjt4
or this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DPXYS_1pRI
compare the average Porsche
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HgTERMmEec
to this (be careful at 00:50)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8br0BHXqjt4
or this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DPXYS_1pRI
Exhaust notes are a big deal to me.
My list of Cars That I'd Like 100% More If They Sounded Better:
Porsche 911
Any and all Nissan VQ-powered products
Nissan GTR
Porsche 928
My own Subaru WRX
(they sound so good with a good exhaust system and so crappy stock)
The Nissan VQ (and whatever is in the GTR) have always sounded like someone letting out a wet fart in a leather chair.
Engine is good and the design is good, it just sounds shitty.
I respectfully disagree. One of my favorite sounds in the world is a well-tuned, carburetted mid-60s small displacement V engine at WOT. I think, more than any other modern, fuel-injected engine, the VQ captures the essence of that sound. It's not for everyone, but it's incredibly distinctive. Although I wince when I hear the telltale sound and flip around onto to see an Infiniti FX full of car seats and a heavyset platinum blonde running a red light …
All but two of the cars you have listed (really only one if you mod the WRX exhaust) meet my criteria for crappy exhaust note. They have an odd number of cylinders per bank! My theory is that a car must have an even number of cylinders per bank to have a sweet exhaust note. I-4, F-4, V-4, I-6, V-8, V-12, V-16, I-8 = good exhaust note I-3, V-6, F-6, I-5, V-10= crappy exhaust note There might be a few exceptions, but this works as a general rule.
I wanted to fight you over the anti-Challenger talk (tho I get it) until you said you like the Mustang. It's a good thing, too, cuz you might've gotten tired beating me up.
The Challenger fails because it's too expensive, too nostalgic and too slow.
If its price matched its performance, I'd forgive it. Namely, the SRT8 needs to be about 36k, the RT 25k, and the V6 cheaper than a V6 'Stang. Unfortunately, for the prices they charge for each level, it's clear that they're expecting people to pay extra for the retro.
If I wanted a slow, poor-handling nostalgia-mobile, I'd buy a real classic.
(oh wait, I did)
If anyone could sell the horsepower that RT is chugging out at 25K, we'd be living in a hell of a world. But I hear you.
The problem is, I'm more interested in performance than horsepower. There's plenty of RT-level performance for 25k.
Here's one that's likely to get me lynched. I can't stand looking at 57 Chevy's. Any of 'em that's not a 'Vette, even the Nomad. I'll never really understand why people pick the Chevy when the General's sister cars from that year are infinitely more interesting. Not to mention affordable.
Yeah, honestly I'd greatly prefer a '55 or '56… or any Pontiac from those three years even moreso. The '57's overrated.
I'll always love that car, but I've seen way too many of them. It's overdone. And it's even worse when they've been garishly hotrodded.
Same goes for the '55 and '56
That said, I still get a kick out of seeing a really good restoration or an original. Especially if it's an oddball, like a sedan or a Two Ten.
I'm sick of them, too. I hate '57 Chevy guitars, couches, all of it. By now it's boring and predictable. I'd rather have a '57 Olds, Pontiac, Cadillac, Ford, whatever. The '57 Chevy is like the Harley Davidson of cars, overdone, common, and I don't care about them anymore.
Agreed. They're ugly, mediocre, half-assed, unenthusiastic douchebagmobiles.
Everything BMW. Right now they're just riding on their reputation. Yes, they drive very nicely, and that's great for automotive journalists… but it's great for absolutely nobody else. The interiors are just crap. The styling is shit. The price is way too high, and the list of standard features is minimal at best. In average, every-day, normal driving that people actually, you know, DO on a day-to-day basis, both the Audis and the CTS do it as well if not better, and are more pleasant places to spend time.
Really? Everything?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/scroggzilla/sets/721...
You're absolutely right, and I stand corrected. I reworded that too many times. I was trying to say "Everything BMW is making NOW." Even the previous generation I still liked (somewhat), and when you get back two generations or more I pretty much love them. Bad wording.
