Time Magazine's 50 worst cars ever.

[Ace$nyper]

http://www.time.com/time/specials/20...658545,00.html

Hope you enjoy the list.

[Mad Hatter]

It was great

[floydpink]

I knew my first car, the AMC Pacer, would be on the list. Same one on the first Wayne's World.

[mosesbotbol]

Only one car I have owned was on the list

1984 Maserati Biturbo

[AAlmeter]

Lot of in that article...but then again, thats why Car and Driver is in the bathroom to read, and Time is in the bathroom in case I run out of TP.

[stfoley]

Yeah, a crap article...The Cadillac 8-6-4 was troublesome, but once the kinks have been ironed out (using a computer with overlap values) fixed the problem and left you with a car that performs well and is generally well-mannered.

The part that made it crap was how many cars that genuinely sucked were ignored, like how many owners of the new Skyline are reporting transmission failures when using launch control (about 8 or less launches and the transmission fails)...that's unpardonable considering launch control is where the car handles the launch for you, thus if it kills a transmission, either the transmission was junk, or the engineer that setup that launch value was VERY wrong. Having a $90k car with that kind of defect should automatically list it.

[mryellowx]

instead of the H2, they should have had the H3. the H2 sucks for gas but the H3 kills my eyes.

[csbrewfisher]

How on God's green earth was the Toyota Scion boxcar omitted from the list? This is the new millennium version of the AMC pacer. The car screams "MY TASTE IS ALL IN MY MOUTH. PLEASE ARREST ME, STYLE POLICE" It is embarrassing to even look at one.

[AAlmeter]

Originally Posted by stfoley

Yeah, a crap article...The Cadillac 8-6-4 was troublesome, but once the kinks have been ironed out (using a computer with overlap values) fixed the problem and left you with a car that performs well and is generally well-mannered.

The part that made it crap was how many cars that genuinely sucked were ignored, like how many owners of the new Skyline are reporting transmission failures when using launch control (about 8 or less launches and the transmission fails)...that's unpardonable considering launch control is where the car handles the launch for you, thus if it kills a transmission, either the transmission was junk, or the engineer that setup that launch value was VERY wrong. Having a $90k car with that kind of defect should automatically list it.

From my understanding of the problem, the manual explicitly states "do not press such and such button during such and such times." This has been causing the failures.

I just got annoyed that perfectly reliable vehicles were listed simply because they were big...the H2, the Excursion, the LM002.

I'm surprised the Prius wasn't listed The average owner will never recoup the initial cost as well as the additional insurance costs. Kind of defeats the purpose of driving something "ultra-efficient" if you lose money on the deal.

[parris001]

There were some true losers in this list, but some weren't that bad. The Edsel wasn't really a bad car it's just that it was much hyped and delivered "much of the same" when it finally came to market.

I have to disagree with about half of this list. But then Time isn't on my list of objective and accurate journalism.

[Hot Stuff x]

Yep, plenty of crap cars and ugly cars that didn't make the list. Chevy Citation, anyone (or any mid-size GM car from the early '80s)? Hell, just about any American car from the early to mid '80s was crap.

How about the GM diesel cars from that era, or the VW Rabbit Diesel? Junk-o-rama.

[kingback56]

How did the H2 make that list? It's not good on gas but I would love to have one. Large and luxurious and well built. didn't all the big time rappers and stars have them?

[themoneycollector]

The prowler, that was a beautiful car. Definitely didn't follow the beaten path and the styling was not for everyone, but it doesn't earn a spot on the worst cars list IMO.

[eyesack]

Originally Posted by stfoley

The part that made it crap was how many cars that genuinely sucked were ignored, like how many owners of the new Skyline are reporting transmission failures when using launch control (about 8 or less launches and the transmission fails)...that's unpardonable considering launch control is where the car handles the launch for you, thus if it kills a transmission, either the transmission was junk, or the engineer that setup that launch value was VERY wrong. Having a $90k car with that kind of defect should automatically list it.

lol 60k, but still... I think it's because they use 2 driveshafts; the smaller provides power to the (rear?) wheels and it is like pencil-thin. Kind of stupid design, I think. Especially coming from the heritage that THAT car has. I'd take an R-34 GT-R over the new one I think. However, Nissan has announced that they've fixed this tranny problem.

[mosesbotbol]

Originally Posted by AAlmeter

I just got annoyed that perfectly reliable vehicles were listed simply because they were big...the H2, the Excursion, the LM002.

Two girls near me had a white LM002 that was so hot! The only example I have ever seen in person. You have to lock the front hubs by hand to get in 4 wheel drive. Such a hot car, even more so when two girls are driving it!