By on October 15, 2007

07relay1.jpgThe Truth About Cars (TTAC) strives to report on all things automotive with the complete, unvarnished, unadulterated, no-holds-barred truth. All our authors write from a single-minded perspective: the consumer’s interests are more important than those of the industry. All our commentators keep us– and the industry– honest. In other words, we’re all a bunch of troublemakers. And it’s time once again to make some trouble. Ladies and gentlemen, I’m proud to announce that nominations are now open for TTAC’s second annual Ten Worst Awards. 

Yes, while our colleagues strive to celebrate the best that the U.S. automotive industry has to offer, we're looking for your help to name the ten worst new vehicles domestic money can (but shouldn't) buy. To refresh your memory, here are the winners you selected during our last forary into America's automotive heart of darkness.

2006 Ten Worst Automobiles Today Winners

10.  Chevrolet Aveo5
9.  Lincoln Mark LT
8.  Saab 9-7x
7.  Subaru B9 Tribeca
6.  Chevrolet Monte Carlo
5.  Hummer H2
4.  Chrysler Aspen
3.  Buick Rendezvous
2.  Jeep Compass
1.  GM Minivans

Thankfully, the following losers winners have gone to that big garage in the sky: GM Minivans, Chevrolet Monte Carlo and Buick Rendezvous. Another '06 Ten Worst winner is slated for extermination (Saab 9-7x) while the Subaru Tribeca been redesigned to remove its, uh, pudenda. The rest live to die another day, remaining eligible for nomination and another Ten Worst award. Here are the six simple rules governing your nominations and an outline of the entire selection process:

2007 Ten Worst Award Rules of Engagement

1.  Any car or light truck offered for sale as a new vehicle in the US between January 1 and today is eligible for nomination. It doesn't matter who built it or where. Repeat nominations from last year are allowed.

2.  Nominations may be deleted without prior warning or explanation for any of the following reasons: insufficient justification, excessive verbosity or pontification, foul language or patent absurdity.

3.  All nominations must meet TTAC's house rules on flaming or trolling (i.e., don't). Offensive comments about other readers will be summarily deleted and the writer may be permanently banned from posting on TTAC. That said, offensive observations about the nominees are encouraged.

3.  Blatantly badge-engineered siblings can be nominated for a joint award if they all suck equally. 

4.  TTAC's writing team will select 20 finalists from the nominees, based on how well the nominations were justified and our personal opinions of the vehicles in question. Unlike last year, we won't track the total number of nominations for a given vehicle. 

5.  Readers will vote via an electronic survey on 20 finalists to determine America's Ten Worst cars. Multiple voting will be electronically prohibited. Anyone attempting to circumvent this ban through hackery will be permanently banned from posting on the site.

6.  Nominations begin today and will continue until midnight EDT, Monday October 22. We will present the 20 finalists for voting on October 29. The winners will be announced on first of November. 

While there's no doubt our readers know Ten Worst-iness when they see it, there are a few specifics that make a vehicle truly TWAT-worthy:

1.) Looks that stop traffic. In a bad way.

2.) The "WTF were they thinking?" factor. A true Ten Worst recipient leaves you wondering which bodily orifice the designers pulled it from and what management was smoking when they approved it. Cheap materials, poor ergonomics and questionable build quality only compound the problem, and help its chances of winning an award.

3.)  Misused technology. This could be a car so low-tech you wonder if it was designed in the ‘70s, or so high-tech it's rendered virtually undrivable. 

4.) Unfathomable product planning. Your favorite automotive abomination could be the result of poorly-executed badge engineering on an already mediocre vehicle. Or it could be a vehicle that's just a dumb idea, a market segment misfit or an answer to a question no one asked (or ever will).

An ideal TWAT would combine most or all of these factors, with an additional je ne sais quois that makes enthusiasts throw-up in their mouths a little upon sight. Those are the miserable machines we seek.

[NB: If someone has already nominated your favorite, please don't add a "me too" comment, unless you provide additional reasons why the vehicle is a really good (bad?) candidate for an award.]

As TTAC has grown since last year, we'll be posting updates and pithy quotes throughout the week, so you don't have to page through several hundred comments per post.

We here behind the scenes look forward to your nominations and attendant CIVILIZED debate. Thanks for helping us do that voodoo that we do for you.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

208 Comments on “Ten Worst Automobiles Nominations Please...”


  • avatar
    NICKNICK

    Sorry for the recycling, but I’m going with my 2006 nomination of Mitsu Galant, and I’m reusing my rationale: automotive sweatpants. cheap, shapeless, OK for a 2AM trip to WalMart, but nothing that you actually want to be seen in.

    I hate the Galant, but it’s so bland I *forget* that I hate it until I see another one.

  • avatar
    italianstallion

    Ford Ranger / Mazda B4000 pickups: Ridiculously antiquated design (15 year-old platform) that is failing in the marketplace despite having virtually no competition (I think that someone could make a killing by offering a solid compact pick-up).

    Chrysler Sebring Sedan: looks that stop traffic indeed.

  • avatar
    umterp85

    RF: note: I think the Lincoln Mark LT is slated for extermination (thank god) as well.

    My 4 choices:

    Jeep Compass—-just hideous–no other word for it

    Toyota Corolla—makes the Cobalt look modern

    Hummer H2—-why ?

    Scion xb—-for 2008 made a previously edgy design look like a midget paddy wagon—ugly

  • avatar
    AKM

    BMW 5-series: designed after a pot-induced Andy-Warhol-style rendition of Peggy Guggenheim’s glasses

    Subaru Impreza: business as usual, i.e. highly decried new model. But this time, it’s not only ugly, it also drives like a ’57 Impala.

    Hummer H2: Just as big, fat, and useless as before. And now, people laugh at you even harder than ever when you’re filling it up.

    Ford “taurus”: worst case of corporate myopia and “360 turn” in a long time.

    Toyota Tundra: long-term loser or, “how to destroy our carefully crafted green image”

    Jeep Commander & Jeep Compass: “why are we here, again? Whatdayamean, trail rated? Not in Neuman Marcus we’re not”

    Chrysler Sebring: “Hey let’s make a car that looks WORSE than the afore-mentioned 5-series. And on top of that, it’ll drive like crud!”

  • avatar

    1. Mercedes R-class- the minivan for people who just couldn’t buy a Sienna or Odyssey.

    2. Lexus GX- Why didn’t you buy a Land Cruiser if you needed off-road capability?

    3. Saab- the entire brand is useless at this point. Someone please rescue them from GM!

    4. Porsche Cayenne- for women who apparently have bought into “the mine is bigger than yours” penis envy mentality.

    5. Chevy Aveo- driving this for a rental made sure I would never, ever bother to even try another GM car. Ever.

    6. All hummers- just go get some Viagra already

    7. Jeep Compass

  • avatar
    carguy

    Apart from re-nominating Chevrolet Aveo5, Hummer H2, Chrysler Aspen and Jeep Compass I would also like to add the following:

    Chrysler Sebring/Dodge Avenger – for jaw dropping mediocrity.

    Saab 9-5 – for being a late 90s Opel Vectra in disguise.

    Isuzu Ascender – no explanation required.

    GM Colorado/Canyon – for making me nostalgic for the S10.

    Pontiac Grand Prix – for overstaying its welcome by a decade.

    Smart fortwo – for being an overpriced, under-engineered automotive travesty.

  • avatar
    danms6

    Subaru Impreza/WRX.

    Mass market appeal at work. Take a small, firm, unique, cheap, quick ride and make it larger, softer, more bland and expensive while not noticeably affecting the performance.

    Will it still sell by the boatloads? Yes.
    Is it more profitable for Subaru? Most likely.

    While it may not be one of the Ten Worst, I think the Impreza’s huge fall from grace will catch up with Subaru eventually.

  • avatar

    Chrysler Sebring; ugly in every form, from every angle. The sedan looks like the front, middle and rear sections were designed by three different people then hastily photoshopped together. The convertible with top up appears to have no room for occupants and with top down looks like a sinking boat (a metaphor for its parent company ?). To make matters worse, the car it replaced was sleek and stylish.

  • avatar
    Lichtronamo

    I nominate the Dodge Caliber as representative of Chrysler’s current design language that tries to make their products look as low cost and unrefined as possible.

    A second nomination could go to the new Chrysler Minivans for trying to look like a scaled down version of the Sprinter – tall and narrow.

  • avatar
    dolo54

    Sebring, Nitro, new American Focus, Compass, 2007 Camry, H2

  • avatar
    dolo54

    ditto Caliber

  • avatar
    lawmonkey

    Cadillac STS – now that we have the newer, snazzier, (faster?), embiggenned CTS, the STS is a good way for an octagenarian unaccustomed to automotive research to lose a big chunk of change for no good reason. Won’t somebody please think of the blue hairs?

    Nissan Maxima – do we really need an Altima XTreme? Size/power/feature creep in the Altima make this another child with an identity crisis.

  • avatar
    Lichtronamo

    I might also add the products of GM’s renaissance (center?)for their across the board representation of engineering cost cutting evidenced by bloated curb weight. Every one of GM’s highly touted new products has been criticized for being hundreds of pound heavier than competitive products (mainly Toyota or Honda). This includes the Lamdas, CTS, VUE, Malibu, and VE. The extra weight required to make the products “solid” ultimately hurts performance and fuel economy and suggests cost saving shortcuts on engineering during development or materials.

  • avatar

    1. Chrysler Sebring – a real 25% effort.

    2. Jeep Compass – brand damaging rubbish.

    3. Lexus F models – hahaha just kidding.

    4. Jeep Patriot – Wolf in sheep’s clothing, manned-up Compass… does nothing for the brand. Nationalistic brand damaging rubbish.

    5. Saturn Aura hybrid – a regular 4-cylinder would get similar MPG #s, weak-ass environmental halo effort.

    6. Honda Ridgeline – Every time I see them I’m curious to meet the buyer…

  • avatar
    Justin Berkowitz

    And yet no one has mentioned the Dodge Avenger, the Chrysler Sebring fraternal twin that, although just slightly less ugly, is every bit as crappy under the skin.

  • avatar
    carguy

    …and I’ll also second italianstallion’s nomination of the Ford Ranger/Mazda B Series truck. It’s Jimmy Carter era dynamics are only surpassed by it ability to roll over during even a small change of direction and kill its occupants.

  • avatar

    Justin Berkowitz :

    And yet no one has mentioned the Dodge Avenger, the Chrysler Sebring fraternal twin that, although just slightly less ugly, is every bit as crappy under the skin.

    Uh, Justin… see carguy’s nominations (sixth comment above)

  • avatar
    Geotpf

    Belive it or not, there are no signs that the Chevy Uplander is going away any time soon (due to very strong fleet sales-it must be dirt cheap, plus Ford has left the minivan market, so there’s less competition), although 2007 was the last model year for the rest of the GM minivans.

  • avatar
    thetopdog

    Hummer H3: When the sole purpose of a brand is 99% “I want to show off how manly/rich I am” and 1% “I can drive this tank anywhere/through anything” and a vehicle from that brand is neither expensive, particularly ‘manly’ nor more off-road capable/rugged than the competition, it boggles my mind to try to fathom the kind of person this vehicle would appeal to

    Audi TT: A souped up Golf that looks like a squashed Beetle. Its performance is totally outclassed by it’s competition (Boxster/Cayman, Z4, Corvette, even 350Z/G37)

    Chrysler PT Cruiser: For Chyrsler having the audacity to sell a vehicle based on the Neon platform in the year 2007. It’s the only rental vehicle that has had the dubious distinction of almost killing me on the highway, I had it pointed straight ahead at about 65mph when I hit an large expansion joint and the non-independent rear suspension almost threw me completely off the road. I actually longed for my previous Chevy Aveo rental after driving this POS for 3 days

  • avatar
    gcmustanglx

    Chrysler Sebring- who’s idea was this?
    Dodge Nitro- see comment above.
    Jeep Compass- this is the perfect to kill a brand.
    Jeep Commander- is this vehicle really neccessary?
    Ford Taurus- automotive valium.
    Chevy Aveo- a beer can on wheels
    Hummer H2- Penis envy on wheels needs more viagra.

  • avatar
    pfingst

    Is it wrong that I look forward to this?

    Right, here we go:

    Dodge Nitro – a special kind of ugly reserved for vehicles produced by old-line domestic automakers. Tries to be simultaneously bling and macho; the end result is neither (blacho, maybe?).

    Chrysler Aspen/Dodge Durango – These are platform mates, so they get nominated together. The Durango is way, WAY past its prime. Old styling, old platform, new price. Maybe not actively bad, but shouldn’t be up for sale anymore. The Aspen is ugly, pricey, and underpowered. A V8 that only makes 235 HP? And drinks like a fish? AND they want 30 large for that?

    It may be early for this one, but it is already up for sale, so…

    The 2008 Subaru Impreza – I test-drove a 2007 Forester (not the turbo) and was wowed by the legendary 2.5L H4 Subaru engine. I then test-drove a 2008 Impreza (also not the turbo), and was heartbroken. It’s the same engine, all right, but you would never guess. What felt so lively and responsive in the Forester felt sluggish and inadequate in the Impreza, despite the Impreza being lighter and smaller. I drove about 500 yards before I turned to the sales guy and asked, “Are you sure it’s the same?” He just nodded; he knew.

    Special mention also for the crummy rat-fur cloth seat material. I know it’s aimed at a lower price point than the Forester, but the cloth they use in the Forester can’t be that much more expensive, can it?

    Pontiac Grand Prix – Of all the Pontiacs to survive this long, why did it have to be this one? I had one as a rental, and ye gods was it cheap! Fisher-Price plastic, el-cheapo seats, bad fit and finish. A prime example of why the domestic auto industry is in trouble.

  • avatar
    HankScorpio

    1. Jeep Compass/Patriot/Dodge Caliber
    2. Chrysler Sebring – Redefines “I just don’t give a crap about doing a good job.”
    3. Dodge Nitro – What were they thinking?
    4. Ford Focus – New or old, still equally TWAT worthy.
    5. Land Rover, All – Who still buys these things?
    6. Mazda Tribute – Just for still being available with all the other good SUV/CUVs that they sell.
    7. Ford Ranger/Mazda B – Ford/Mazda could really make a killing with a good small truck. This is not a good small truck.
    8. Monte Carlo – Reminds me of playing Baccarat with Bond at a Nascar event.
    9. Chevy Cobalt/Pontiac G5 – See #2
    10. Toyota Sequoia

  • avatar
    steronz

    I third the nom for the “all new” 8 year old Ford Focus.

  • avatar

    Geotpf :

    Belive it or not, there are no signs that the Chevy Uplander is going away any time soon (due to very strong fleet sales-it must be dirt cheap, plus Ford has left the minivan market, so there’s less competition), although 2007 was the last model year for the rest of the GM minivans.

    The Uplander will finally die in 2008 when they close the Doraville, GA plant where it’s made. It’s to be replaced with the Chevy Traverse, yet another Lambda CUV.

  • avatar
    guyincognito

    Ford Focus – So cheap they even cost saved out the third bar on the corporate grill.

    Lincoln Navigator – Actually its a pretty good SUV, perfectly optioned to allow those so inclined to give their F-U to the Prius crowd with the L version, drives great, very capable, lots of seating/storage space that was rendered totally worthless by styling influenced by a complete misinterpretation of the word bling.

    Toyota Tundra – You’d think after Nissan came in with a PN96 copy and failed Toyota would’ve not made a cheap flexy frame and easily breakable bits…

    Jeep Compass.

    Mercury – All of them. Not that they are bad per se, but because they arrive courtesy of the department of redundancy department.

    Jaguar XF – Ok, I know it isn’t out yet, but because its souless Lexus of 5 years ago design and underwhelming downmarket features/stats could be the nail in Jaguar’s coffin before it even arrives I believe it deserves the “honor”.

    Chrysler 300 – Don’t touch it, its a hit! Now find some more transparent ways to remove material cost from it.

    Chrysler Aspen.

    Chrysler Sebring.

  • avatar
    jthorner

    How about any Isuzu? Why is this company still in the US market? Their only products are band slap jobs on the Chevy Trailblazer and Colorado, both of which are weak competitors in the first place.

    The Chevy Uplander still lives on and thus has to be a TWAT.

    The Pontiac Solstice deserves a spot on the list for being a brand new clean sheet almost-there car sold by a clueless dealer network.

    The Hummer H2 and H3 both deserve spots for being two of the most ridiculous vehicles on the road. The H3 starts of with the mediocre Trailblazer platform and just makes it uglier and less efficient. The Hummer will long be seen as the signature fad of a dying automotive era.

    Chrysler and Dodge should get spots for their entire lineups. Not a single best in class vehicle in the whole bunch. Jeep should have slots for the Compass, Patriot and Commander.

    Saab’s whole lineup deserves spots, but the 9-7 runs away from their dull pack of vehicles as the worst of the bunch.

    Maybe a ranking of manufacturers top-to-bottom would be interesting. If so, I would nominate Honda as overall the best run company in the North American automotive market and Tesla for the worst.

  • avatar
    Johnny Canada

    The latest generation (E60) BMW M5 with the SMG transmission.

  • avatar
    dhcobra

    My additions:

    Hummers (All) – Too Ugly & Too big to be practical

    Jeep Compass – A poor joke as an off roader.

    Dodge Durango – Just big, ugly & fuel extravigent.

    Nissan SUV’s – All ugly.

    GM’s compacts & subcompacts – These look like disposable cars 40,000 to 50,000 miles & throw them away.

  • avatar
    LamborghiniZ

    1. Chrysler Sebring – A new vehicle that already feels old.

    2. Chrysler Aspen – Bloated, plasticky, and thirsty.

    3. Jeep Compass – Bad design, handling, steering, breaking, etc.

    4. Ford Ranger/Mazda B-Series – 1992.

    5. Chevrolet Cobalt – Mediocre. In every way.

    6. Hummer H3 – With the I5, it’s slow as hell, and drinks like a Tahoe with a V8. Bad sightlines, bad handling, game over.