I felt the same way until fairly recently when I actually bought a BMW. But, having owned three different BMWs in the last 4 years or so has changed my mind. Of course my newest BMW has been a 1996, so your criticisms of the new ones compared to the Audi and CTS are probably valid, especially the new purchase price and Bangle styling.
As I just said to Scroggs, I worded that wrong. I should have said everything CURRENT BMW. I like pretty much everything two generations old or older, and some of the stuff from the previous generation.
McLaren F1. It just looks so utterly non-spectacular.
Granted it is fast and rightly deserves all its performance accolades, but every time i look at one its just a resounding "…meh"
1) The Alfa Romeo MiTo. The press loves it; its styling makes me cringe.
2) The Cadillac CTS. I have still not warmed to the Art & Science school of design, and the current CTS is a really awkward-looking car — it looks okay from certain angles, fat and clumsy from others, and it's extraordinarily sensitive to what wheels it has. I would not hate it (it gets a B- for effort) if others didn't seem to love its looks so much.
3) The Jaguar XF. It's not a bad-looking car, admittedly, but people are wetting themselves over it. It looks like a perfectly ordinary big sedan. It could just as easily be a Buick. (Ironically, the last-generation Riviera looked more like a Jag than some current Jags.)
4) The Audi R8. Grab a dictionary and look up "anodyne." Then add obnoxious LED lights.
5) The new Camaro. Its greatest achievement is to make me feel better about the retro-Challenger, which I don't like, either. I like the '69 Camaro, but the new one manages to capture almost everything I don't particularly like about the original and almost nothing I do.
Ouch. Badly want an early Bronco, mid-70s, Orange and white, totally stock with hounds-tooth interior and sweet Ranger package.
Sigh… you're right, most of the Broncos have been modded into looking like every other modded rhino-lined monster. It was cool maybe the first 1,000 times. Where's my @#$ %&* hounds-tooth!?!?
Nissan GT-R. Godzilla. The second coming of Christ rolled in sushi. Bleh.
It's a fantastic car. Don't get me wrong. Fast, capable, intriguing. But it's not all that good looking. It's capable, but not soulful. It has electronic wizardry to distract it's owner from the fact that it feels nothing. It's what vanilla in an $80,000 container looks like. I just don't like it.
I feel the same way about the LFA. Even worse on the LFA is that Toyota is teasing us. It's like they are showing the world that they can still do fun cars like the MR2 and Supra, but they don't want to so they are going to price themselves out of the market. So then when sales flop they can go back to making appliances again.
The new Challenger. Ugly. Bloated. Ill-Handling. Horrible. Chrysler should have cancelled this the day it was supposed to go on sale and told everyone they were doing it to save the planet. It's got over 100 hp on the Mustang GT, yet the Mustang can run circles around this behemoth. I remember the first time I saw pictures I thought it looked great. I remember the first time I saw one in person I felt puny.
Speaking of that, I'm not too keen on the styling of the new Camaro, either. It almost looks like Chevy tried too hard. Yeah, it's a cool car and it's much more capable than the Challenger, but it looks like a fat, middle-aged man trying to be cool. Imagine Archie Bunker with a fauxhawk. That's what the Camaro makes me think of.
I completely agree about the GTR. Much, much, much too large. Although I will say that it miraculously makes the R34, a homely car in its own right if you ignore the artificial image boost it gets from being a very capable driver, look positively svelte and sexy by comparison.
Same here.
It's not good-looking. It's not terribly interesting. It's apparently not engaging. And it breaks if you look at it funny, and Nissan will gladly tell you where to stick it when it does.
Nissan were apparently trying to develop a new game console – one that bursts into flames and burns your house down if you install a mod chip, and is fairly likely to have a critical component fail regardless.
Sort of like, say, the original PS2, or the 360. At least those are cheap enough to void the warranty and fix the design flaws.
It's rolling proof that you can't design a car based on numbers alone. And for that, I can't stand it.
Yeah, I really like the Challenger, but once I sat in the drivers seat and put my hands on the wheel, I felt like a tiny baby.
I felt like I was in a Tupperware party.
And when I drove the SRT8, well, they did a great job of re-creating the 1960s Muscle Cars, because it don't handle worth a crap. It wallows like an early-90s Buick.
The problem there is that for $46k I could have a real 60s muscle car in blow-your-mind awesome shape.
With an interior that makes you happy, instead of one that makes the Baby Jeebus cry.
Bullseye. Or you can pick up a driver-quality '60s muscle car for half that and still have enough for a new car that's quick and doesn't drive like crap.
"Archie Bunker with a fauxhawk" AWESOME!
BMW M5. You want to hoon with your kids in the back seat? Get an M3. Do you really have some executives who you need to take to the airport in a hurry? Why else would you buy a bigger, heavier four-door sedan? It's not like you got any additional seats. And to my knowledge the horsepower to weight ratio is not improved over the M3. Is it just so you can say you're better than M3 buyers? I got news for ya'….
I've gotten pretty bored with the 60's Cameros. Seems like you can't open a mag or site without a goddamed Camero placed prominently. Mostly the same feeling for 55-57 Chevy's too. They're so cool that they're not cool any more.
Totally! The '67-'69 Camaro gets all the attention when the '70-'73 was a far better car in every respect.
Pretty much all FWD hot hatches.
Post-W124/W140 Benzes.
Post-2004 Audis.
Whatever Deartháir might be driving at the time.
I gave you a thumbclick for the Dearthair dig. He just called me old and I was going to kick him, but then I fell and I think I broke my hip.
How's that Subaru working out for you? When that beautiful engine finally breaks free of that horribly crappy car, let me know; I'll buy it and put the whole thing in a Bug-Box, where it belongs.
It's awesome! The rumbly exhaust, cool gearbox noises, and turbo whine really help mask the squeaking plastic and and crinkling tinfoil.
I wonder if we could make that drivetrain fit in an Iltis. Now that would be a fun little beast.
Anything that costs over $75,000, more or less. Not that I'm really "supposed" to like those cars, but I'm pretty rooted in y economic class and reading about super high priced cars just makes me think about insurance and parts costs, and how many McDoubles I could buy each month with all that money.
Okay then, for real:
1. Every Audi (besides the A3, she's a cute little one.)
2. Ford Focus RS: I know it's supposed to be Boner City, but it's still FWD. I know it does a lot to overcome that, but why bother/overcomplicate?
3. Roadsters. And convertibles. Sure, they can be pretty. Pretty ugly (elementary school insult FTL.)
4. Porsches, besides the Cayman. I know they are all great cars, but there are a lot of great cars out there without the weirdo weight distribution. I do love the Cayman for its looks, price and performance (and secretly probably because Porschephiles are dismissive of it.).
5. Bacon (okay I was just trolling with this one.)
Interesting, I friggin' loathe the Audi A3. It's got none of the space of a Golf with 100% of the drivetrain. It makes zero sense to me except as a profit-maker for Audi, much like that horrible hunk of shit Mercedes B-class.
1. I'll admit to liking the looks of the A3, but otherwise I have to agree with Number_Six. Drivetrain's good, but nothing a nicely-equipped VW wouldn't have, and darned if a 10-grand-cheaper Mazda3 doesn't have significantly better room for my 6'4" frame.
3. Ditto on roadsters and convertibles. Pretty, yes. Fun, in their unique way, on a sunny day, yes. But I'll take a nice, rigid, and paradoxically lighter (well, as compared to most convertibles, anyway) hardtop any day.