  • avatar
    LamborghiniZ

    7. Ford Focus – Give us the Euro. Oh you’re not going to do that? You’re going to give us a refreshed, re-uglied, tinny piece of economy crap?. Ah. Well then you’re a TWAT.

  • avatar
    Wulv

    Hard to find something that hasn’t been nominated already and have anything to add.

    I Just finished driving a Dodge Avenger this weekend, the first and last word for this car is definitely the word “cheap”. I put my Mother in the front seat, and she actually told me she was scared because of the lack of build quality, she felt safer in her friends SMART on the highway.
    Lo and Behold, I get home and the TWAT nominations are up.

  • avatar
    Turbo G

    Jeep Compass.
    That is all.

    And props to the poster who used the word “embiggens” It is a perfectly cromulant word.

  • avatar
    Landcrusher

    The cheap Jeeps – Compass and Patriot, and the new Liberty. What were they thinking? The old Liberty was attractive, even if insanely cheaply made. The new ones are just stupid, ugly, and will reinforce the brand’s biggest selling hurdle which is perception of poor quality. You are selling a brand that is supposed to ooze ruggedness – a brand that has iconic style only beaten by Porsche. All of these are killing them/us. Anyone on this board could have done a better cheap Jeep. Suzuki did it decades ago.

    US Ford Focus. As an American, I am insulted by this outrageous slap in the face. Ford should just stand up and say they believe American buyers are stupid and tasteless. If they did so, we could argue, fight, make-up, and be friends. As it is…

  • avatar
    murphysamber

    I’d have to say the entire Mercury linep should be fitted for a coffin. What is the point of anything they make? Ford’s NA product offerings are lame enough without crapping a couple thousand dollars of fake chrome on them and calling it a brand.

    The next couple fall into a grouping that is just insulting:
    Highlander, Arcadia, Enclave, Outlook, Edge, etc…it’s called and SUV, not CUV. You are building a tank. Make no mistake about it. Your car is enormous and you should still be ashamed or yourself. 4000+ pounds of gasoline powered automobile is not efficient. The public may be fools, but i’ve got my evil eye on you bastards. Lipstick on fat pigs.

    How about that snazzy new Accord? On looks alone I want to be blind. Because we all know you’ll run forever that means that I’ll suffer forever. Please be crappy somehow so you just go away.

  • avatar
    blautens

    You have to include the 2008 Ford Focus – am I the only one that sees Chrysler Sebring style hood strakes in the over stylized front hood? Really? Borrowing styling cues from the Sebring is like taking anger management classes from Mike Tyson.

    Combine the slapping of that exterior on a car that old to go out and fight the good fight against Civics, Mazda 3’s, etc…that ought to be a crime.

    And I hate to say this, but is it possible to nominate any BMW with I-Drive?

  • avatar
    Bunter1

    Rats! jthorner- you beat me to the Solstice.
    It hads to beat ONE competitor that got a competent but uninspired update.
    Gets clobbered in every comparison.
    Pathetic top design, ergo problems, tubby, CRs third worst reliability car last year.
    Crowning touch? The only good thing about it, the looks, was penned by a guy who now works for …Mazda.

    GMs “Why?brids” (Vue, Arua)- For your extra dough you get MPG competitve with the competitions normal four cylinders but with much slower acceleration. The Prius under cuts the Aura (& new ‘Bu) in price is just as quick and gives an extra 20mpg. Why would anyone buy one of these?

    Ford crown vic- 93% go to fleet (the rest to ford retirees ;^D). NOBODY, but nobody, buys these at retail. It is totally irrelevant in the retail market, put the lightbars on at the factory and stop cluttering up the dealer lots, they need the space for F-150s.

    Aveo-MPG of a midsize sedan, acceleration of a sloth. Fails in a small cars primary mission.

    Anything else Daewoo has BARFed on this market belongs here also.

    The Col/on (colorado/canyon)trucks. Gets the nod over the stRanger und clone as they were a fresh try. Totally outclassed by every competitor in every way.

    I’m un-nominating the Tundra. Won about half it’s head to heads with the ‘Rado. Kickin’ hiney in the market. Best powertrain by far.
    The nominations smell of brand loyalty fear and troll fells. Lame guys.

    Stay groovy.

  • avatar
    Sajeev Mehta

    I don’t think its fair to pan the Focus since nobody’s driven one. Not that I expect it to be an awesome ride, but we have to give it a chance. Isn’t it just as “new” as the new CTS? Give it a shot, people.

    Ok, here’s my list:

    Jeep Compass: wrong car, wrong brand, a worthy 2-term TWAT-er.

    Lincoln Mark LT: kick a badge-engineered turd on its deathbed. No mercy!

    Sebring/Avenger: they are both equally horrid inside and out. Misery comes in pairs.

    Dodge/Mitsu Dakota: ugliest truck ever made, inside and out. Its thirsty, expensive (compared to a full size) and completely outclassed by the Taco and Frontier.

    Durango/Aspen: same basic problems as the Dakota, but in the SUV realm.

    Pontiac Grand Prix: this is the oldest W body design, and the interior, exterior, fleet sales and overall dumpiness says it all.

    Pontiac G5: badge engineering and all that just like the Mark LT. Just a shameful car from a company who keeps on promising a tighter, more relevant divisional structure. Don’t have a problem with the Cobalt…I think.

    Chevrolet Impala: 50% effort design from day one. Coarse engines (SS excluded), rough interiors, dull styling, terrible dynamics. Doesn’t deserve to be the #1 fleet Queen when the new Taurus is a good bit more polished.

    Nissan Sentra SE-R: a complete insult to the original, and to the performance compact genre. Soft performance, expensive, too big, etc…

    Toyota Corolla: extremely dated, nothing nice about it other than its reputation/resale value. Its languished around long enough to be called a GM product. Ouch.

    Ferrari 599: I don’t care how great the materials/performance is, you can get a Lingenfelter ‘vette or RUF Porsche to cream it. Italian cars are supposed to be beautiful, and that’s a seriously ugly car. I betcha Historians will see it my way too.

    BMW 5-series: ugly, complicated, hard to understand, driving experience is weak compared to its predecessors.

  • avatar
    morbo

    Chrysler Sebring – Puts the F.U. in FUGLY.

    Toyota Camry – The hood is vaguely phallic shaped, and the rest looks like a late ’90’s Pontiac on an acid trip, with Bangle Butt to Boot.

    GM Minivans – Nothing says modern like the ’94 Chevy Lumina APV, after being renamed the Venture, and the Uplander, and the TransPort, and the Montana, and the Silouhette, and the Relay, and the Terraza.

    ’08 Mercury Mariner/Ford Escape – Let’s take our right sized, succesful compact SUV, and make it too big, too thirsty, make the gauges less intuitive, and change the rear pillars so it’s harder to see out of. Brilliant!

  • avatar
    zorbgelnick

    Dodge Nitro – Cardboard Box styling at the worst.
    Chrysler Sebring – Where’s the rest of the car?
    Dodge Caliber – A series of bad ideas!
    Suzuki Forenza- Built not to last or drive comfortably!
    PT Cruiser – Good upgrade in styling!

  • avatar
    NickR

    The Cadillac Escalade – for being a gas guzzling behemoth that will never, ever go off road or carry more than two people. Worse still, for being a shoddy attempt by GM/Cadillac to make some easy money while polluting the brands image.

    The Jeep Commander for as someone upstream said about another Jeep, a combination of macho poseur and bling styling.

    The Suzuki SX4 sedan for having really, really dreadful styling.

    The Mitsubishi Eclipse for being not too small on the outside, but tiny on the inside, having cheap materials, and for having a really, really poor choice of engine in the sporty version.

  • avatar
    glenn126

    Volkswagen Jetta. Unreliable, nasty, overpriced, generally generic look (the Corolla that it resembles is to be replaced soon…)-why is VW still p*ssing money away “trying” to sell cars in the US? Perhaps they’d be better off to pull down the VW signs and put up Skoda signs – the quality is better (!), prices are lower and the cars are just as good in every sense of the word, at least, for “transportation modules”.

    The Chrysler Sebring/Dodge Avenger. Pull the plug on these “dogs” Cerebrysler, pleeeease? Euthanize them both…. they’re awful. See what happens when you “stiff” your partner (Mitsubishi) half way through a joint-venture development program? Kizmet!!!!

    The Saturn Aura “light hybrid” – ditto the Chevrolet Malibu “light hybrid”. Hauling around a battery pack makes sense when you add 60% to 100% to your MPG. It makes NO sense when you add 5% to 15% to your MPG. (Literally, it’s a waste of relatively expensive batteries!) LAME. Awfully lame. Sorry to be truthful, but “typically GM” (“Generally Messedup”).

    Isuzu. Anything Isuzu. Why is that “chevy in drag” still on the market? Who buys these things?!

    Hummer. Anything Hummer. After billybob clinton’s episodes with young interns, doesn’t a vehicle called a “Hummer” kind of bring up unpleasant phallic insinuations?! Plus it makes my wife comment on the penis size (or lack thereof) of every male Hummer driver, and I’m kind of tired of it…. so let’s at least stop the production lines and give the rest of us males who don’t need any “help” a break… besides which, as vehicles, they are totally “1999” (not “2007 / 2008 / over $85 per barrel for oil”)

    Ford Taurus. What a BULLshit car (sorry, I could not resist).

    Jeep Compass. Clearly, the Jeep guys were NOT paying attention to their brand compass when they developed this POS.

    Ford Crown Vic/Mercury Marquis/Lincoln Town Car. Good God, the basis of these cars was literally on the engineering tables when CARTER was in office (not even when Clinton was in – CARTER). So antiquated, they are embarrassing. Just goes to prove, Ford is probably the first of the 2.8 to die on the vine. “Ford spelled sideways is DORF”

    Ford Ranger and Mazda cloned whatever B2000 (?) or whatever it’s called. See above.

    Mitsubishi Galant. Hopefully, the eventual replacement car is NOT “Avenger/Sebring” tech, or if it is, hopefully a) Mitsubishi hire a real car stylist and designer instead of using rent-a-chip design inc and b) Mitsubishi reserved all the good car bits from their Chrysler car development JV for their own use. In the meanwhile, the current Galant is competing against the Camry, the all-new Accord and Hyundai Sonata… kind of like going to a knife fight with a butter knife, no? Yes….

  • avatar
    Lumbergh21

    I would like to add a second nomination for the newly designed Toyota Camry. They took a bland but acceptable looking car and made it ugly.

    I’ll second another Toyota offering, the Scion xB. They took a practical people hauler and said how can we make this uglier and less efficient so those old people will stop buying it. Scion was supposed to be Toyota’s entry into the young, hip market; to Toyota’s dismay, “old people” were snappng up the xA’s and xB’s. If this is your biggest problem with a new car design, I guess you really have to stretch to “improve” it.

    A completely new car to add to the list is the Nissan Rogue. I don’t know how this thing drives, but I do know it’s outside is a joke. I had a good laugh when I read Motor Trend’s review of this vehicle and its modern, rakish good looks.

    I won’t bother with seconding any of the ugly, ridiculous, or pointless american offerings. They’ve already received enough nominations. Okay, I can’t resist, I nominate the Impala. Maybe the newer models are better, but the ’06 rental that I drove earlier this year had to be the worst rental car I have ever driven. Surpassing (if that’s what you would call it) the ’04 Neon and ’05 Magnum rentals I had previously driven for shear inability to meet standards set by other cars in its class. The car somehow managed to handle like a boat yet be uncomfortable to ride in. The car was unable to get out of its own way despite gulping gas (like a Dodge Magnum). Where did they find that auto transmission? In a pile of parts left over from the early 80’s? I doubt that the designers even knew how to spell ergonomics, least of all implement them in the interior design of the car. And while we’re on the subject, a picture of this car’s interior should appear in the dictionary next to cheap plastics.

  • avatar
    jkross22

    Fugliest car: Subaru WRX. What were they thinking???

    Even though it’s not a car, the absolutely ridiculous ads for Ford “Swap your ride” make me laugh every time they show some dolt saying how much they like the Ford over their Honda/Toyota/Nissan. Yeah, how ’bout after 2 yrs of ownership??

    Toyota Yaris – Is this really a car? It’s not cute, it sure doesn’t look safe, and really, about the only positive comment you could make is that it gets great mileage and is easy to park.

  • avatar
    N85523

    How about the Jeep Patriot. Although it is slightly more capable than it’s fraternal twin the Compass, they share the same platform and take away from the crediblilty of Jeep which has always stayed away from badge engineering. Badge engineering is one thing within a manufacturer, but to badge engineer within the same brand is inexcusable.

  • avatar

    I forgot more:

    Maybach, why wouldn’t you buy a Rolls instead and get something with way more real heritage and class than this bloated ugly S-class?

    Bangle BMWs- the Z4 especially is never going to be remembered fondly for the droopy styling that looks like the headlights melted…

    The Audi TT- I have to agree that this shows the limits of styling, when you can just get a slightly used Boxster. Bring on the R4 already…

    Scion xB- the boxy one was ugly-cute and eminently practical in a city. The current one is fake macho and has less space while being bigger.

    Acura RL- still never competitive and still blander than even a Lexus. That takes something special to achieve.

  • avatar
    klossfam

    WOW! So MANY choices out there…

    1. Dodge Caliber – the car/trucklet is WORSE than the Neon it replaces.

    2. Dodge Nitro – I takes more than boxy and a tough name to be a tough truck/crossover.

    3. Lincoln MKX – Just because the name is close to the Acura MDX, the vehicle is not in the same league (and TOO MUCH chrome is too much).

    4. Mercedes R Class – Is it a minivan? No. Is it a SUV? No. Is it a crossover? Maybe. Is anyone buying it? NO.

    5. Mitsu Lancer – It’s all good “styling-wise” until the educated consumer realizes those slick duds on sitting on a Caliber chassis.

    6. Scion xD – The Brave Little Toaster xB gets a re-do by Dr. Frankenstein!

    I could go on…but I’ll stop now.

  • avatar
    BerettaGTZ

    Nissan Sentra – they cloned a 5-year old Saturn Ion, only made it fatter and uglier.

  • avatar
    NickR

    Almost forgot to add the Buick LaCrosse for having vast quantity of utility grey, rock hard plastic as pleasing to the eye and touch as a cheap plastic snow shovel. The worst combination of colour and material on the market today, bar none.

  • avatar
    Justin Berkowitz

    Volkswagen Jetta (not the GLI model). It’s just totally off the mark. It’s the wrong size, it’s ugly and bland, it’s got an engine that astonishes with the power of a 4 and the fuel economy of a 6.

    Also, the Buick Lacrosse really should be on this list. I love Buicks, but the Lacrosse (that’s the cheaper sedan) is horrendous to drive, and the interior is an incredible let down. Its sales to white haired folks are less than impressive, too.

  • avatar
    Jordan Tenenbaum

    Nissan Rouge. It just pushes all the wrong buttons, and the Honda CR-V is still very ugly.

  • avatar
    frenchy

    Cadillac DTS- old design, fwd and this is supposed to be their big car? Time to move on.

  • avatar
    frenchy

    Thought of another
    Saturn ION. This car has been ugly since the day it came out. Definition of cheap.

  • avatar
    Joe O

    I’m amazed at some of the comments above. All things Saab? The new Camry? While certainly not the best of the market, not my personal opinion of the worst either. Unfortunately, I raise the same argument this year as I did last year: Have you driven the car you are declaring is the worst?

    Moving on…

    My recommendations:

    Toyota Tacoma – The fact that 16k can get you ANYTHING nowadays with manual windows and door locks is a crying shame. And how can you declare yourself a pickup truck yet actually have a model unable to be “hitched”? Who knew a pickup truck could lack a proper frame in the rear.

    Volkswagon Golf – What exactly is a dirty, gas-guzzling 5-cylinder engine doing in an “entry-level” tossable people’s car anyway? This car deserves a TWAT because it’s engine is confused with it’s purpose, it doesn’t like to rev, it’s Drive-By-Wire System confuses itself upon manual shifting and results in making everyone who drives it’s hydraulically-actuated 5-speed into a jerk. And overall, this car has forgotten it’s purpose (unlike the GTI, which aside from it’s the-stupidest-thing-ever electronic brake differential, is a proper driver’s car).

    Saturn Ion – The bane of my existence (my wife’s car) for 54k miles and counting. Panel gaps in which a 3-year could get their head stuck. An engine that asks to be taken out back and shot each and every time you start it up. For me, a heat shield that broke itself in half from engine vibration (it appears to be 1/4″ thick iron…yet it vibrated itself in 2 pieces).

    Poor gas mileage and yet poorer acceleration, and this is with the 5-speed manual…which is a unit designed by engineers using “new math” to determine it’s ratios.

    But the part that really pisses in my cheerios: The damn thing has been nigh-on reliable for 4 years thereby making it impossible for me to talk the wife into trading it in all the soooner.

    Chevy Cobalt – Only one step up from the Saturn Ion. A baby step. Need I say more?

    Pontiac Solstice/Saturn Sky – It’s as if the designers were given the task to make it as unergonomic as possible. It must be the european design/disdain for driver’s with cell phones, cups of coffee, or fat wallets (though not fat with cash after shelling out for the dealer markups in the beginning of the year). 5-speed transmissions stolen out of trucks…whilst using the same ratios.

    Cursed with drop-dead gorgeous looks, thereby enticing unsuspecting victims to consider purchasing this vehicle of the damned. By actually finding buyers for this vehicle, we have all been bewitched with years more of the ECOTEC engine from the 4th circle of hell.

    From a special place in my heart: The 2008 Subaru Impreza:

    A car that sold because it was the opposite of every other car: bare-bones, ugly, with a flat-four blatting out it’s unique sound but it would rock you with great driving dynamics.

    Subaru took the car and removed some of the driving experience (softer suspension, less steering feel, more sound deadening). Instead of being ugly or attractive, it just is. Unfortunately.

    When a Subie salesperson introduces you to the car, they ask you not to look below the top of the dash. Because the top has been redesigned…but that’s but-ugly shiny black plastic below that baby.

    With 6 years to make some sort of mechanical advantage, the Impreza debuted with….exactly the same thing! Oh some shafts have been tweaked and some cats have been shuffled around.

    All this, for a price that’s not really competitive!

    But hey, AWD is standard.

    Hope you enjoyed my writing and I didn’t get too verbose.

    Joe O.

  • avatar
    jaje

    Ford Focus – It’s bold moving redesign takes part on a the same 8+ year old platform. Still trying that old failed Detroit strategy of simply slapping lipstick on a pig.

    Lincoln Mark LT (aka Gussied Up Rebadged F150) – It failed miserably the first time around trying to create a luxury pickup in a damaged beyond recognition luxury brand.

    Chevy Monte Carlo (and Gran Prix) – No amount of v8s or superchargers can rescue a 4000lb, fwd, highly discounted, pathetic in resale value, rental car build quality from it’s core redneck customers.

    GM minivans – What everyone else has said. Kill these off already – I don’t even think the fleets want these.

    Chevy Aveo – Fulfilling the promise of America’s cheapest car by being the cheapest car made in Korea.

    Jeep Compass – Complete betrayal of Jeeps Heritage (unless it was originally cheaply made economy cars with poser off road images)

    Chrysler Sebring / Dodge Avenger – pushed by DCX as a competitor to the Camcord (maybe for the 1989 models) but it’s only true calling or competitive advantage will be to the rental fleets.

    Chrysler Aspen – The sales strategy of can’t afford a Hummer / Escalade / Navigator hasn’t gone so well with today’s gas prices.

    Chrysler PT Cruiser – put this gelding out to pasture or to the glue factory. The Caliber has replaced it in spirit and with a more modern package. The HHR has it beat with better build quality too. A convertible is just what the rental car fleets needed in Florida for the geriatrics.

    Saab 9-7x – Talk about brand assassination. Nothing good came of this.

    Jaguar X-Type – An outdated Ford Mondeo platform with quality and reliability issues making owners seeking reliability from lucas wiring equipped Jaguars. It sells less than an Acura RL and Jaguar has the biggest rebates of any brands on piled on the hood.

    Porsche Cayenne – Porsche should have never built it, they should have never made a 2nd generation. Why Porsche, why? (from a concerned Porsche Owner)

  • avatar
    Bytor

    There are a lot of bad cars out there that I don’t spend much time thinking about like:

    Hummers: All of them – ridiculous, over sized, wasteful toys. (many other lame SUVs I won’t go into)
    Saabs: All of them – ugly.
    Domestics: Most of the uninspired sedans, non competitive compacts.
    Smart: clown car.

    I reserve my nomination for a car I might have otherwise bought if they didn’t so thoroughly mess it up.

    The new Subaru Impreza hatchback. While the ugly it is not quite of Aztec proportions, it is a major step backwards. The 06/07 was actually decently sharp looking. It had clean lines and a sharp clear style. This new shape is awkward and bloated and bland. Reports are that the driving experience has also dropped as well.

  • avatar
    starlightmica

    Saturn Ion is out of production although still for sale – does that disqualify it? If it’s eligible, it deserves a nod as it’s the opposite of what the S-series was in 1991 – a good copy/reinterpretation of a Japanese subcompact.

    I’ll re-nom the last of the CSV’s, the 2008 Chevy Uplander, for GM’s sole purpose of milking money from the udder of a mad cow’s rotten corpse.

    Jaguar X-type is going to pasture, too, so I’ll nom it to give it a last hurrah of badge/platform engineered inanity. I pulled up behind an X-type wagon last month and had no idea what car it was before reading the badges, because it was so bland.

    Jeep Compass is just too easy, a car only a focus clinic would ask for. Which actually happened.

    2008 Ford Focus, for lack of foresight to switch to the C1 platform and sticking with C170 when Ford Europe has long moved on. Extra credit for canning the the hatchbacks and wagon.

  • avatar
    Sajeev Mehta

    Another vote for the Maybach: why anyone needs a top-drawer Hyundai Azera is beyond me. The Phantom is what a luxury car should be.

    Saturn Ion: ugly in and out, probably the ugliest car on the market today. And its far from class leading else where. Thanks to the person who refreshed my memory about this one.

    Nissan Armada/Infiniti QX56: poor reliability, poor dynamics and ugly styling. If you’re gonna risk pissing off the tree-huggers, you’re so much better off in a Tahoe/Escalade or Expedition/Gator.

  • avatar

    starlightmica:
    Saturn Ion is out of production although still for sale – does that disqualify it?

    Nope. If it was for sale as a new vehicle between January 1 this year and today, it’s eligible. Saturn dealers still have IONs they’re trying to foist off sell to unsuspecting buyers

  • avatar
    synthetic

    Toyota Corolla:

    A reliable powertrain should not grant Toyota the right to insult its customers with an ugly, bland, and non-rewarding toy that screams “Blah” all over.

    Chevy HHR:

    Just what the hell is this car supposed to be? Why is it “cool” to look like you’re still living in the 50s? (this is according to GM’s official slogan “Cool can be useful, useful can be Cool”!

    Chrysler Sebring / Dodge Avenger:

    Trust me dude, it’ll sell. They’re dumb enough to buy it. Just approve it and I’ll split the bonus with ya!

    Mitsubishi Lancer:

    Despite the aggressive design, its cheapness is apparent even from outside. Horrible economy for a compact sedan. A 50% job at best.

    Mitsubishi Galant:

    A real shame for the brand despite being the flagship. There is so few of them around that I really wonder how Mitsu justifies its production.

    Chevy Aveo:

    I wouldn’t mind this car if it was a genuine GM attempt at creating a sub-compact that is meant to improve over the years, but for God’s sake, this is a POS made by the mother of all flukes “Daewoo” and it has no place on North-American soil. Who buys these things? Can they see, read or feel?

    BMW 5 series:

    Why don’t they just call it the 15-series as it’s 3 times begger than what 5-series used to be and handles worse than a previous generation 3-series? What is BMW’s justification for the laughable price-tag? Can a portion of that profit go into developing some decent window regulators so the Macho man with the silk-tie and the Armani suit doesn’t get himself all wet on his way to the divorce hearing?

    Mazda RX-8:

    Nice try Mazda, but it sucks. It drinks like a V8, performs like the small-block 4-banger it is, and breaks down more often than those rotaries revolve. Either fix ’em or ditch ’em.

  • avatar
    Joe O

    I can confirm that the Saturn Ion is still for sale at dealers, as I was at the Saturn dealer on Tuesday of last week. Still one of the best dealer experiences I’ve ever had…as long as you are willing to forgo free good coffee and free wireless internet. Not to be confused with the Quattro Cafe, where the starbucks is free, the internet is in your hands, and the service guys will milk you for all you are worth.

    Seriously though, if you haven’t driven a Saturn Ion (especially the 5-speed) your reference point is set way to high.

    To be fair though, my wife just saw a brand new 2007 Ion 2 (mid-level with automatic trans) for sale for, I believe, around 10,900 listed at the dealer.

    So sometimes cheap things come in cheap packages.

    Joe

  • avatar
    brownie

    BMW M6. That’s right, I think one of the uber-bimmers is among the worst cars on the road. Here are my reasons:

    1) The 6 series is hideously ugly in general (subjective, I know, but seriously – compare it to its competitors and tell me it’s not less visually appealing in every way). Anyway, the M6 ups the ugly ante by adding side vents (the car fashion accessory du jour), oversized rims, bulgy fenders, and out of place quad tailpipes.
    2) Here’s the real strike against it: it’s not better than the 650 in any meaningful way. The M6 adds 140 horsepower over the base 650, but only 20 ft-lbs torque; and the 650’s power is already on the border of “silly”, possibly “useless off the track”. It doesn’t really handle or stop any more competently (some say it is actually worse), though it does reward its drivers with a much more uncomfortable ride for their trouble and $$$. And despite not really bringing much more to the table in performance, it somehow manages to consume almost 30% more gas than the 650.
    3) iDrive. I might forgive its other sins if the M6 was a stripped-down driver-oriented version of the 650. But no, it still has iDrive and everything else. Great.

    Honestly, I’m amazed BMW has managed to swindle anyone into paying up for one of these things. What’s the value proposition? If it’s the “prestige” of overpaying for an M-car, aren’t there more prestigious cars to be had for about the same price?

  • avatar
    ex-dtw

    Scion xB

    Take a “quirky” japonese econobox with plenty of personality and feed it a steady diet Mickey D’s supersize meals.

  • avatar
    Dave M.

    Saab 9-5 – for being a late 90s Opel Vectra in disguise.
    That’s being kind. I thought it was developed in the early 90’s.
    Isuzu Ascender – no explanation required. Isuzu has gone beyond disgrace – in 10 years they have bobbled away some tremendous markey opportunities. They should have hooked up with Subaru and cross developed modern, reasonable AWD platforms for both to share.

    Oddly enough, I own both an Isuzu and a Saab. There’s just something about orphans…..

    Jeep Patriot – Wolf in sheep’s clothing, manned-up Compass… does nothing for the brand. Nationalistic brand damaging rubbish and Jeep Compass – Complete betrayal of Jeeps Heritage (unless it was originally cheaply made economy cars with poser off road images)

    I have mixed feelings on this. I drove my niece’s 4X4 (!) Patriot and am duly impressed with what it is – a decent, roomy little CUV that more easily gets places where others struggle (RAV-4, CR-V, Escape). Great gas mileage overall as well, except the CVT is hard to get used to at first. No, it’s not a Wrangler – but again, I was impressed (except for the cheap interior plastics, but then again Jeeps have never been known for the quality of their interiors….).

    The Compass has no reason for being…except as a modern day Jeepster (so yes, there was a precedent….) developed as a car for the ladies to go to town with.

  • avatar
    starlightmica

    brownie:

    What’s even more puzzling to me is why someone would want to pay double for one: enter the Fisker Latigo.

  • avatar
    Zarba

    Jeep Compass: Soft-Roader that kills Jeep’s cred. Cheap, and built to make you remember the Yugo!

    Jeep Commander: A larger, uglier Grand Cherokee with a useless 3rd row bouncing around over the live axle.

    Mercedes-Benz R-Class: The minivan for folks with more money than sense. Only partially forgiven now that it has a diesel option.

    Chrysler Sebring: Oh, God, my eyes, please rip out my eyes!!!

    Chrysler PT Cruiser: A warmed over Neon that is 5 years past its’ sell by date.

    Chrysler Aspen: Naming this useless gas hog after the trees that it kills is just wrong.

    Chevy Cobalt: After all those years of the Cavalier, this was all they could come up with?

    Chevy Aveo: Makes a Vega look cool in comparison

    Ford Focus: When a great Focus is built, we won’t sell it to you!

    Maybach 57/62: It’s painful to watch BMW/Rolls b****-slap Mercedes-Benz this badly. A terrible design, poorly executed, and marketed badly.

    BMW Z4: A great drivetrain in search of a great body.

  • avatar
    Zarba

    I’ll second the nominations for the:

    Scion xB: A cute, inoffensive box is made into a bloated, ugly mule.

    Pontiac Solstice: I predicted on FastLane Blog at inception that this thing had 18 moths of life in it before the market rejected it totally. 1.5 cu ft of luggage space?? Typical GM blundering. Could have been a winner.

  • avatar
    BobJava

    Scion xB(eefy) aka the Scion McB.

    This is TWAT material. No other old model/new model can match the depth of its decent. Toyota is indicted for the following:

    For destroying what was a fun, viable, small car (with plenty of cache) with too many fat strokes of a pen.
    For making it “American” (or so automakers tell us) when we have plenty of “American” cars to choose from. (Why was Scion created anyway?)
    For inadvertently proving naysayers of the original xB correct; it’s hideous.
    For increasing insurance premiums with a ridiculous and useless rear pillar.
    For that godforsaken gas-sucking 2.4 liter engine. If I wanted a Camry, I’d buy a Camry! … and in fact I would, over the current xB.

  • avatar
    G-Dubs

    I nominate the Chevy Avalanche/Cadillac Escalade EXT twins. Horribly ugly, badge engineering, aimed at the little-weenie compensating crowd, very expensive, small useless truck bed, and 9 MPG in normal city driving, but probably in LA where the trashy Hollywood set likes to drive them in heavy traffic about 5 MPG.

    The Aveo is not that bad considering that it can be had for less than 10K brand new. What are you expecting? The Scion xA is 50% more expensive!

  • avatar
    Sajeev Mehta

    brownie: I tested the M6 (reviewed here) and you’re right, its a seriously flawed vehicle. Much more expensive than the last M5, useless options like active seat bolsters, horrible SMG, oil burning engine that revs like nuts and gets 12mpg on a good day.

    And its got i-drive and Bangle styling. Heck, let’s put the entire 6-series lineup on the board!

  • avatar
    Haudi

    Chrysler Sebring. This car is as joke. Ugly ugly ugly. Cheap cheap cheap. Did someone with a 6 or 7 digit salary really think this abomination would sell? Seriously?

  • avatar
    Sajeev Mehta

    Wow…

    To the Chrysler Sebring: I predict a first place finish for you in the 2nd annual TWAT awards.

  • avatar
    William C Montgomery

    Okay, this looks like fun. Let me try…

    GM U-body Minivans: Represent everything that went wrong with the US automakers thirty years ago. So long as they make these abominations, the must remain on the Ten Worst list.

    Toyota Camry: Last year I defended the Camry against the multitude of Ten Worst nominations. Its dependability alone justified its dullness. However, no matter how reliable the new model is, it cannot compensate for the overpowering ugly affixed to the front of the sedan. Puke!

    Dodge Nitro: This vehicle is a sharp stick jabbed into the heart of the Jeep Liberty. Dodge needed a good CUV to compete with RAV4 and CR-V, not a cheaply built, gas guzzling, inefficient, dirt-phobic, LR3 wannabe poseur.

    Dodge Avenger: Alas, its beauty is only skin deep.

    Jeep Grand Cherokee Overland CRD: Oh, we had such high hopes for a MB sourced clean diesel in the Grand Cherokee, didn’t we? Yet this diesel isn’t clean (where’s the BlueTec?), grossly overpriced, and the steering and suspension tuning is disastrously isolating. Why isn’t this engine in the Wrangler or JGC Laredo for $28K?

    Dodge Magnum SXT: Sans HEMI, there is nothing, nothing, NOTHING good about this car.

    Cadillac Escalade EXT: No matter how you dress up a pickup, a vehicle with a truck bed is fundamentally incompatible with luxury. This is brand poison.

    Lincoln Mark LT: No matter how you dress up a pickup, a vehicle with a truck bed is fundamentally incompatible with luxury. This is brand poison.

    Honda Civic: Any car whose windshield (from base to top) measures longer than the hood (front to back), loses all aesthetic proportion and assumes clown-car status. This especially pains me because I have liked the Civic as an economical runabout for so long.

    Ford Mustang: There, I said it! (Sorry Sajeev.) The new body style was such a breath of fresh air when it was new. Now it is about as fresh as a year old fart beaten out of an old couch cushion. The handling is primitive, ride crude, and interior astoundingly low-rent.

    Mitsubishi Galant, Outlander, Endeavor, and Raider: Ugly, ugly, ugly, and double-ugly.

  • avatar
    Luther

    1. Anything built on the GM W-Body. Hacking a 25 year old hacked chassis is like making the finest camel shit sandwich.

    2. Chevy Uplander – It looks like it was designed by Papa Smurf after a weekend kegger at the Pokemon School of Design.

    3. Chrysler Sebring – Nothing need be said here.

  • avatar
    Steve_K

    The “redesigned” Jeep liberty, and clone sibling the Nitro. The Liberty redesign killed the only appeal this pig ever had: looks. It looked cute enough for a certain demographic with the rounded lights; now it suffers from Cherokee anxiety. This on a vehicle that isn’t comfortable on-road, not that capable off-road, and is outclassed in every way by the competition.

  • avatar
    KixStart

    I’d like to nominate The Saturn Vue. Because it’s fat. Seriously; about the same size as a Toyota Rav4 but 700 lbs heavier. Doesn’t anybody at GM have computer-aided design tools? What a lard-ass…

    I’d like to contest one of the nominations of thee Tundra; I don’t think it can be nominated for having a flexing frame unless someone has actually induced it to flex. I don’t think there’s any give in any component of it at all and that might include the “springs,” which I suspect to be nothing more than steel rods (but I am not a truck guy, so what I might see as an “unforgiving” ride, others might see as “business as usual” in a truck, perhaps *all* pickup trucks induce hemorrhoids?). You might see Ford ads critical of the Tundra’s construction but that doesn’t mean the construction doesn’t work.

    However, I can support the earlier Tundra nomination on the grounds of bad marketing by eroding a fairly green corporate image. It doesn’t bother me all that much; it’s not like I can go to GM and get anything like a Prius for the next half-dozen years, but between introducing the Tundra, which is really unnecessarily large, and speaking out on the proposed CAFE (when they should have remained silent and let Detroit take the heat), Toyota, perhaps, is not showing the best of business sense in an increasingly green-sensitive market.

  • avatar
    BobJava

    I have to say, although the Mark LT is atrocious, I wouldn’t put it in a top 10 because I don’t notice the thing … just as none of us noticed the Malibu Classic a few years back. The same goes with the entire Isuzu line. Yeah, it’s bad, but if a tree falls in the forest …

    Just my humble opinion, but I think greater weight should be given to the make/models that actively insult our collective intelligence. In-your-face, type of cars. (So yes, mainstream models would be better choices.) Chrysler advertised the hell out of the Sebring. And that “new” Focus … its debut was worthy of a European princess (I know it’s not eligible for this year’s TWAT … but for next year).

    TWATs to me are the ones you yell at through your car windshield at a stop light and insult behind your brother-in-law’s back. Frankly, I don’t see new Rangers, so their existence doesn’t bother me.

    Again this is all IMHO, so YMMV.

  • avatar
    shabatski

    As someone who rents a new car in a new city every week I get to test drive lots of new cars. That being said, the following are cars I’ve driven that I cringe at every time I get behind the wheel.