4. Ditto again, and hooray for Cayman love! (Not so sure about the price as a positive, but I guess as compared to its closest competitors…) Now if it were just allowed out of the shadow of big brother 911…
Mercedes apart from the 300SL, and the CLS. The CLS just does it for me, I don;'t know why, since I almost always get a big 'meh' from Mercedes styling.
And every corvette since the C3. I don't know what they lost, but it's gone, and doesn't seem to be coming back. It's not performeance, it may be styling, quality interior? The C4 gets some 80's nostalgia twinges though.
That's amusing, I like most Benzes except the 300SL, and every generation of Corvette except the first two.
I think the CLS, while capable, is not attractive.
Mitsubishi Evo X – No 6-speed manual? Really? Also, it’s driven exclusively by new haircuts.
Camaro/Challenger – Too many others have belaboured the point already.
Ferrari 458 Italia – The worst Pininfarina has thrown at us in years. The triple exhaust is just too kitschy, the steering wheel is overloaded.
Current Aston Martins – The styling is growing tired, and they don’t have much else going for them. Awful interiors too.
Nissan 370Z – Boomerang headlights/taillights need to go back where they came from.
Countach/Diablo – They just seem like caricatures.
Current Audis, BMWs, and Mercs – Just too naff, also driven by new haircuts. This is unfortunate because I think the M3, RS4, and C63 are incredible machines.
Ferrari California – Absolutely hideous. Designed by focus groups.
Tell me more about "new haircuts". I want to use it to deride others, but I'm not completely sure of the usage or target. Regardless, I like it.
I’d be more than happy to enlighten you on the wonders of new haircuts. These individuals are renowned purveyors of Jägerbombs, Heineken, protein powder, fake tans, and hair gel. Anyone who uses these products frequently or subscribes to the general lifestyle of these individuals is a “new haircut”. This YouTube video pretty much says it all: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JMOh-cul6M
Ford Focus RS. It's just a Focus, utterly unspectacular, clinically sane, and visually unstimulating. Jeremy Clarkson can talk about it all he wants, but I'd rather have something cheesier and Frenchier.
Lotuses are also somewhat meh to me, although their philosophy is fantastic.
Any luxury sports sedan currently on sale: BMW 3-series, Audi A4/S4, Cadillac CTS, etc. etc. For only fifty or sixty grand, I can have a car that makes racing to 100mph feel like watching television. Honestly, I've had more fun in a golf cart with a busted speed governor, not to mention a hundred times more hoonage.
Smell the hate! Whew! Everyone feel better after taking a big dump on a bunch of icons? I love this thread!
I have zero interest in Mustangs from 1967 to 1973 (the Mustang II never happened, in my mind). I think they look bloated, slow, and stupid.
I also hate the 1967 – 1969 Camaro and Firebird; see my reasons for hating the Mustang of the time.
I hate Novas of any description after 1966 and I only feel bad about it because Novaload and Beercheck are Nova fans.
I would rather be drawn and quartered than be forced to own any Corvette other than a 1963 327 fuelie.
The new Camaro is simply appalling. It is so utterly bad-moonshine-blind-you vulgar that it makes my crotch itch.
I'm actually pleasantly surprised at how civil it's all been. Not many places where you could diss' a bunch of (semi) iconic cars without opening the floodgates on the online idiot reservoir.
I've simply chosen to read the anti-Porsche comments with 'Cayenne' or 'Cabriolet' or 'Panamera' in place of '911'.
In which case, I agree completely.
And yeah, it's felt good to vent.
I agree. It's been an interesting and in no way annoying read. Except for the 911 hate.
We really must find a time to go for a drink. You and I will get along famously. Well, except that I do like the Eleanor Mustang — and only the Eleanor Mustang — from 1968. In stock trim, it does nothing for me. File that under one of my "guilty pleasures".
I don't care that much for the CLS – it's just sort of droopy, and has '76 Camaro taillights, and I'd just end up buying an E-Class. You know, once it's ten years old.