    1. Jeep Patriot: CVT sucks the life and enjoyment out of driving. Also, you have to duck under the liftgate when loading your cargo. (learned that the hard way…)

    2. Dodge Caliber: Same CVT that sucks.

    3. Jeep Patriot: Same CVT that sucks.

    4. All other Chrysler cars that use the CVT not mentioned above.

    5. Chrysler 300/Dodge Charger/Dodge Magnum: I can’t speak to the high performance versions, but the rental fleet base models make me feel like I’m driving my grandfather’s 1978 Impala. I can break the tires loose (i.e. slide) around off/on ramps going the RECOMMENDED speed, and the interior plastics must come from the absolute cheapest suppliers on the market. Additionally, the exterior panel gaps are so wide at times that I’m utterly amazed it makes it through QA. God, I just hate these vehicles…

    All in all, the only Chrysler product that I look forward to driving off the rental car lot is the Chrysler Crossfire. (I know, it’s a Mercedes – but they actually did a great job re-styling the exterior.)

  • avatar
    William C Montgomery

    BobJava: I have to say, although the Mark LT is atrocious, I wouldn’t put it in a top 10 because I don’t notice the thing … just as none of us noticed the Malibu Classic a few years back. The same goes with the entire Isuzu line. Yeah, it’s bad, but if a tree falls in the forest …

    Touché! You’ve made a fine point.

    Yet, I cannot get myself to withdraw the nomination. The notion of a luxury pickup truck is just that abhorrent to me. Yes, we had a great debate on whether Lexus should make a luxury high-performance variant to some of its models. RF hates the idea and I think it’s okay. But we really aren’t that far apart (a matter of slight degree rather than diametric disagreement) when it comes our belief in the paramount necessity of a manufacturer to carefully cultivate and fiercely protect its brand image. If you really want to set me off, suggest that Toyota should make a Lexus version of the Tundra.

  • avatar
    sawaba

    G6 Hardtop Convertible – The VW EOS is a short runner up.

    VW/GM Management: Hey boss, I’ve got some good new and some bad news. The good news is that design and engineering got together and figured out how to make a hardtop convertible without having to design a new platform from the ground up!

    Boss: What’s the bad news?

    Mgr: It looks awful. The cabin had to go a few feet too far forward to look properly proportioned, and as a result, everything from the C-pillar back looks awfully distended. The design guys have all taken their drawings down because they can’t stand to look at it.

    Boss: But it works?

    Mgr: It functions, yes.

    Boss: Add it to the line-up.

  • avatar
    Sajeev Mehta

    Bill: I understand the Mark LT, but the Escalade? At least it has a Cadillac-specific dashboard. People go for luxury pickups, and the Caddy doesn’t upset me nearly enough to be TWAT-worthy.

    And the Mustang: go for it. Its too big, cheap inside and clumsy in the corners for me to care anymore. But its not bad enough to be a TWAT, and it’ll get voted out in a hurry.

    Re: the Chrysler LX cars…I’ll go with because of 1)no upgrades 2)weak performance in all non-V8s 3) third-world interior trimmings.

    The style doesn’t cut it anymore. Pretty much a RWD Sebring these days.

  • avatar

    At the risk of stepping out of bounds, I nominate the entire Chrysler line-up.

    It is unfathomable to me that a dealer is still in business which such a putrid, discount-bin collection of also-rans. Yet there it is, putting out a shingle in the hopes that you will be enticed from a Civic to buy a Dodge Caliber or enticed from an Accord to buy a Sebring.

    It is just a cluster-f**k of garbage that is so vile, its ruinous effects extend beyond just Chrysler itself and cast a pale shadow over all of the domestic industry

  • avatar
    Haudi

    The New York Times has a very similar article. They are naming the Jaguar X-Type as the “Dud of the Decade.”

    http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/15/jaguar-x-type-dud-of-the-decade/index.html?hp

  • avatar
    confused1096

    The new Scion xB. If this were just the newest ugly CUV I would not be as annoyed. But they took a useful, economical, and cool (in a quirky kinda way) car and eviscerated it. The first gen xB was the first vehicle to ever get me on a Toyota lot. Though I did not buy one I thought about it pretty hard.

    Then this…thing…comes out. It’s ugly, it gets poor fuel economy, and has less headroom. WHY?!?!?!!? This car is as much of an abomonation as a Corvette minivan or a Porsche pickup truck would be.

  • avatar
    rashakor

    Like someone else mentionned: the amount of choses is staggering!!!

    Where to start? let see, Japan:
    Sentra and Xb: Dont forget you are small quirky cars you fattening into american proportions is gonna cost you dearly. You are now ugly bloated spawns of your former selves.

    Corolla (corollary of the previous point): What are u now good for? you r a redundant model clamped between the Yaris and the Camry

    Germany:
    No comment, no complaint. Except for the Minivan tourer wannabe R-Class.

    Korea:
    Wow, content of its flawless mediocrity no vehicle shines by its excellence or its TWATness.

    USA:
    H3, A pathetic and cheap attemp to look like the H2 (which i do not dislike and actually feels like a real truck).

    Nitro: WTF? Commander: WTF? Patriot/Compass: WTF-squared?

  • avatar
    joshpaul_2007

    The Pontiac G6….crappy all around

    The Honda Ridgeline…a fwd truck????WTF

    The Dodge Avenger…ungly as can be

  • avatar
    whatdoiknow1

    Chrysler PT Cruiser: For Chyrsler having the audacity to sell a vehicle based on the Neon platform in the year 2007. It’s the only rental vehicle that has had the dubious distinction of almost killing me on the highway, I had it pointed straight ahead at about 65mph when I hit an large expansion joint and the non-independent rear suspension almost threw me completely off the road. I actually longed for my previous Chevy Aveo rental after driving this POS for 3 days

    I too rented one of these things this summer and could not get over how badly this thing handled. Any input to the gas would easily upset the entire cars at highway speed. The back of the car always felt like it was not in sync with the front end. On top of the piss poor handling the PT Crusier had about the worst brakes (rear drums and no ABS)I have experinced in about 15 years.
    While I found the engine quite gutless in the low range it did seem willing to give up all 150hp when you flogged it really good.

  • avatar
    rpn453

    Ford Mustang convertible. I’d never have believed a modern chassis could be that flimsy until I drove it. It also has poor visibility, a cheap interior, uncomfortable seats, and a 4.0L that can’t even spin the tires (with a 5 speed auto). I don’t even think I’d want to play with it if it had a V8 and a manual.

    I’d throw the Aveo/Wave/Swift, Monte Carlo, Aerio, Sebring, Crossfire, Caliber, Nitro, Compass, Pathfinder, and Armada in there based on looks alone.

  • avatar
    sandi beale

    To those two who nominated the Audi TT – surely you think the 2008 model is a major improvement, right?

  • avatar
    KatiePuckrik

    I would like to nominate the following:

    The Vauxhall Vectra. Cheap and nasty interior and bland looking on the exterior. I’d rather become CEO of Chrysler boil my head in pig fat.

    The Toyota Avensis. Actually, well made and good value for money. But all of these points are neutralise by the sheer bucket loads of boredom this car has in its DNA.

    Chrysler PT cruiser. We don’t like it in Europe, it seems people don’t like it in north America, so where are the sales coming from?!

    Chevrolet Aveo. Depressing interior and so so exterior. When you consider this is up against the Yaris and Jazz, it really is a poor offering.

  • avatar
    Steve Biro

    “”Joe O :
    October 15th, 2007 at 1:33 pm

    I’m amazed at some of the comments above. All things Saab? The new Camry? While certainly not the best of the market, not my personal opinion of the worst either. Unfortunately, I raise the same argument this year as I did last year: Have you driven the car you are declaring is the worst?

    Moving on…

    My recommendations:

    Toyota Tacoma – The fact that 16k can get you ANYTHING nowadays with manual windows and door locks is a crying shame. And how can you declare yourself a pickup truck yet actually have a model unable to be “hitched”? Who knew a pickup truck could lack a proper frame in the rear.”

    Hear, hear, Joe. I agree completely. And your comments about the Tacoma point to why the Ford Ranger – despite its aging design – shouldn’t be on this list. It’s not as refined as it could be, of course, and Lord knows it’s far from perfect. But the Ranger is the real thing – a truck. In fact, I admire it for its honesty as a vehicle. I’m not making excuses for the Ranger’s shortcomings. But it’s not trying to pretend it’s anything other than what it is… while remaining remarkably economical, trouble-free and easy to live with on a daily basis. And, having owned one (4-cylinder, manual trans, 2WD, standard bed, standard cab) for the past four years and being a rather spirited driver, I have observed none of the tendency to roll over that an earlier poster wrote about.

    Also, I nominate anything from Volkswagen. There’s just no excuse for any modern vehicles from a first-world, industrialized nation to be so trouble-prone. Many vehicles from GM and Ford that are scorned by many on these boards look great by comparison – from a reliability standpoint.

  • avatar
    TomAnderson

    1) Jeep Compass: The Cimarron of Jeeps.
    2) “New” Ford Focus: To paraphrase a certain K. West, “FoMoCo doesn’t care about American compact buyers!”
    3) Subaru Impreza/WRX: From, uh, “distinctively styled” compact/hoonmobile to bloated Kia doppelgänger.
    4) Chrysler Sebring: Probably makes blind people wince.
    5) Ford Ranger/Mazda B-Series: Wait, they’re still around?
    6) Jeep Commander: Wrong vehicle, wrong time, wrong styling…just plain WRONG.
    7) Toyota Corolla: Has overstayed its welcome by at least two or three years.
    8) Pontiac Grand Prix: The pasture would be that-a-way.
    9) Saab 9-7X: Why’d they even bother putting the ignition switch on the console?
    10) Mitsubishi Galant: See Ranger/B-Series.

  • avatar
    UltimateX

    The CR-V, the previous generation was a decent if bland and underpowered. The new model is just ugly. The square roof line with the swooping effeminate greenhouse. Then you get to the front with the overhanging grill over grill, that from the side looks like some teeth were knocked out. Of course the lower grill looks like a retarded smile, so maybe that how the teeth got knocked out. It used to be a chick car, but now it is an ugly chick car.

  • avatar
    starlightmica

    KatiePuckrik:

    Too bad for you (and the rest of the world) that TWAT is limited to the USofA. I’m sure that the list of semifinalists would have to be quadrupled if we had a GlobalTWAT award, lots of nominees such as the Chery QQ which comes to mind.

    In highly modified form:
    Vectra -> Saturn Aura
    Avensis -> Scion tC

  • avatar
    carguy

    Looks like the Chrysler Sebring/Avenger is taking the 2008 TWATs by storm – a very impresive feat for a new model. Some great comments – makes me wonder how I neglected to nominate the new Scion xB, Maybach, Jaguar X-Type and even the M5/M6 – a lateral thinking nomination from brownie that I would have to agree with.

  • avatar
    amcadoo

    The Chevy Uplander is the ugliest car ever made.

    Agree with others on the new impreza, looks even worse, and has lost performance and quirk that its dedicated buyers sought. Bad choice. Don’t know if that makes it a ten worst.

  • avatar
    JJ

    Toyota Prius…A green car that is not really that green, bland to its metal bones and only bought by hollywood actors who think it’ll be good for their image and who drive about 5 miles in it before yet again turning to their Sclades.

    And of course by vegetarians…

    And maybe Al Gore…but he probably settles for a hybrid RX400h, which is even worse.

    Furthermore I’d like to show some support to the ones who nominated all chrysler products. Those interior plastics should be enough reason for anyone not to buy them.
    And they are killing Jeep.

  • avatar
    salokj

    I’m going to go with the Toyota Corolla as well, at least the base model. I know some people that have a few-year old Matrix with a stick, and I just assumed that all Corollas were like that. How how wrong. I drove one of these (2007 LT) for something like 800 miles this summer and what a POS. When GM whines about the “perception gap” they’re talking about this car and they are 100% correct. Throw some GM badges on this baby and 99% of the people would say “yep, Detroit still can’t make something that can compete.”

  • avatar
    Arkay

    Hummer H2

    Hummer H3

    Anything by Hummer really…including ALL FUTURE models

    Chrysler Sebring

    Cadillac Escalade

    Lincoln Navigator/Aviator

    Chrysler PT Cruiser

    Acura RL

    Maybach

    Mercedes-Benz G-class

    Chevrolet Uplander

  • avatar

    Dodge Caliber–the ugliest of the ugly, with no redeeming fun to drive or quality features.

  • avatar
    lawmonkey

    salokj – do you mean you got a bad Vibe? (although if GM/toyota don’t spend much effort differntiating the two, no reason why you should)

  • avatar
    NickR

    I nominate the entire Chrysler line-up

    So long as that is only one spot out of the ten, let’s not crowd out the other worthy contenders.

    Actually, if we are going to nominate entire line ups, in the luxury field I offer Jaguar (my Dad briefly owned an SS100 and an XK120, so it pains me to say it). But seriously, the X-type, the S-type, the ‘new’ XK (the worst length to interior room ratio since the Camaro), and the XJ (looks like the old one, still has no room, and sells in even smaller numbers!).

  • avatar
    Lichtronamo

    The Scion xB is a great nomination. Toyota managed to ruin in one update what made the original appealing – its like they had Honda Element envy or something (something!). Leaves the door wide open for Nissan to slide in with the Cube.

    As for nominations – the Saturn Aura. Finally making a competitive product does not make it a great product. Its basically the car the G6 should have been or at least would have been after a pretty significant mid-cycle update. Despite the accolades it received (including NACOY award), the Aura advanced nothing in the mid-size segment and isn’t really a better car than a 2002 Accord, much less the 2003-2007 and definately not the 2008. The Aura’s sales to date are reflective of its relevance(or lack thereof)in the market.

  • avatar

    I know the twat awards don’t work this way, but somehow Toyota should get a special Edsel award for killing the xB icon. (See Paul Niedermeyer’s paean to the real xB.)

  • avatar
    HEATHROI

    hey who killed the 350Z for 08 – and replaced it with a altima with 2 doors welded up? The 270 horses are good but through the front 2 wheels? and it looks much worse than the sedan, especially the butt. I nominate that.

  • avatar
    jayparry

    Assuming the Aerio, ION, Monte Carlo, Mark LT and Grand Prix are dying/dead…also FWIW i don’t think we should nominate trucks or SUVs simply because they are gas guzzling… there is a (shrinking) market out there for big trucks and we cant blame car companies for building them, just building bad ones.

    10. Honda Ridgeline
    9. Maybach 57/62
    8. Pontiac G6 Convertible
    7. Saab 9-5
    6. Scion XB
    5. Ford Ranger/Mazda B
    4. Chrysler Crossfire
    3. Chrysler Sebring/Dodge Avenger
    2. Jeep Compass
    1. Ford Focus

    In detail:
    Honda Ridgeline – Uni-body design in a body-on-frame market, V6 in a V8 market, overpriced, and bad styling both outside and in. I dont mind if a car company does something different but this is different for the sake of being worse. Buy it for the in-bed cooler. Or don’t and carry a cooler with you.
    Maybach 57/62 – A car and brand too pretentious even for its target audience. I think potential buyers are turned off by the snob factor…but also the exterior of the car is ugly, most people don’t know of the brand (I had heard of Bugatti before they returned) and it feels like you would be lonely at the top inside your austere Maybach.
    Pontiac G6 Convertible – An ugly car that was delayed to ‘finish’ the ugly top that works by completely destroying all cargo room. Reliability is in question and the interior (as on all G6s, a black plastic mess. They should have stuck to a softtop because the hard top is the reason not to buy this convertible.
    Saab 9-5 – The facelift that never should have been. Just let the old car solder on or take this one off your lineup. This facelift was akin to putting (chrome) lipstick on a pig and they are ruing brand equity for the promising 9-3.
    Scion XB – The least hip car they could have designed for the allegedly hip car brand. They basically took all the requests of the old people buying xBs into account. Not just bad cars but bad business decisions make my list. A bad business decision to unveil a great car, now thats a different story!
    Ford Ranger/Mazda B – Its STILL here. This is FoMoCo’s problem. Take a car that is doing good to great sales and let it rot on the vine well past its prime until everyone hates it (see Taurus, Escape and #1 on my list).
    Chrysler Crossfire – The only car (i believe) ever sold on overstock.com. I think most people have forgotten about this example of the bad Daimler/Chrysler marriage including any potential buyers. This was sloppy german seconds with sloppy american sheetmetal on top.
    Chrysler Sebring/Dodge Avenger – A lot has been said…I dont understand why they dont realize what people like about American bling is the big/brash attitude (read: big rims!) not the whispy hood strakes or disjointed details. I have been in the marketing focus groups and people are mean in there! I dunno how this was created, its the Aztec of midsize sedans.
    Jeep Compass – Again a lot has been said…making a small Jeep is a great idea, but making it a lame duck is not. The exterior looks pre-wrecked and the interior looks scary flimsy. Dynamics are horrible, its not brash enough to be urbanized and not outdoorsy enough to be jeep. It hurts the brand and my eyes. Bad execution, lets execute it.
    Ford Focus – Mainly because its such a slap in the face and shows what is wrong with Ford in our market. This is a poster child for a design that no one would want on a poster and Focus focus groups had to be brought in to try to fix it last minute. I would gladly pay the premium to drive a EU Focus over here and almost did in the form of the Mazda3 (but instead got a GTI). Terrible loss of focus for a once-great American compact.

  • avatar
    david42

    Chrysler Sebring sedan: I have found better-looking creations in the kitty litter box.

    BMW M5: It’s like they Bangled the powertrain, too.

  • avatar
    Buick61

    pfingst:

    The Aspen/Durango 4.7L V8 now makes over 300HP and gets better mileage.