And I don't care very much for the 350Z/G35 – weird shouty engine, cheap interior that'd be absolutely lambasted if it were in an American car, and the key has to be turned way too far. Yes, it's a small point, but my wrist doesn't work like that. I have to keep reminding myself of that when I see how cheap they are.
The new Camaro. It's way too big. The styling is overblown and tacky. The ergonomics are pure garbage. The materials and build are cheap (at least the shitty base Mustang comes with real alloys, not painted steelies with plastic trim rings). The much-heralded independent rear suspension is meh and, despite a huge motor, it can only beat the outgoing Track Pac Mustang GT by a couple tenths of a second. The whole car is indicative that GM is the same as it ever was and always will be.
Come to think of it, I haven't liked any Camaro after the '69 model. And I'm actually pretty sick of the early Camaros at this point, since they clog up every auction and car show I've ever seen. Why does everybody HAVE to convert theirs into an SS or COPO? What's wrong with a 307 RS? Hell, I'm seriously considering an early straight-6 Mustang over the 289…why can't the Chevy guys do the same?
Bugatti Veyron.
I don't hate it, but I am defiantly "meh" on the topic
The Citroen DS. I don't know why, but it just doesn't pitch a pants tent for me like the rest of you.
Me too. It has an interesting shape, and the hydropneumatics are kinda cool, but when all is said and done it's just a front wheel drive luxo-sedan.
Same here. And when I said this over at [Redacted], they nearly tore my head off.
It's sorta neat to look at and it's mechanically fascinating, but it's still just another weird French car.
They absolutely suck. I've said so on (REDACTED), and that may be one of the reasons I never have and never will get a star (like I give a shit anymore). When I was stationed in Italy in the early eighties, I made friends with some Germans, who lived in northern Germany, in Essen. They invited me up there to hang out, and of course I took them up on it, put in for some leave time. They, like us, were Hoons. The guy had a DS, and I got to drive it around. A gutless, wallowy, goofy car that was kinda comfy. Like a French Cadillac without acceleration. The day we planned on driving the goddam thing to Amsterdam (you can use your imagination as to why we were going there), the stupid Citroen blew the bizarre little mobius-shaped hose that fills the hydraulic fluid reservoir with outflow from the rest of the nightmarish system that runs everything. The car started, but wouldn't move. If it could move it wouldn't have been able to stop or shift gears, it couldn't even lift its ass off the ground for chrissake. What a shitty car. My German buddy borrowed the Plymouth Fury that he had sold to his buddy, for the night, and we went to Amsterdam and had a grand time. Fuck a Citroen.
Lamborghini, Maserati, Tesla, Smart(which had such promise, but ultimately failed), and to prove how much I hate them, I will state that I'd rather ride around in a Daewoo Lanos, with a Yugo motor. At least it would have SOME character…
Did the 'States ever (finally) get the Smart with the little turbodiesel? I can't think of any reason to own one of those without that engine.
I'm a little fuzzy on this whole "supposed to love" and "hate" stuff. I think Benz has totally lost its visual identity, for example, and Bentley has been watching too many futuristic cartoons. I fell in love with the Furai at first sight (but it refuses to return my calls) but for all the wrong reasons–such a happy, confident smile–! Oh, yeah, and that sound when it winds out.
Wow, this is tough. I never liked the Valiant-Cudas, so until they offloaded all the Valiant parts in what, 70? I just couldn't love them. I was never crazy about falcons except the 62, or the 63 Galaxie or the 61 and 62 Impalas, compared to what came before and after—wait, I'm not doing this right, am i?
Although the rumble of a warmed up Chevy Nova sometimes catches my ears, once my eyes see it, I must look away.
I agree. To me, the X-body Nova is one of those rare cars that never misses an opportunity to look wrong.
Thank you. I've never, ever understood the point of a Nova SS. Sure a Nova 396 was a few hundred bucks cheaper than 396 Camaro when they were new, but that was not worth the cost of driving a much dumpier car, sleeper or not.
And today, despite what anyone says, it's still just a dumpy car with a hot motor. Now it just costs way too much. Same goes for hot-rodded Darts and Valiants/early Barracudas/Dusters.
Lamborghini Countach. Never liked it. Never will.
I wouldn't hate it if it was actually drivable.
Holy crap, is that an M1 burning during re-entry?
No car specifically anymore. I may have not favored a particular make or model in my "unaware" days, but since I can appreciate any car. Really. What I hate are automatics, excessive airbags, drive by wire throttle/ brakes and other modern standard equipment that either dull ethe xperience or add to the bloat. So what I hate are all modern (post OBDII) cars with exceptions, of course, like the WRX and Evo IX among others.
-Mazda Miata (arrogant douchebag driver)
-Honda Civic (douchebag driver with too much hair glue)
-Any 4-popper made by the "Big Three" from about 1982-1996 (give or take on the year span). (a douchebag with no interest in driving whatsoever)
-Toyota Prius (douchebag driver that believes in the Global Warming hype)
-Honda Del Sol (tree-hugging douchebag driver that is stuck in the 90's)
-Those huge Kodiak half-breeds that look like a regular 4 door truck that has a bad case of hydrocephalus (I mean really…how big of a d-bag-mobile do you need to run down to the local Starbuck's for a Mocha-laca-dunka-friggin-chino)
-Camaro, Firebird, Mustang (and now Challenger) with a V-6 in it…what is the point?!? (Seriously! It would be like dating a Porn Star with no privates…all of the looks, but none of the benefits).
You're not supposed to like the Del Slow. It's a terrible bastardization of the CRX that it was intended to replace.
Any new Jeep. They really disappoint me. The SUV's do not deserve the Jeep nameplate, they're road going junk, not meant to venture off the pavement. Not Jeeps at all. The Wranglers, like the described Camaros and Challengers above, are so bloated that they don't resemble the nimble, simple, and bulletproof CJ at all. I mean, I have a '66 Ford F100 shortbed, which is not a small truck, I mean it counts as being full-size. This afternoon a regular Wrangler, not even the four door stretch limo version, drove by my truck and the damn thing was as big as my truck. This is supposed to be a Jeep. Yeah, I guess they're supposed to be still fairly competent off-road, but give me a real Jeep instead, an old CJ or an older Wrangler, that doesn't appeal to the suburban demographic that Jeep caters to nowadays. I mean Chrysler. New Jeeps suck. I hate them. I hope this changes soon, Jeeps are an American icon, and need to be returned to their fun and utilitarian roots.
I'll third the Countach, which has always seemed overwrought and vulgar to me. I could say the same for basically any post-Miura Lambo.
Oh, and I think the E-Type is horrendous looking! It's proportions are exaggerated and comical. The hood could be a foot shorter. And the way many have a narrow track that makes it seem their skinny tires are recessed a foot and a half into the wheel wells troubles me as well. I looks like they'd just tip right over if you went around a corner carrying any kind of speed (which I know is not the case). It's like having a Geisha with size-3 bound feet tell me she's actually quite agile. I'm not buying it.
And that's just the convertibles! The coupes, with that grotesque, bulbous greenhouse way, way at the back are even worse.
Couple all that with Chapter 7 inducing maintenance costs, horrifying unreliability, and sky high prices, and I say no thanks. Finally, although I know many great car people who'd love to have an E-Type, every time I see or talk to E-Type owners at car shows I inevitably end up thinking "what a bunch of —-s."*
* Almost forgot about the "Keep it civil and safe for work." Anyway, to borrow from Clarkson, I was thinking of the name the Alfa MiTo would have if it had been designed in Twickenham, and built in Attercliffe.
So someone else thinks so, thought I was the only one.
I mean about the E-type, I think Countachs are totally rad.
I'm with you on the E-Type. I think it looks weird, too.
Gotta few I hate.