    1. Chevy Uplander: Yes, there’s still a 2008 Model.
    2. Chrysler Sebring Sedan: This list wouldn’t be legitimate without it.
    3. Honda Ridgeline: They’re languishing in inventory for FIVE months on average.
    4. Subaru Impreza: They took out weird and added bland and ugly and neglected to add any power.
    5. Ford Taurus: Chrome and safety ratings won’t save this bull from the matador.
    6. Toyota FJ Cruiser: Toyota’s Aztek, with a weak front structure to boot.
    7. Jeep Compass: WHY WHY WHY WHY does this exist?
    8. Mercury Grand Marquis: A relic that parties like it’s 1979.
    9. Mercedes-Benz R-class. COME ON, why haven’t more than 3 people said this??
    10. Chevrolet Trailblazer: It wasn’t great in 2002, and adding a Corvette V8 doesn’t make up for the interior, quality, reliability, resale, and safety ratings.

  • avatar
    kansei

    Ones that I had not seen (Only read through page 2 of the comments)

    Hyundai Veracruz — the ‘bigger’ Hyundai SUV that is hardly larger than the 3-rows-of-seating Santa Fe

    Honda Civic –I still can’t get over the external appearance. Downright ghastly.

    Cadillac DTS – FWD, nuff said

    Nissan Murano – ugly styling that was futuristic and now just looks silly. It never was ‘right’.

    Mazda CX-9 –just bring over the new minivan you sell in japan already, but give it the 3.5/3.7 V6 as an optional motor for those who don’t want a highly turbocharged 4-cyl mill. The CX-9 is decidedly unsporty and pollutes the zoom zoom brand image.

    Mazda Tribute — now neutered to resemble the poor, ugly stepchild to the CX-7. A pitty, as it actually had relatively decent power and handling when it was first released. The hybrid model is the only saving grace, but why bother maintaining a badgejob cousin of the Ford Escape just for that?

  • avatar
    LamborghiniZ

    Saturn Ion: They still make this? Garbage through and through, awful styling, awful interior, bad dynamics. boooo.

    Chevy Impala: Generic in every way, ancient mechanicals, SS is a torque steer POS, lesser models are outclassed and bland as vanilla ice cream.

    Buick LaCrosse: Truly a pathetic offering. Simply awful fit and finish and interior materials, floaty ride, electric handling, no oomph, no NOTHING.

  • avatar
    JuniorMint

    I have waited for the 2007 TWAT nominations since the moment I laid eyes on the new Scion xB. Or should I say “xL.” I’ve never seen a vehicle LOSE headroom with a 20% weight gain.

    This car represents Toyota’s first zombie-like lurch toward filling GM’s much-lamented shoes: redesign a popular, iconic car based solely on the opinions of people who hate it. Toyota could have had the next Beetle, and instead they opted for a Rav4 with Scion badging on it. The xB gained the most rabidly loyal fans Toyota has had since the Supra was discontinued, and the new xB threw it all away.

    Worse mileage; worse interior space; still ugly, just not really all that different anymore. Turn a quirky little looker into just another CUV-wagon-thing. Nice work, Toyota…for a TWAT!

  • avatar
    Thagomizer

    Jeep Compass: A non-rugged Jeep that exists to eat away at Patriot sales.

    Smart Fortwo: A two-seater in the same price range as larger, more practical cars.

    Current GM Hybrids: Keep trying. Only mildly improved mileage compared to the competition.

    Mercury: For rule number three about badge-engineering. Exists as a new coat of paint on Ford models.

    Mustang: What a cheap, vinyl-ish interior.

    Hummer: Impractical considering more useful,similar products in GM’s lots.

  • avatar
    labrat

    Jeep SRT8 – Jeep needs a hot rod like Chevy needs an off-road Vette. More proof that Jeep has lost its direction.

    VW New Beetle – This is a car whose target market is 16 year old girly-girls. With auto mechanic daddies.

    Lincoln Town Car – Can Lincoln be charged with elder abuse for selling these?

    Maybach 62 – For billionaires with bad taste. Like Trump.

    Escalade EXT – C’mon, how many pimp farmers are there really?

    Lexus ES350, SC – What’s worse than bland? Expensive bland.

    BTW, if there were a TWAT trophy, what would it look like? (Old Subaru Tribeca grille, possibly)

  • avatar
    whatdoiknow1

    To understand why Toyota is able to continue selling all of those Corollas you need only spend about 15 minutes inside of a Colbalt, Calibur, or Kia! While The Corolla is definitely nothing to write home about it is still a very competent car that gets the job done and will last forever. There are many cars that are more fun and exciting but the Corolla does well by providing the buyer on a budget with piece of mind. Nothing more nothing less. If I needed to buy a car for local business I would hop on a Corolla deal in minute. In NYC Corollas are a dime a dozen, you will find at least 3 or 4 (all model years)on every block. You can’t go wrong with choicing a Corolla for basic transportation. On the other hand choosing form of function in the guise of a fashionable Mini or VW can and will break your heart and wallet in shortorder. Remember most urban folks do not have personal garages to store their non-working toys nor do we have much time to waste going back and forth to the dealer.

    The corolla is in no way a TWAT, it is to good at being a basic transportation appliance to be labeled as such. The Corolla know what its misson in life is and does it well.

    On the other hand I can agree with the nomination of the RX8. While it is in no way the worst car on the market it is still one confused bunny that can’t figure out what its mission or purpose is. Is it a sports car? If so it is quite under-powered and why does it have the back seats? It lacks sufficent luggage space to be a grand tourer for anything more than two, so why the back seats? Why the Rotary? The Rotary sucks in this application, it does not have enough torque to move this 3000lb car with any type of authority. Mazda actually has a much better engine for this car, the 2.3 turbo. But I guess a turbo four is not as “exotic” as a rotary.

    Note to Mazda: Install the Rotary in the MX5, make a fixed head hatch and call it an RX7! Install the 2.3 Turbo in the RX8 bump it up to 300hp. 300hp + 3000lbs= (I sure some of you guys can come up with some very interesting things to say here)
    Wow, Mazda you have instantly created a line of cars to go head to head with Porsche at HALF the price! All of us car nuts will LOVE you for it!

  • avatar
    umterp85

    Updated Nomination:

    I did not include the Chrysler Sebring in my initial nominations because I had not driven it. Well today I rented said car and it BELONGS on the list….maybe even the top because it is a brand new offering.

    Even a domestic bent person like me cannot make excuses for this car. It just plain stinks—-not one redeeming quality. Even the stereo is terrible.

  • avatar
    pfingst

    Buick61 :
    The Aspen/Durango 4.7L V8 now makes over 300HP and gets better mileage.

    You are correct, I was looking at the 2007 numbers. I therefore nominate the 2007 Aspen for being underpowered, thirsty, and ugly, and the 2008 Aspen for being ugly and only slightly less thirsty.

    The Durango sucks in either year.

  • avatar

    Caliber, Compass, Sebring, PT ugly, Nitro, Commander:
    What is it with them? Let me take the same ugly interior, same ugly exterior, use the ugliest gray plastic and someone will pay for it?
    What’s up with the rear end of the Caliber? Any 6 year old could do it better.
    One of these receive NOTHING in the “For” section in a recent consumer reports magazine, they simply couldn’t find ONE single good thing about it.

    Hummer:
    All of them simply make me sick.

    Toyota Prius:
    We need some REAL cars, if they want to save the planet, please, there are other better ways to do it; and if saving gas is what they are looking for, paying $6000 more on a weird design does not make any sense, we have plenty of other good cars costing much less.

    Saab, all of them:
    It’s about time to stop, if I want to feel like a pilot, I’ll buy myself an airplane, and if I really like the Impreza I can get it in ORIGINAL form for much less.
    I wonder how much Saab is paying all these movie producers showing an actor starting a car with the ignition in the WRONG place?

    BMW 7 series:
    In 2006 BMW came up with one of the best designs of any new car, the 3 series 2 door, specially the 335i, it’s a joy to look at almost from any angle.
    Now, the 7 is something that BMW should be ashamed of, no matter how many times they will update this ugly design, why can’t they start from scratch?
    For a car requiring a degree in computer science (I drive) and numerous reliability problems, the last thing you need is a design from hell.

  • avatar
    vento97

    Joe O:
    Volkswagon Golf – What exactly is a dirty, gas-guzzling 5-cylinder engine doing in an “entry-level” tossable people’s car anyway?

    You mean the gas guzzling 5 cylinder that is rated as a Partial Zero Emissions Vehicle by the EPA?

    Gas guzzling, I agree. Dirty? You’ll have to take up that issue with the EPA…

  • avatar
    BobJava

    In its defense, the Ranger/B-series is still the best small truck on the market … if only because it’s the ONLY small truck on the market.

    But you see my point, perhaps. It has a purpose and market segment which no other company will bother to address (not that Ford has done much lately, but still).

    In any case, that alone should keep it from the TWAT.

    And the ES350 and Corolla? Let’s reFocus. Boring and bland isn’t sufficient … it’s not even TWAT necessary! The ES has no FWD luxo equal (even if it offends the enthusiasts’ sensibilities). The Corolla will get you there and back a thousand times over (and still give you a decent return when you sell it). We could name TWENTY small cars that can’t do the same … actually almost anything but the Civic qualifies.

  • avatar
    Lumbergh21

    William C Montgomery :
    October 15th, 2007 at 3:08 pm

    Ford Mustang: There, I said it! (Sorry Sajeev.) The new body style was such a breath of fresh air when it was new. Now it is about as fresh as a year old fart beaten out of an old couch cushion. The handling is primitive, ride crude, and interior astoundingly low-rent.

    Yeah, but it sounds great.

    I’m assuming you got at least the GT. The 6 cylinder Mustang kind of defeats the whole purpose of buying a “muscle car”, afterall; that being having a car with “muscle.”

  • avatar
    nicke

    Maybach. Why oh why? It’s ugly, useless and mildy different than the S500. Please Mercedes, take this brand out back and shoot it… I can’t figure out why Mercedes think they need a Mercury of their own?
    ___

    Any Bangle derived BMW, especially one with I-Drive…

    ____

    And my nominations of the stoopid bloated if it aint broke break-it nominations…

    The new Impreza… Saw one on the road yesterday, and it’s as ugly as the press shots promised. It had a nice “Korean” or “new fangled car manufacturer” feel to it. Can’t wait not to drive that one.

    Mini V2. Bigger, softer, duller and who decided that the speedo need to be bigger than an original Mini wheel?

    Scion Xb, the first one was not my fav, but it had a cool quirkiness. The new one BLAH!

    VW Golf. Could it get any bigger and still be a “small” car?

    ____

    My why oh why nominees:

    Jeep Commander and or any non-trail worthy Jeep. But since 90% of the owners seem to be posers, I guess its a logical growth path.

    SAAB 9-7

    All Hybrid SUVs

  • avatar

    Dodge Nitro – Because I can’t even see the name on a billboard without giggling cruelly.

    Lincoln Mark Z – Not so much “near-luxury” as “cry for help.” When I see one (rarely!) I have an overwhelming urge to take the owner aside and ask if everything’s okay at home.

    The longer-lower-wider Scion xB – Memo to Toyota: Harley Earl is dead.

    Scion xD – Memo to Toyota, part 2: Being as big as GM doesn’t have to mean being as dumb as GM, does it?

    Mercedes S-class – Didn’t Mercedes used to be tasteful?

  • avatar
    Nemphre

    The Lamborghini Reventon – Now you can throw obscene amounts of money down the drain without clogging up the sink! Proof that money can’t buy you a brain, and that exotic makes aren’t selling cars, they’re selling badges and snob appeal.

  • avatar
    slateslate

    Sebring, sebring, sebring! the people are speaking.

  • avatar
    sfl2113

    I haven’t had time to read all the nominations, but I nominate:

    1. PONTIAC GRAND PRIX- I never used to think that this was such a horrible example of an American rental car. Until I drove one for a few hours at night. There is absolutely no padding on the driver’s left armrest, the mirrors have no tint at all, so bad that i had to hold my hand in front of the mirror to avoid going blind, which made the no-pad armrest worse. Trunk hinges that stick down into the trunk – I had a lot of baggage with me. Japanese economy cars figured that out years ago. The seat wouldn’t lock in place, so the backrest was leaned way too far back for my driving position. The odometer takes a strange prominent position right in the middle of the dash above the radio. This would have been an average car 10 years ago. It doesn’t cut it in 2007. Thankfully it’s being put out to pasture soon enough, but they will still fill the rental fleets for years to come.

    2. 2003-2007 CADILLAC CTS – I like the way it drives, but can GM really expect to sell these when people cross-shop them with BMWs, Mercedes, Audis, and Lexi? This has the most craptastic interior I have ever spent time in. One glaringly obvious miscue is that it has the exact same turn signal stalk as every Cobalt, Malibu, Impala, LeSabre, Lacrosse, and Grand Prix I’ve ever rented. The dash material is also the same one with the same pattern that’s on the Grand Prix. Everything creaks when you press on it, there’s not a piece of wood or shiny stuff in sight, and the parts that aren’t Grand Prix-level vinyl is hard plastic. It’s too bad, since I really like the styling. Hopefully the 2008 redesign has fixed the interior up.

    3. 2008 FORD FOCUS – How hard could it possibly be to sell the C1 Focus in America? Mazda and Volvo do it profitably. Why can’t they just build the C1 Focus here? The original Focus was a good car for its time, but 10 years after the fact on the same platform don’t make it look so great anymore. What were they thinking with the 2008 redesign? The interior doesn’t look bad (I’m sure that’s only in press photos though) but the exterior is a step behind the Escort. But it’s got a chrome grille and fender vents, so everything is OK. Where’s the 2008 hatchback? Ford would be selling the C1 European Focus like hotcakes if they brought it here.

    4. TOYOTA COROLLA – Lest y’all think I only dislike American cars, the Toyota Corolla makes my list too. Seriously, the only reason anybody would buy this car new is because of the name. I don’t know how they can even sell these on the same lot as the Yaris. The driving position is awkward, the exterior does nothing for anybody, the interior looks straight outta 1996 (but at least it appears to be screwed together well, possible better than the CTS). This has been on sale almost as long as the C170 Focus, and it looks it. Even the new Corolla on sale in Japan looks bland, although it at least looks like it was designed in this century

  • avatar
    jthorner

    The Honda Ridgeline is certainly ugly, but it isn’t a TWAT. Think of it as the modern incarnation of the market once served by the ElCamino and Ranchero. A comfortable car-like interior combined with a light duty utility hauling bed. This is for picking up a load of plants at the nursery, taking the mountain bikes up to the mountains and that sort of thing. It isn’t supposed to replace a real pickup truck for real pickup truck service …. but then again in recent times many if not most of the pickup truck buyers didn’t buy them to haul loads of bricks or pull 10,000 lb. trailers.

    Now if only Ridgeline looked as good as a 1967 El Camino!

  • avatar
    casper00

    Here are mine list.

    1. Mercedec Benz G-class : Ugly like hell, took a page right out of LandRover.

    2. LandRovers – all of them, box cars that cost a fortune.

    3. Scion xA and xB – don’t know what toyota was trying to accomplish.

    4. Toyota FJ Cruiser – Saw them on the world and say to my self what the f**k is that thing.

    5. Mini Cooper – another car that look like it came from outerspace.

    6. Chrysler Sebring – what the hell happen….

    7. New WRX – I don’t even want to start….

    8. Chevy Impela – please retired this car

    9. Ford Taures – Ford’s making some “one” happy…

    10. Rolls Royce – Phamtom – car that cost more than houses, this car belongs in a cemetary, not the streets….

  • avatar
    Johnster

    So many bad cars, so much time for them to be produced.

    1. Chevrolet Uplander
    2. Chrysler Sebring/Dodge Avenger
    3. Dodge Ram Pickup
    4. International CXT/RXT/MXT Pickup
    5. Jaguar X-Type
    6. Pontiac Grand Prix
    7. Dodge Caliber/Jeep Compass/Jeep Patriot
    8. Chevrolet TrailBlazer/GMC Envoy/Isuzu Ascender/Saab 9-7X
    9. Chevrolet Colorado/GMC Canyon/Isuzu Pickup
    10. Ford Explorer Sport-Trac

  • avatar
    davey49

    I’ll nominate
    2008 Ford Focus for being hideous
    2008 Saturn Astra for being a dumb idea
    2008 Saturn Sky/Pontiac Solstice for being useless
    2008 Subaru Tribeca- because it looks like a Chrysler

  • avatar
    xantia10000

    Brilliant Ford management seems like they’d rather go play golf than design cars…

    I could imagine these types of conversations in halls of Dearborn:

    “Hey guys – remember how we still build the Ranger and Grand Marquis and Town Car… well, I was thinking, we should probably get around to redesigning them… Just kidding! Let’s go get wasted. You thought I was serious for a moment, didn’t you…”

    Ford executive: “Ok guys, time to redesign the Focus. Let’s do what we usually do and just reskin it and put in a cheaper instrument panel and call it a day. Oh, and get rid of those weird-looking hatchbacks and wagon. This is America, nobody drives those little shitboxes.”

    Smart Ford employee: “Wait, sir, why don’t we tool the European Focus in North America – the design’s already done and it looks and drives great!”

    Ford executive: “This is Detroit, not Europe. Now get to work and leave me alone! I need to sit idly at my desk for the next 10 hours so I can get overtime to afford my Bloomfield Hills mortgage and my cottage up north and my new boat.”

    “Man, I’m so tired of all that work designing the Fusion. I’m _so_ not in the mood to design another one… but the 500 is looking all dull and in need of something”

    “Yeah I totally agree… Why don’t we just scrape off the ‘500’ badge and instead write ‘Taurus’ on the trunk lid and call it a day?

    “Sweet idea – wanna go play 18?”

    So I vote for:
    1. Mark LT (gotta be the dumbest vehicle concept since the Blackwood and SSR)
    2. Focus (The worst automotive riches-to-rags story of all time)
    3. Escape (Interior so cheap they’d probably VE out the steering wheel if they could)
    4. Expedition (Plastic chrome rims say it all)
    5. Taurus (Oh wait, _this_ is the worst automotive riches-to-rags story of all time)
    6. Grand Marquis/Town Car (designed before I was born… and I’m almost 30!)
    7. Ranger/B4000 (even the Thais get a new one…)

    “But wait, there’s less!”