Veyron: Mainly for taking the most complicated way possible to a high top speed. Look how close Koenigsegg gets with half the cylinders, about half the displacement, less gears… etc. a 4000+lb supercar? Ugh, no thanks. A Saleen S7 is more exciting to me.
Fiero: UGH. Failure. The AW11 and CR-X did this whole idea SO MUCH BETTER. Typical GM.
Any pre-C4 Corvette: mainly because deep down, they really sucked. 'specially the C3.
Lexuses – with very few exceptions (LF-A, IS-F, SC300 5-speed, IS300 5-speed basically) if I wanted a sensory deprivation chamber, I'd get one.
SHO Taurus (EcoBoost) was a HUGE let-down in real life
at least the epicness of the Evo X in real life compared to how "meh" i felt about it on paper helps the sting.
I loathe Mustangs and most mid-engine supercars (three exceptions: the Countach, F40, and Miura). I just cannot bring myself to care or be impressed.
What about a Pantera?
It's a Mustang-engined mid-engine supercar!
Seriously. How can you not like that?
A Volvo 240 makes 85 MPH exciting, once you get there!
I think I've covered my issues ("hate" is a bit strong) with modern 911s elsewhere, but as far as others go…
–Recent BMW's. Can't speak for their quality as driver's cars (I must admit, I wish I'd driven a few to be able to say for certain), but between the Bangle-ified styling and bizarre interiors, plus the price points…eh, not doin' it for me. Also, the 1 series was a great concept, and points for offering one with a 3.0L six more than powerful enough for a 3 series, but when the pricing also hits 3 series levels as fast as it does…
–Current Jag XK. As much as its looks have been lauded, it's always just looked a bit awkward to me.
–Current Benzes. Can't vouch for the AMG models (though those have their own problems…awesome engines, auto-only. D'oh), but the run-of-the-mill models I've been in are just…underwhelming, interior-quality-wise, for a brand as storied and, well, German, as M-B.
–New Minis. Again, I can't vouch for their driving qualities, and actually wish I could, but the interior is just ridiculous, and the cheeky, "unique" marketing message is beginning to grate after having seen so many of them around.
Thought of another one. '32 Fords, specifically any and all Hot Rod versions with a Ford or Chevy V-8, even the flatheads. It was cool at one time but has just been too played out, even the rat rod types. Do something DIFFERENT!
Yeah, it is somewhat disgusting to me that rust, rot, dents and general auto body ad-libbing is now classified as "patina" style…back when I was in my early 20's if you had some rusted out, dented to snot crapmobile…you were just called a loser.
God! It feels good to vent!!!
-Camaros. I love the 1st generation, but after that I don't give a damn. Give me a Trans Am any day.
-Any Chevrolet, for that matter. (This may be the upbringing in a Pontiac/Oldsmobile family talking.)
-Nissan Z cars after the 280.
BMW 5-series. Yes, all of them. All the way back to the E12, from 518i through S85, all of them.
Camaro, every freakin one of em
Mustang, see above
BMW, Used to like them, now the represent a-holes
Nissan GTR, still a freaking ugly old Z car
The Viper.
It's a cartoon caricature of a 6th grade boy's super car fantasy, a vehicular pair of clown shoes, a low-quality, high-flash self-parody.
Grip, grip, grip, grip, grunt, grunt, grunt, grunt and all the delicacy of a sledgehammer to the face. Fine for a blocky muscle car, great even, awful in a cramped, compromised, OTT cock mobile. The posers choice.
Glad it's dead.
P.S. awesome topic guys.
The R35 GT-R. It has zero appeal for me.It's lines are cartoony, it weighs too much, it costs an ass-ton to fix or replace anything, it sounds dull, it's basically driven by HAL 9000, and it has absolutely always looked to me like a riced-out 350Z. Oh, yeah, and DSG (yes, the thing is a wonder, but making it the only option does nothing but make it more of a video game and less of a car).