    8. Dodge Caliber/Jeep Compass/Jeep Patriot – Chrysler challenged its interior stylists: “we want the best design you can come up with using only two things: a light grey marker and a 12-inch ruler. It’s ok if it looks like crap cuz just wait ’til you see the challenge we have in store for the materials department.”

    9. Chrysler Sebring/Dodge Avenger – Chrysler sells 84% of Avengers to fleets. Maybe that’s cuz _nobody_ will actually pay for one of these.

    10. Dodge Durango/Chrysler Aspen – Big, slow, thirsty, cheaply-built, ugly, ill-handling. Excellent support for birth control.

    11. Pontiac G5 – What’s the point of this thing again?

    12. Toyota Corolla S – Sporty! I love how the 15″ wheels with plastic hubcaps are set so inboard compared to the Pep Boys plastic side skirts. Extra points for legendary Toyota handling!

    13. Lexus SC430 – It handles like… a Toyota. It looks like… a sea cow.

  • avatar
    davey49

    To counteract all the Ford Ranger haters I’ll nominate the Toyota Tacoma Double cab 4wd. Because a truck is supposed to be for work not posing and driving around your frat buddies.

  • avatar
    maxspivak

    Toyota Camry – I got this as a service loaner. Camry is supposed to be a car that appeals to the every-man. Well, it’s so bad, in so many ways, that I don’t understand how it can by used by any man (or woman). It’s a boring and bland road appliance, but that’s just the beginning of its sins.

    Its ride is soft but not supple. It rolls on turns and makes you feel all road imperfections.

    Its motor is a wheezing geezer.

    Its interior is beige-bland with random light-teal lighting accents. I haven’t sat in seats this bad.

    Its exterior is a bad caricature of Bangled 5-series and Japanese faceless car.

    It amazed me how much it sucks…

  • avatar
    y2kdcar

    Toyota Corolla — Harry Potter fans will recognize this car as the automotive equivalent of a dementor’s kiss. Driving it sucks the very soul out of you.

    Chrysler Sebring / Dodge Avenger — ugly and thoroughly mediocre. What’s not to dislike?

    Ford Taurus / Mercury Sable — the name change and powertrain upgrades can’t conceal the fact that these are bland, boring old-fartmobiles that desecrate the memory of the ground-breaking 1986 Taurus and Sable.

    Toyota Camry — all the soul-sucking blandness of the Corolla in a wrapper that screams ugly.

  • avatar
    Matt from OH

    Wow! What a list!

    Here are some of my nominations

    1. I’ll third the nomination of the entire DCX lineup…the most clueless and out of touch with market realities today. they have exactly ONE hit…the 4 door Wrangler. Lets let our few good vehicles rot on the vine and replace them with badge engineered crap…

    2. I’ll nominate ALL CUV’s. Hmmm…let’s take a STATION WAGON, put it on stilts, add AWD and a mostly useless third row seat and call it good. What do these vehicles do SO much better than a well executed sedan/wagon, minivan, or real truck. Really nothing… How much better is a Pilot than an Odyssey or the missing Accord wagon. Same with CR-V, VUE, RX350, Highlander, X5,CX7…. If you want to tow or go off road, get a real truck. If you need to schlep seven people around, bite the bullet and get a minivan or a Suburban. You actually like to drive, get a sedan and a $30 roof bag for vacation time.

    3. Mitsubishi Eclipse – a sport coupe that’s not fun to drive. The Disco era had the 280ZX and now we have our version of it in the Gangsta Rap era…

    4. Chevy Cobalt/Pontiac G5 – they used the Mk 4 Jetta as a benchmark and made sure they put all the crappy elements of that car into the Cobalt…useless rear seat and worse than par realiability. At least it’s better than the Cavalier…

  • avatar
    lprocter1982

    Heres my nominations (apologies if they’ve been mentioned already):

    Chrysler Sebring – a ratteling, boring, useless waste of natural resources… if I owned a rental company, I wouldn’t stock this car.

    BMWs with I-Drive – another piece of technology that is rendered useless by it’s complexity to all but the guys that designed it…

    Smart Fourtwo – an ugly, small, useless, expensive, ugly and slow ‘car.’ Did I mention I think it’s ugly? A motorcycle is more practical, and a Hyundai Accent gets better mileage, can hold more, and costs less. By the way, it’s been for sale in Canada for a couple years now, so I think it qualifies.

    Chrysler Aspen – another overpriced, overpowered, unloved and unbought monster from Chrysler’s “What the Hell Where You Thinking?!” division.

  • avatar
    rudiger

    Chevrolet Aveo5
    Hummer H2
    Buick Rendezvous
    Lincoln Mark LT
    Ford Focus
    Toyota FJ Cruiser
    Chrysler Aspen
    Jeep Commander
    Dodge Nitro
    Smart ForTwo

  • avatar
    jeremy5000

    Anything from Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep would get my vote. I would have to say their worst offering in my mind is the Dodge Avenger though, just because it’s an attempt to sell the Sebring as an exciting car.

  • avatar
    r129

    I’ll spend the most time on the 2008 Focus, because I find it the most offensive candidate.

    2008 Ford Focus: It’s bad enough that we’re not getting a Focus on the new platform, but with this car, they’ve taken everything that was good about the old Focus and thrown it in the trash. No more hatchbacks or wagon, no more uplevel engine, but we do get an oddly proportioned two door sedan. This is essentially the same move Ford made back in 1997 when they redesigned the Escort.

    The interior looks pretty good in photos, but the fabrics and some of the plastics actually feel cheaper than the old model’s. And this update cost Ford how much? I think if they’d just stuck the new dash with Sync into the old Focus, I’d have been more likely to buy one. Even worse, Ford seems to be confused about whether the car is on sale yet. If you visit Ford’s website, it’s listed as “coming soon” and you can’t search dealer inventory. If I drive down to my local Ford dealer, there are several 2008 Focuses on the lot.

    If all the above reasons weren’t convincing enough, the Focus also has the worst ad copy in recent memory:

    “You remember Focus, right? It debuted as the little car with the perky techno soul. Well now, that vehicle with zippy performance and the glow stick attitude has gone techie. That’s right, from techno to techie. Excited yet?”

    Other Candidates…

    Jeep Compass: What more can I add that hasn’t already been said? At least the Patriot has that mini-Cherokee look going for it.

    Chrysler Sebring: The only car that can make the Dodge Avenger look good by comparison. At least you can tell who the target market for the Avenger was, but who exactly is the Sebring aiming for? Mr. Magoo?

    Mitsubishi Galant: Everything that’s dynamically wrong with the Sebring in an older, less fully featured package with a shorter warranty. This car has only one purpose: to take up the slack at Enterprise and Hertz now that GM and Ford have reduced their fleet sales.

    Mitsubishi Eclipse: Essentially, a less practical Chevy Monte Carlo. Nobody wants one, not even the people who bought the last version.

    Toyota Corolla: Just how unreliable is the competition? Is it really THAT unreliable? If this thing wasn’t a Toyota, it would be ripped to shreds, and everyone who’s driven one knows it.

    Chrysler PT Cruiser: Lackluster engine, terrible fuel economy for the class, it hasn’t been cool since 2001, it will never be cool again, and there’s no way to effectively redesign it. At least it’s available as a convertible.

    VW New Beetle: Lackluster engine, terrible fuel economy for the class, it hasn’t been cool since 1998, it will never be cool again, and there’s no way to effectively redesign it. At least it’s available as a convertible. Less practical and less reliable than the PT Cruiser, plus the PT still offers a turbo model.

    Chevrolet Uplander: I can’t believe they’re actually producing a 2008 model.

    Pontiac Grand Prix: I can’t believe they’re actually producing a 2008 model.

  • avatar
    Point Given

    It’s back again yay!

    1. Ford Ranger/Mazda truck thing….outdated design and failing in teh small truck segment (AND IT’S THE ONLY PRODUCT IN THAT SALES SILO)

    2. Jeep Compass – A brand destroyer, butt ugly. Foolish error.

    3. Sebring – Ugly, might as well admit it’s for the rental car segment and surrender pure retail sales. It’s that bad.

    4. Kia Amanti – Designed for an 80 year old, at least there will be few repeat sales at that age group.

    5. Chevy HHR – the pt me2. ugly design, slow seller introduced about 5 years too late.

    6. Jeep Commander, Chrysler Aspen, Chrysler Pacifica….pound on poor old dodge/chrysler/jeep. Bad designs and refusing to kill them.

  • avatar
    Sanman111

    Well, I have to agree with a lot what has already been said

    #1 goes to the Chrysler line up – With the exception of a couple of Jeep products, I didn’t think a company could be so thoroughly uncompetive product-wise on so many levels. They proved me wrong.

    #2 Mitsubishi (except the lancer/EVO) – Giving Chrysler a run for its money.

    #3 Subaru WRX – I know cars have mistaken this and a suzuki forenza. Also, why did they decide to leave the car as is and make the handling worse.

    #4 Toyota Corolla – As much as I am a fan of these cars, Toyota has left it for dead.

  • avatar
    jaje

    What’s with all the Ridgeline haters? It is designed for the majority of retail truck buyers. Those who replace normal cars with the manly pickup image. But instead of 15mpg you get 19mpg, car handling and agility, safety, and a half truck bed utility. Dissing it b/c it offers an reality check alternative to a full blown gas guzzler truck is short sighted. Tell me how my many neighbor’s brand new always clean RAM 1500, Harley Davidson F150 Diesel, and F150 have hauled one load of mulch or small assortment 2x4x8s, or even towed a small 1000lb 2wheel trailer with a HD motorcycle, and never seen off road. The Ridgeline will do that easily, get better mpg and have safer on road manners. Plus it’s just a better daily driver for managing traffic and parking lots.

    The Ranger is a absolutely fine pickup for those who need the ruggedness without the 2000lb extra size and mass. I don’t know anyone who bought one retail so these are mainly gobbled up by fleets. But why is this one get blasted so much. It was and remains a simple appliance. I can’t see a TWAT for a cheap applicance that does all it was intended for.

    PS – I own a GM 2500HD pickup to pull a 8000lb trailer with my racecar & all my gear – so I understand the purpose and use of a real pickup – often have to pull stuff out at the farm in the mud so need real 4×4 capability. But just buying a truck for the “image” of having a full on truck is just stupid when you can get the utility in a much more efficient package. Heck a small CUV or minivan will do everything 50% of truck buyers need.

  • avatar
    Robert Schwartz

    I am going to take a radical position. I think it is almost impossible to pick out the 10 worst cars. I think we should concentrate on identifying 10 good ones.

    Take Toyota as an example. For the most part they make pretty good machinery — except that everything they have brought out in the past 3 years has been UGLY, really, really, UGLY.

    Or, Honda. I am very fond of my 2002 Accord. Unfortunately the new Accord has turned fat. They also make some incomprehensible vehicles. The Ridgeline? Why? It is not a truck. It is not a car. And it is ugly.

    The Germans should be barred from installing electronics in their vehicles. They have also led the international uglification campaign. And their build quality has gone way down hill.

    There are hundreds of candidates for ten worst. The real problem is that there are very few candidates for “car I wouldn’t mind owning”, or “car I would like to buy”.

  • avatar
    Mrb00st

    Chrysler Sebring – there are few cars out there that make me long for the gorgeous (by comparison) looks of the previous-generation Sebring. Err, this is one of them.

    Also, Dodge Avenger. Holy crap. Both of these cars are so poorly proportioned, i literally cringe everytime I see one drive by. The avenger looks slack-jawed, and that little black piece of plastic they stick at the corner of the back windows just makes the car uglier. It’s there for no reason. The available powertrains range from unrefined and unbelievably underpowered to… unrefined and still behind the times in both power and fuel economy.

    Mitsubishi Raider – I saw one of these yesterday and realized “oh shit, they still make these!” I hate this car for a few reasons. One, it’s completely heinous – actually UGLIER than it’s twin, the Dodge Dakota (whoa, they still make those?) Also, if you’re going to make a truck (and why, Mitsubishi?) why base it off of such an awful piece of crap? I don’t believe a Raider has ever left a dealer lot at MSRP. Ever. They month they came out they had 4 grand on the hood. What’s the point of making it? Grrrr….

    Dodge Caliber. Again with the awful proportions – way too narrow and tall – in my eyes, it’s the spiritual successor to the Toyota Echo. Disappointing powertrain, rubbermaid interior, 1980’s NVH levels… who would buy one? Oh, Hertz.

    Buick LaCrosse – seriously? why is this still in production? It was garbage when it was new. Although the new V8 hot-rod version might be it’s saving grace. Talk about a sleeper. But actually they need a new Grand National. It’s telling that the last car Buick made that was remotely interesting went out of production the year i was born. Seriously now.

    Jeep Compass – Okay, I’m beating a dead horse. But Chrysler please take this lame steed out behind the barn and shoot it. Twice. Utter carbage.

    and now for some off-the-wall controversial nominations.

    New style Subaru WRX – how did they take one of the most fun cars in America, and make it ugly and boring to drive all in one fell swoop?* (exception: new STI.)

    Hummer H2: Please kill it on principle. America doese not need this. This is one of the reasons why everyone else hates us. Seriously.

    Toyota Corolla: It’s time to replace the charmless grandpa of a car. If they don’t replace it soon, I will. Get rid of it. Replace with something fun to drive! Hey, Toyota! Imagine… fun to drive!

    new Scion xB: Toyota is playing GM very well these days… designing cars to “general american tastes” rather than designing cars intelligently. The main appeal of the old xB was it’s odd shape, fun-to-drive qoutient (despite being slow, the old one was a hoot! …seriously!), great gas mileage, low price, low insurance, and just generally it’s “differentness.” All that remains of the new one is… it looks weird. Not good weird like the old one, which said “it’s ok to be square.” the new one looks like it’s just awkward, timid to be square – “let’s round the edges a bit, smooth this and that up… make this square look smooth!” I really dislike this car.

  • avatar

    @ Robert Schwartz:

    TTAC has the TBAG.

  • avatar
    alanp

    I don’t think I’ve seen a specific nomination for the Colbalt. I had the misfortune to have one foisted upon me as a rental, and it was astonishing how poor it was in every way – though it’s bland looks didn’t particularly offend or even warn of the mediocrity that lurked inside.

    As far as looks the Infiniti FX series is so squashed and misshapen that it reminds me of a Gremlin – only without ANY cuteness or redeeming styling. Sort of a rounded Aztec – at twice the price.

  • avatar

    The Z4 must be on the list for design that totally ruins an otherwise very competent chassis.

    Escalade EXT is on par with the Lincoln LT, without even being a useful pick-em-up truck.

    Corolla, despite its bullet-proof nature, is an ugly bar of soap.

    Lexus SC – even though it’s been around for a few years, I see one and it still screams “What were they thinking?”

  • avatar
    bleach

    I love these TWAT threads. So many choices…

    Actually driven:
    Acura RL – An Accord that makes you pay an extra $25K for AWD and gadgets
    Lincoln MKZ – Ugly in and out with a disgusting dash texture that makes the windshield look zit faced in daylight
    Chevy HHR – Embarrasing drive in a fat PT Cruiser
    Dodge Caliber – A child of the Aztec that made me feel like I was 15
    Pontiac Grand Prix – Always surprises me how small it is inside given its big footprint and I end up with these a lot at National
    Cadillac XLR non-V – Just OK all around so not okay for the $80K price tag. Give me a corvette.
    VW EOS – Terrible profile and somehow neuters the 2.0T/DSG combo

    Not driven but can’t stand the sight of:
    Chevy Aveo
    Land Rover LR3 – From the side it looks like it was made from 2 different sets of legos, but that rear is even worse.
    And of course the Sebring/Charger

  • avatar
    mrcknievel

    Chrysler Sebring – To be fair, both that I’ve driven were rentals..but I felt molested…just freakin awful.

    Dodge Avenger – yet another failed attempt to capitalize on the design of a successful vehicle by Chrysberus. At least they stuck to the Charger design in spirt..while the Sebring managed to completely avoid channeling ANY of the good things that made the 300 a hit.

    Jeep Compass/Patriot – The Jeep products that I refuse to believe anyone was waiting for.

    Jeep Commander – fugly, unwanted, unneeded and I can honestly say I’ve only seen ONE of these in the last few years..and I just stared at it like a platypus was riding by on a unicycle eating a funnel cake.

    And ummmm…why in the HELL are they still making PT Cruisers? The last “new” ones I saw were given away as courtesy vehicles for visiting foreign military folks…and I wouldn’t be surprised if thats the reason our foreign policy is in the dumps.

  • avatar
    jurisb

    i can`t think of a single reason why tribeca should be on the infamous list.

  • avatar
    Clargnblost

    Before I give my grand-poobah nomination for ugliest vehicle on the market – I’d like to give special mention to a SUV with everything going for it (including good looks) until that one moron in the meeting at Acura insisted on adorning their MDX with that fricken’ obnoxious snow-plow for a grille. This vehicle looks terrific from every angle until you get to the, uh, crap, front, damn, tsk, tsk. It’s as if the designers at Acura finished it all up and it looked great, then said moron entered the room and said “it needs a little more Pontiac Aztec to it.” So – they quickly bolted that shovel on the front and headed home for the day.

    Ok, enough of that – sorry, but I get frustrated every time I see one on the road.

    I’ve given some thought to this and pound for point the winner in my mind is the:

    Mitsubishi Raider

    The folks at Mitsubishi must have decided that the Dodge Dakota wasn’t quite ugly enough for them so they somehow found an even more unattractive way to bend the sheet metal. I’d pay to see the look on the Mitsu dealers face when these things rolled off the carrier into their showroom for the first time. “Good luck with that” says the distributor as he drives away.

    Perhaps you haven’t seen one of these on the road? They are quite rare, except on the dealer lot – where there are *plenty*.

  • avatar
    AKM

    Jeep Compass – Okay, I’m beating a dead horse. But Chrysler please take this lame steed out behind the barn and shoot it. Twice. Utter carbage.

    About the Compass: there’s one in my parking lot. It has a sticked with “JRZ Grrl” on it. ‘Nuff said (and I’m from NJ).

  • avatar
    guyincognito

    I have to add a few.

    Lincoln Mark LT – I actually didn’t realize this was still for sale.

    Jaguar X-Type – I’m embarrassed to admit I actually owned this vehicle (although only for a year and I got it really really cheap). It has horrible quality, the worst handling awd vehicle ever made, materials that would feel cheap in a Focus, the worst stereo ever with $1100 cd player option (when I got it), best in class acceleration 0-2mph and then worst in class by far after that, an insult to everything Jaguar is, was, or could be. I would have nominated this earlier but I didn’t realize this was still for sale either.

    VW Beatle Convertible – If the constant squeaking from the top rubbing against the windows doesn’t drive you insane, the scary driving dynamics, the soon to crap out transmission, the 18 wheeler swallowing blind spots, or the total lack of forward motivation surely will.

    I would also like to nominate the entire Chrysler lineup rather than the individual Chrysler products I previously nominated.

  • avatar

    Jeep Compass – Driving dynamics are miserable, badge engineered disaster – and worst of all, it dilutes the jeep brand image – a SOFT ROAD Jeep? Come on!

    Chrysler Sebring – This thing is just hideous. Its ugly. It drives like crap. Its consigned to rental fleet depreciation hell. You’d be out of your mind to buy one.

    BMW 3-Series – I can’t stress how much I hate this car and how much it has diluted the BMW brand. I’ve driven the 335i and 328xi (loaners for when my superb Z4 is in the shop). All of the new 3-series have this numb steering feel that really isolates the driver – its a shame because the old 3-series was such a driver’s car with so much feedback – you really knew what the front wheels are doing.
    In BMW’s attempt to appeal to the masses, they’ve created a bland car that has alienated consumers. Driving the new 3-series is as exciting as driving a Toyota Camry. The car does everything absolutely perfectly, but delivers no joy, and to me, that tarnishes the entire image of the 3-series line. (As you can tell, I loved the old E30, E36, and even the E46 to a degree, and feel like the new E90 is a betrayal to the BMW faithful as an appeasement to yuppies).

  • avatar
    theflyersfan

    There are so many to choose from and there will probably add a small list later, but I’m in the mood to rant about my nomination of the Toyota Prius.
    In addition to looking like the crashed UFO that did a header into Chicago’s Soldier Field, to keep costs down, Toyota keeps stripping standard features. But I believe this car should be nominated on the pure basis of the business ethics of Toyota and how they played the Prius card to us. I remember with the first generation Prius (the one that was so ugly it made eyes water), Toyota was playing the Honda Insight game and introduced it as a testing of the waters. When Gen II (in America) came out, the production numbers were still small but the green image was already put into play. It has been proven time and time again that Toyota had no intention of being seen as a green-friendly company but when they saw all of the positive press, they ran with that image as far as it would take them.
    Toyota has used this smokescreen to introduce a horribly overweight and guzzling Tundra, the Scion xB that put on a few pounds at the cost of over 25% poorer economy, the bloated Highlander and RAV4, and kept the Sequoia around. Does this sound like a green company? No. However, with the Prius halo-effect, most consumers don’t seem to care.
    If it wasn’t for the Prius, Toyota would probably be in a constant battle with the government and environmentalists much like Ford was forced with when they released the Excursion in addition to their huge SUVs…and look where Ford is today.
    Oh yeah Toyota – how about the life span of those battery packs? Good luck keeping the halo glowing when those time bombs have to be chucked.
    I have a few more to nominate, but in terms of perception – people believe the Prius to be a great and Earth-friendly car, but the reality is the opposite – this hopefully will win hands-down…plus, isn’t the Compass and Sebring too easy of a target? (They are just junk in the Yugo sense of junk!)

  • avatar
    dolo54

    @ Sajeev – The “new” Focus is deserving of a TWAT, not because it won’t drive as well as when it actually was new, but because it represents everything that is wrong with GM, i.e., taking a 8-year old design, not doing anything to it except making it even uglier and cheaper than before and then trying to pass it off as a new offering. Oh, and to add insult to injury, selling an amazing euro only version that everybody stateside would rather get instead.

    I’ve driven several IONs unfortunately and they are extremely TWAT-worthy. The absolute worst-quality, worst-handling, scariest, most uncomfortable car I’ve ever been in.

    And Avenger… another pathetic TWAT.

    Someone nominated a Saturn VUE. I was in one recently and it’s actually pretty nice. Of course that’s because it’s an Opel, but it’s not a TWAT. Sure we don’t need another SUV, but it’s better than many.

  • avatar
    paholler

    I wish to nominate the Suzuki Forenza and, for that matter, most of the Suzuki line. The Forenza is underpowered, poorly designed, engineered, and constructed.

    I see more parts falling off of these “new” cars while driving down the road than I can count.

    Not to mention they have lured people into buying this piece of junk with low payments ($99 a month) spread out over a period of time that well exceeds how long the car will last.

  • avatar
    fordtrucks

    I would like to nominate the:
    New Toyota Tundra for making a mockery of fullsize truck
    The Chevy Coblat because have you seen that wing on the SS

  • avatar
    the_stig

    Lincoln Navigator for extroverted misuse of shiny metals.

    Dodge Caliber for looking like a tarted up 1988 Omni.

    Subaru Impreza for looking like an Optra5.

    Ford 500/Taurus for identity crisis name change and dull, anonymous styling.

  • avatar
    Kman

    Jeep Compass: Like a certain president whose middle initial sounds like “double-Q”, the Compass is destroying a strong reputation built over decades, in a matter of 2-3 years.

    Hummer H3: Get an H2 already.

    Hummer H2: Get some Viagra already [(c)akatsuki]

    Chrysler Sebring: The most cobbled-together design since… ? And it makes sure to back it up with utter automotive incompetence.

    Dodge Avenger: I give it a separate nomination for: the biggest marketing lie of today, implied as a tough, sporty, powerful Dodge, when it is nothing but a Sebring (see above).

    I was going to nominate the new Impreza, as I loathe it, but I have a concern that it might grow on all of us a little, to the point of “really dont’ like it”… which is better than “loathe” and off TWAT.

    Dodge Caliber: selling the sizzle (“refrigerated glove compartment”), without any steak to back it up (clompy ride, poor build, drives like crap, heavy). Also: get an H3 already (see H3 above, follow path)

  • avatar
    Sajeev Mehta

    @ Sajeev – The “new” Focus is deserving of a TWAT, not because it won’t drive as well as when it actually was new, but because it represents everything that is wrong…

    dolo: the phrase “won’t drive as well” proves my point. I’m all about panning the Focus for its heritage (see my editorial on it) but you can’t shoot something down that hasn’t had a chance to earn your (and your peers) admiration/hatred.

    I sat in a pre-production Focus at the auto show a while back. It didn’t horrify me like the Sebring, it was just as mediocre as many Japanese offerings.

    I’m not saying the Focus is a good car, I’m saying you cannot judge a book by its cover.

    Let people drive them first.

  • avatar
    Lumbergh21

    dolo54 :
    October 16th, 2007 at 9:53 am

    Someone nominated a Saturn VUE. I was in one recently and it’s actually pretty nice. Of course that’s because it’s an Opel, but it’s not a TWAT. Sure we don’t need another SUV, but it’s better than many.

    I owned a Saturn the first year that they came out. Maybe the new generation is better, but try living with one. Test drive, it was just fine. However, slowly but surely, it sucks the life out of you. You begin to dread getting in the car a nd driving it anywhere, until the day you drive it to the dealer and buy a new car. Some good ideas, but poor execution, poor build “quality”, and poor components.

    While I have had some problems with the ’04 Mazda 6s that I now have, I still get a smile on my face when I drive it. The honeymoon with the Saturn VUE ended only a couple of months after I bought it by comparison.

  • avatar
    crc

    forgot Mercedes R class

  • avatar
    jd arms

    I nominate the Chevy Cobalt. I have driven one. It was ugly, the interior was pedestrian, and the sound of the engine was shrill. My wife literally laughed at it when I pulled up to our house (it was a rental). Hardy-freakin’-har.

    The car was closer to one of those amusement park cars that ride on rails, than it was to my regular car. Seriously.

  • avatar
    Sajeev Mehta

    Oh yeah, the R class is both hideous and out of step with the Mercedes brand image. Definite TWAT material.

    Nice catch, crc!

  • avatar
    Axel

    I’ll nominate one per class:

    Small car: Ford Focus (old or new) still edges out the Dodge Caliber. Bad looks plus nothing whatsoever to distinguish it from the very able competition.

    Midsize car: Sebring. Nothing to add to the beating it’s taken already taken here.

    Large car: Crown Victoria. This 30-year-old sway-backed old mare needs to be put out of its misery.

    CUV: Honda CR-V, because they wrecked nearly everything that was great about the previous CR-V. Do I hold Honda to a higher standard? Yes.

    SUV: Durango/Aspen. Ugh-LEE.

  • avatar
    lsttac

    I registered just to post for TWAT.

    I would like to nominate the Mercedes S-Class.

    Yes I have driven it. On the outside, it is an elongated monster on the inside the technology is so confusing even the salesmen could not preset a radio station using the voice commands that are the only way to operate the radio, climate controls, and navigation. Oh, and it can be only operated by the driver the passengers can’t even lower the volume.

    Oh, Mercedes also felt the need to weld in a telephone keypad to operate its crazed bluetooth phone interface.

    I also enjoy the throwback column shifter that easily slips in and out of drive like a blinker. The best feature is the clock because it is analog and requires no interface at all.

  • avatar
    racerx74

    my nominations:

    1. Chevy Avalanche: nice try, but the one at my office is ‘rust’ colored. It’s big, I never see anything carried in the back. I hear banjos every time I see it.

    2. Ford Explorer: Around the washington DC area, they are always driven by a overweight woman and an OBX sticker on the back. Just an ugly square thing on dangerous tires. Why do we still need them????

    3. Subarau: the one with the pickup truck back. Same as the avalanche….do you ever see anything in the back…then why?!!? Driven by women who hate men. Yes, some of them are married to men.

    4. Nissan Rouge: mini Murano but plainer and even uglier…is that possible?

    5. Chevy Silverado: Every time I hear that John Couger song I want to burn a U.S. flag…that is not good. Every Chevy I see has a nascar number on the back.

    6. Buick Lacrosse or Lucern…one of them has holes along the sides for what?!?! Air intake?!?! Who does that appeal to?! What goes on in the those design meetings????

  • avatar
    lprocter1982

    I want to add to my nominations the Ford Crown Victoria, not because it’s a bad car (it isn’t) but because it should be so much better. Ford’s had the large sedan market to itself for the better part of a decade, so what do they do? They sit on their asses and stop improving their product. Now, the CV is about 8 years behind it’s competition, with essentially a small niche market, which it’s losing ground in quickly. There is no reason why the CV isn’t as good as the Charger, 300, the Tahoe, and likely the G8/Impala coming out next year, since Ford’s had a decade to improve and build upon it. Seeing even small police forces driving Chargers and Tahoes shows that Ford f***ed up with the CV by letting it rot on the vine for a decade.
    Of course, it wouldn’t surprise me if the same dumbf***s might be responsible (irresponsible?) for giving North America a crappy version of the F**kus, I mean, Focus, while Europe gets something much better.

  • avatar
    guyincognito

    @ the_stig, whats worse is the “shiny metals” on the Navigator are mostly plastic.

  • avatar

    Jeep Compass– this is the perfect to kill a brand.
    +1, me too.

    Fake rugged look via plastic body kit on re-badged Neon replacement — pointless, and destroys the hardy Jeep brand image.

    On the other hand, the Chrysler Sebring I had as a rental car was a better drive than a Camry, so I must stand up for this poor man’s C-Klasse.

  • avatar
    MgoBLUE

    5. Pontiac Grad Prix — nice landing, wrong decade.

    4. Chevy Uplander — Best in class, 1992.

    3. Chrylser Sebring — the fact that this vehicle is NEW is very disturbing. This has to be bulletin board material in Auburn Hills. Something to the effect of: “How did this shit happen to us?!” or “We got Punk’d!”. Surprisingly, no class action lawsuit from the dealer network! Bonus!

    2. Jaguar X-Type — I thought they stopped selling these in 2003. I haven’t seen one since then. Exactly what the NY Times said…GOD AWEFUL. (well, they don’t use the term “God”, but they nearasdammit implied it)

    1. Mercedes R Class — For people with more money than common sense. AKA: School on Sundays – No Class.

  • avatar
    Robert Schwartz

    Tyler D:

    TBAG illustrates the problem. The number one car is the BMW 3. It is ugly, not as ugly as the 7 series to be sure, but ugly none the less. It is heavy — just how do you get a 3300 lbs. compact anyway? The car should be at least 500 lbs less. It has idrive (at least in most models, I think there are a few without). Three strikes, you are out. BMW built a much nicer car 15 years ago. Like many manufacturers, they have gone backwards in the last few years.

  • avatar
    Robert Schwartz

    I don’t want to defend the Toyota Corolla, except to point out that unlike the rest of the Toyota line it hasn’t been uglified — yet.

  • avatar
    confused1096

    I know ‘me too’ nominations are discouraged. However I’d never heard of the Mitsu Raider until this nomination. WOW! It looks like a Dakota had relations with a Frontier and this was their love child. Yuck. Strange option packages and insanely overpriced accessories. Do they actually sell any of these?

  • avatar
    Phil Roast Beef

    I have to say the 2008 North American Focus gets my vote. I had a 2000 ZX3 Kona and now drive a 2003 ZX5 SVT. I had first driven the first generation Focus when I lived in Europe in the late 90’s. I was impressed because it was light years ahead of the Escort it replaced. Too bad they won’t bring it to the US I thought. But they did and I bought one and was delighted to find that they didn’t dumb it down significantly for the NA market. Although the engine was merely adequate the ride and handling were better than many cars that were more expensive. The interior room was great and I had the practicality of a hatchback. And to top it off the car was fun to drive. The SVT took all of the good qualities of the Focus and upped the fun to drive factor. Then came the “refresh” while the rest of the world got the 2nd Generation Focus. No SVT. No performance hatchback. Now no hatches at all and no performance version. Instead we get the Sync, which looks like a pretty cool toy, and ugliness and chesse (faux side vents? WTF?). As cool as Sync is I don’t think that anyone will want a car this ugly. Can someone explain to me how Ford was able to bring over the 1st generation Focus (hecho en Mexico) over here but deems it too expensive to do it with the 2nd generation?

  • avatar
    f8

    oh yeah

    I’m going with Kia Amanti again:

    1.) Looks that stop traffic. In a bad way.

    Yes, definitely.

    2.) The “WTF were they thinking?” factor.

    Cheaply made, ugly car from a manufacturer with known reliability issues that is billed as “luxury” and costs 26 grand? What?

    3.) Misused technology.

    Not much of that – maybe if you count misuse of design and drafting tech that produced this sheetmetal abortion

    4.) Unfathomable product planning.

    This is definitely the answer to the question noone asked – “can I get a luxury car from a car manufacturer that specializes in cheap, poorly made, unreliable cars with incredibly poor trade-in values?” I mean, why? Half of the luxury appeal is in the brand. Getting a luxury Kia is like getting a Chinese “Rolux” watch. It doesn’t help that the watch is just an alarm clock that was spraypainted with gold paint.

    It’s not only awful for the listed reasons – the design of the Amanti is not just terrible, but also extremely derivative. I first thought it was trying to rip off a Merc, but I later realized Kia was going for the Jaguar S-type. Look at them – same rounded shape of the C-pillar, same rounded rear, same 4 headlight configuration with a similar meshed grille on the front. S-type isn’t a good looking car to begin with, and a bargain bin copy of it is truly an awful thing.

    Just look at these images:

    Jag:
    http://www.haletrailer.com/autos/2006-12%20December/Jaguar/01_Jaguar_Stype01.jpg

    Kia, 2004:
    http://www.canadiandriver.com/testdrives/images/04amanti_5.jpg

    Kia, 2007 (slight facelift):
    http://www.cars.com/features/autoshows/2007/losangeles/coverage/images/08_Kia_Amanti_frntangle_mfr_430.jpg

    Rear –

    Jag:
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/99/2001_Jaguar_S-Type_rear_34.JPG/800px-2001_Jaguar_S-Type_rear_34.JPG

    Kia, 2007:
    http://www.womanmotorist.com/images/articles/reviews/kia/2007KiaAmanti02.jpg

  • avatar
    Bunter1

    I think a special award is needed for GMs two-valve sixes.
    It gives you a vehicle (any vehicle) with the performance of a four yet it is thirstier than many vastly more powerful sixes. Many fours beat it on NVH scores also.

    They forgot to check the label, “warning best if used by 1997”.

    I must say that some of the nominations are pretty thin, no real reason given, some of you just hate certain companies and freak on anything they build.

    Few examples:
    Silverado and Tundra nominations. Depending on what you emphasize in a truck one or the other is the best in the class. The others are off the back. Limp.

    Any one that nominated the Prius and not the Aura Why?brid is blind. Both are midsize, and take 10+sec to 60mph. The Prius is cheaper and gets 20mpg more and has excellent reliability. Duh.

    Ridgeline-never seen a comparo where it didn’t crush the competition. Even with only one engine and body choice it’s retail sales bury the Canyon (somebody should anyway) and is close to the Dakota. I would say for a car company making its first truck it is amazing. Detroit should screw up this bad.

    TTFN

    Bunter

  • avatar
    red.66mustang

    1) Jaguar X-Type (finally dying but still alive)
    2) Toyota Tundra, shear monstrosity, with bad
    proportions and design inside and out (Three-tone
    dash)
    3) Subaru Impreza/WRX, taking an awesome car in
    terms of performance and okay looks and turning
    it into a Corolla wannabe with a boxer engine.
    4) Ford Ranger/Mazda B-Series, platforms dating back
    to the Reagan Administration, last redesign at
    the beginning of the Clinton Administration, just
    another example of Ford letting their products
    rot on the vine.
    5) Chevy Aveo, wow what a cheap car. Design a real
    budget car and not this joke.
    6) Chrysler Sebring, ugh! Talk about fugly! Take
    some what decent styling of the Crossfire’s
    front end and totally screw it up in to
    something that resembles a Pug.
    7) Smart For-two, overpriced, cramped example of
    why Mercedes-Benz isn’t what it used to be. For
    the money why not buy a Rabbit or Astra if you
    really want an European hatch?
    8) Scion xB, Toyota made it a Toyota. Took a car
    that looked cool and had character and replaced
    it with a fugly, bloated Camry box.
    9) Toyota Camry, once known for reliability and
    quality now it is no longer “recommended” by
    CR, the interior materials belong in an Aveo
    and the nose of the car has falic
    resembelences.
    10)Jeep Compass, takes any coolness and
    masculinity the Jeep brand had and cut it in
    half! When did consumers ask for a FWD Caliber
    with round headlights and a seven slotted
    grill? Also it epitimizes the term “Cheap
    Jeep”

  • avatar
    TheRedCar

    The Toyota Solara. With that design, they’ll drive everyone away from coupes forever.

  • avatar
    yournamehere

    the Chevy Camaro…its going to take way to long to get it on the road and once it does its going to be yesterdays news. after the first 2 months of sales surge its going to sit on lots and pack on the incentives.

  • avatar
    Lichtronamo

    Hey racerx74

    I may be dumb, but what does OBX stand for?

  • avatar
    RGS920

    I would like to nominate the Buick Lucerne, all 3800+ pounds of it. It has a stunning 3.8V6 base engine (If you happen to relish 1970’s technology) cranking out 197HP. To compliment the engine, GM mated it to a 4 speed automatic (Not even the Kia Optima still uses a 4 speed automatic!). And you can get all this, for only $27,000… if you happen to buy it devoid of any options.
    In a time of automotive renaissance, the Buick Lucerne stands in stark contrast to strides made in modern engineering and perpetuates Buick’s downward spiral. You can opt for the engine a Buick “should” come with standard (The impressive 7 years ago northstar V8) but it only comes in wrong wheel drive while costing $36,000.
    This car deserves the #1 TWAT award because this car IS the quintesential sleezy huckster preying on the older crowd of car buyers. At a 27,000 dollar base price, GM should be ashamed everytime they take someones hard earned retirment money.

  • avatar
    phewop118

    I don’t know why some people are nominating some really good cars. All BMW’s and Hummers are actually really nice cars. Those who are nominating them probably never have driven them and are haters cause they’ll never have the money to drive them. There are other very well-done cars that have been nominated many times, such as the DTS, Impala, Grand Prix, and 9-7x, all of which are very respectable cars when compared to the competition.

    Anyways, I shall get on to my nominations and why. I would first like to say that I’ve driven just about every car for sale currently (valet parking), excluding most vehicles over $200k, so I have well-formulated opinions on any specific vehicle compared to the rest of the vehicles on the market. These are in no particular order, but are numbered only for me to keep track that I have listed 10 vehicles.

    1) Toyota Camry/Lexus ES What went wrong here Toyota? The last generation was well put together and a reasonably solid vehicle. Now, the interior is made of only the cheapest cardboards and plastics and the fit and finish is awful. The more powerful V6 now causes torque steer problems, as they are poor FWD designs (unlike the GM-W body, which has almost no torque steer, even with V8’s available). The Camry/ES350 also handle as if they had pillows for suspension. Finally, the interior seems to have shrunk compared to the last model.

    2) Honda Civic I never have liked the Civic and this generation is every bit as bad as the last several. The interiors are very poorly put together with hard and hollow plastics, of which everything is pieced together rather than flowing. It also suffers from traditional Honda-hard assed seats and butt-ugly exterior styling. Finally, I’ve never been a fan of Honda’s coarse-at-low-rpms and power-only-at-the-top-end 4 cyls.

    3) Hyundai Tuscon While the V6 is smooth enough, never does it generate enough power to get this little, but heavy CUV moving. Then there’s the styling, which is absolutely horrible, both inside and out, as though it were designed for the middle 90’s. Not only is the interior small, but it has some of the worst plastics of any vehicle on the market currently. Definetly a poor effort at a CUV.

    4) Lexus RX350 This entry-lux CUV had its glory days 5 years ago. Now it is in desperate need of an overhaul. The new engine helps some, but the interior is made of cheap materials and is so poorly put together. Lots of squeaks and rattles. The thing handles poorly too.

    5) Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan Why all the hype over a rebadged, 5-yr old Mazda 6 (which by the way, is an excellent vehicle) with a horrible interior, cheap suspension, and ugly styling.

    6) Volkswagen Passat Here’s another example of a new-gen model that is worse than its predecessor. The last Passat had a gorgeous interior, magnificent W8, nice handling, and respectable room inside. The new Passat has a funky starting mechanism, cheap and small interior, weak structure, ugly styling, and a V6 limit. Most of these descriptions also apply to the Jetta and Beetle.

    7) GM Epsilon Vehicles (Malibu, G6, 9-3, Aura) While I tend to like GM vehicles, these have got to be some of the worst in their lineup. Problems began when GM tried to copy the worst of the Japanese and Europeans rather than create their own automobile. The structures on all of theses vehicles is very creaky and there is way too much crash-through over potholes for any one of these vehicles to even approach premium, like the Saab and Saturn are supposed to be. The steering is another weak point, not so much in the 9-3 or Aura XR, but all the other models use lifeless, clunky, over-boosted electric steering which ruins any kind of sporting nature or road feel that a vehicle should have. Then there are the engines. The Saab V6 is great, as is the Aura XR’s 3.6 (which is shared in the G6 GXP), but the Ecotec 4 used in all of them is horrid (especially the “hybrids”). While it’s smooth at low RPMs, it has no power, is unrefined, and turns coarse as RPMs increase. The 3.5 V6, on the other hand, while it generates respectable torque, is coarse at all speeds, even so much as to have a rough idle, which makes it a complete piece of rubbish. Then there are the interiors, which all are filled with cheap plastics and random bits of rubbish. It doesn’t look like the 08 Malibu will be doing any better in this department either.

    8) Chevy Equinox/Pontiac Torrent WTF? Why is there even a Pontiac model, when it is the same damn thing as the Chevy? The 07 update did help the interiors on these vehicles some, but it didn’t do nearly enough to rid them of the cheap plastic that plagues them. Also, the structures are weak and the suspension sucks. The base engine is complete rubbish, being an ancient GM engine from the 90’s, but produced in China. Very coarse and weak. The 3.6 is decent, but nothing like the 3.6 in the CTS, which is incredible.

    9) Honda Pilot/Odyssey/Ridgeline These 3 vehicles are a perfect example of high-selling vehicles that are complete pieces of trash. For starters, the V6 that powers all of them is miserable. While it is smooth enough at low RPMS, it has a resonance that builds with RPMs that sounds awful. Also, it doesn’t even have adequate power for vehicles this heavy. Then there’s the awful interiors, that not only lack design and ergonomics, but also have the cheapest plastics known to man in them. Every plastic piece feels like its going to crack, with nothing soft-touch and everything being hard and hollow. On top of that, they all have flex-prone structures and a lot of crash-through over irregularities in the road.

    10) Chrysler Sebring/Dodge Avenger Why would Chrysler bring to market a vehicle that feels like it was introduced 15 years ago? These cars have some of the worst interiors around, with every material being a cheap, hard, and hollow plastic. In addition, there is very little room inside for 2 people, let alone 4. The engines in these vehicles are complete mockeries of the internal combustion engine, being coarse, weak, thirsty, and slow-revving. This car represents everything that is wrong with Chrysler and why it is doing do poorly in the marketplace. I don’t know if I have seen any of these on the road other than rentals.

    So that is my lovely list of vehicles, which is very descriptive, though just about every one contains the same ideas.

  • avatar
    DAC17

    It seems that the Hummer H2 has way outlived its 15 minutes of fame. The Ford Ranger/Mazda B4000 pickups have probably outlived their fame by 10 years.

  • avatar
    davey49

    f8- the Amanti is cool because it looks like that,it’s like a new school Sedan DeVille.
    Personally I like the Compass/Patriot/Caliber and recommend them to people. You can’t beat the useful cargo area/price ratio with anything else.

  • avatar
    LamborghiniZ

    daver49: Right, and along with that comes AWFUL everything else. Not worth recommending.

  • avatar
    theflyersfan

    Outer Banks, NC

    It’s up there with the faded and cracked Oakley Thermonuclear Protection window stickers.

    Of course in a decade, we’ll all cringe at all of the window stickers that broadcast to the world what sport(s)/activity their overloaded and overworked kid strapped in the back of said van or SUV takes part of.

    Lichtronamo :
    October 16th, 2007 at 7:14 pm

    Hey racerx74
    I may be dumb, but what does OBX stand for?

  • avatar
    webrat

    1. 2008 Honda Accord – BMW looks? Riiiigghht. You sure that things not plastic because it sure looks like the 2003 Saturn L200 to me.

    Was the extra year wait for restyling to give us more time to forget?

    2. 2008 Honda Civic – Owned an ’06 after my ’03 Accord lease expired. 34 mpg with a mid-size or 28 mpg and a sore arse with the Civic? Tough choice? Not really. Bye Honda.

    3. 2008 Saturn Vue – I no longer need to imagine what it would be like to steer the back half of a ladder truck.

    4. 2008 Ford Taurus – Previous generation Passat look alike with a convenient, “Remember to shave?” front.

    5. Mitsubishi anything – Eeee-soozooo! Gesundheit? No, I’m the ghost of Joe Isuzu calling you home… Oooo-eee-soozooo!

    6. Subaru Legacy/Outback – America is at war! We’ll have no high falootin’ colors around here!

    C’mon already, black, white, brown, silver, grey and blue? Hey, how did blue get in there? Oh, nevermind. They tossed in the palest tan interior you’ll never be able to keep clean anywhere you’d want an AWD vehicle so we won’t be seeing those on the streets.

    7. 2008 Toyota Corolla – If this is the best Toyota can do for sheetmetal maybe Honda’s 5 year old Saturn knock-off isn’t so bad.

    8. 2008 Toyota 4Runner – Lease a fully equipped mid/full-size SUV with sunroof for $249/mo on a 36 month lease with nothing down or headroom up.

    9. 2008 Chevrolet Impala – Need to replace the seats in grandma’s ’82 Ciera? Look no further.

    10. 04-08 Ford F150 – Comes standard with the tallest box walls in it’s class to help you discover the glass jaw of all bumpers.

  • avatar
    LamborghiniZ

    phewop118: How on earth could you criticize the Odyssey’s interior? Or the Pilot’s, Ridgeline’s, or Civic’s?? I’m in awe. You really have the audacity to critique some of the best interiors in their respective classes. There is no better interior in the mini van class than the Odyssey. It’s damn near perfect. Same with the Pilot. Good grief!

  • avatar
    callidad

    I am in agreement with those that nominated the xB. It is a rare and sad thing that a company creates an easily affordable car with enough verve to develop a virtual cult following and a niche of its own only to rip it out of the hands of an adoring public, replacing it with something that belies all the brilliance of the original concept or nothing at all.

    The Honda CRX comes to mind as another beloved car that that an otherwise successful company pulled leaving nothing in its place.

    I would have purchased another xB if they had left it the strange practical car that it was rather than a not quite miniature FJ cruiser.

  • avatar
    sashazur

    The new Ford Taurus – they started with the underpowered 500 which looked like a ripoff of the last Passat generation, then gave it the name of a car that was only good over a decade ago, and to boot they grafted on the new 3 bar grill which only looks good on the Edge.

  • avatar
    sashazur

    I nominate any small hatchback that has been “sedan-ified” for the USA market.

    I’m not sure why car companies are so afraid of hatchbacks or wagons, but grafting a trunk onto a perfectly good hatchback design is just silly.

    The worst of these is the Nissan Versa sedan – it looks absolutely awful – but luckily you don’t see very many of them, wonder why?

    The Toyota Yaris sedan isn’t that pretty either, but it’s nowhere as hideous as the Versa.

  • avatar
    rjwillis

    I’ve driven ’em all:

    — Chrysler Sebring: The worst of the worst. Ugly, slow, and the hardest seat I’ve ever sat in. I’m not at all big, and I felt cramped in this car.

    — Chrysler PT Cruiser: Ugly, bad handling, incredibly uncomfortable.

    — Dodge Caliber: See above.

    — Toyota Camry: A great car for people who don’t like cars.

    — Chevrolet HHR: The PT Cruiser, only worse. Incredibly awful ergonomics.

    — Toyota Corolla: Just ignore that piece of dashboard hanging off on the passenger’s side.

    — Cadillac DTS: Not nearly the car that it should be. It was not at all unpleasant, but I liked nothing about it better than the Buick Lucerne (a car I really like, btw.)

    — Pontiac G6: I used to like this car, until I realized I was comparing it to the Grand Am rather than, well, a good car.

    — Chevrolet Malibu: Why can’t GM get this segment right? It can’t be that hard to do a midsize car well; the Mazda 6 proves it can be done.

    — Lexus ES: Zzzzzzzzzzz. Again, would rather have the Lucerne. Who woulda thought?

  • avatar
    Kman

    Can we start a separate thread?

    “Ways to describe the Jeep Compass”.

    Should prove hilarious based on what I’ve read so far… (e.g. “The Cimarron of Jeeps”)

  • avatar
    p00ch

    1. Ford Focus, North America – outdated design may slide with a Crown Vic/Marquis but not with FoMoCo’s only entry in the compact segment. It’s like buying a Windows98 package that includes a ‘new for 2008′ version of Solitaire…

    2. Chrysler Sebring – current version of the mid 80s’ LeBaron, whether it’s looks or driving excitement. Can’t wait for the vinyl roof option.

    3. Toyota Solara/Tundra – Yikes. The big 2.8 would have been proud to produce such shapeless barges.

  • avatar
    jaje

    @ phewop118: “I don’t know why some people are nominating some really good cars. All BMW’s and Hummers are actually really nice cars. Those who are nominating them probably never have driven them and are haters cause they’ll never have the money to drive them.”

    Seems the owners rank Hummer in last place in most surveys reliability and quality.

    “9) Honda Pilot/Odyssey/Ridgeline These 3 vehicles are a perfect example of high-selling vehicles that are complete pieces of trash. For starters, the V6 that powers all of them is miserable. While it is smooth enough at low RPMS, it has a resonance that builds with RPMs that sounds awful. Also, it doesn’t even have adequate power for vehicles this heavy. Then there’s the awful interiors, that not only lack design and ergonomics, but also have the cheapest plastics known to man in them. Every plastic piece feels like its going to crack, with nothing soft-touch and everything being hard and hollow. On top of that, they all have flex-prone structures and a lot of crash-through over irregularities in the road.”

    And calling the Pilot / Ridgeline / Odyssey behind the competition in every respect? Ever test drive a Caravan, Jeep Grand Cherokee or Dakota against the Hondas? Jeez…man take some of your own “haters b/c they can’t afford them on a parking valet’s salary medicine”.

  • avatar
    f8

    phewop118:

    “I don’t know why some people are nominating some really good cars. All … Hummers are actually really nice cars. Those who are nominating them probably never have driven them and are haters cause they’ll never have the money to drive them

    2) Honda Civic I never have liked the Civic and this generation is every bit as bad as the last several. The interiors are very poorly put together with hard and hollow plastics, of which everything is pieced together rather than flowing. It also suffers from traditional Honda-hard assed seats and butt-ugly exterior styling. Finally, I’ve never been a fan of Honda’s coarse-at-low-rpms and power-only-at-the-top-end 4 cyls.”

    Hahahaha you have got to be kidding me – this is the funniest stuff I’ve read here in a while

    People hate on Hummers because they’re “haters cause they’ll never have the money to drive them” and not because they’re huge, inefficient SUVs that have nothing in common with the venerable military vehicle they’re emulating? Great call there, chief, a real eye opener!

    And then you submit Civics, because:

    “interiors are very poorly put together” (what? really, what? It’s a sub-20K car. Go sit in a Hyundai or Kia and let me know how them fancy Korean interiors feel compared to a Civic. Go drive a Focus, for that matter)

    “everything is pieced together rather than flowing” (again – what? Have you even seen the inside of a new Civic?)

    “suffers from traditional Honda-hard assed seats” (I guess, if you prefer the upscale styling of a Hummer – not that us lowly plebes and “haters” would know what such exorbitant luxury is like!)

    “and butt-ugly exterior styling” (while the new Civic is somewhat more controversial, older generations have been plain, but very much adequate in their styling. Again, it’s a sub-20K compact, not a damn Ferrari. Compare a Civic to other cars in its class styling-wise – it’s ahead of Corollas, Focuses, and Cobalts by miles.)

    “never been a fan of Honda’s coarse-at-low-rpms and power-only-at-the-top-end 4 cyls.” (Okay, this is where I lost it – do you know what an economy car is? Do you know what a low-displacement 4-cylinder engine is? They naturally make most power at high rpms. That is also the trade-off for good fuel economy, and that’s why a Civic gets 40 mpg highway. Like an economy car should. Not since you’d know, of course, since you’d be driving your prestigious Hummer and all).

  • avatar
    itsme

    callidad: There was a successor to the American CRX – the Del Sol.
    phewop118: Yikes!

    My Nominations (in no particular order):
    – Jeep Compass
    – Chrysler Sebring
    – Dodge Caliber
    – Dodge Nitro
    – Chrysler Aspen (and friend)
    – Toyota Camry (exterior)
    – BMW 5-series (They fixed the 7-series, now they should focus on this fugly pile.)
    – Ford Ranger (and friends)
    – GMC Canyon (and friend)
    – Scion xB
    – Cadillac DTS
    – Cadillac Escalade (and GMC Yukon – how did such formerly cool-looking trucks get so dorky and ugly? Glad the same fate didn’t befall the Tahoe!)
    – Maybach 57/62 – as much presence and sex appeal as a Lexus ES.

  • avatar
    TaxedAndConfused

    Dodge Caliber – the only car designed by and built with Lego. Needs bricking.

    Saab, oops, Cadillac BLS – Spotted a 6 month old one at a garage here in the UK last week. Sticker price of only 50% of new. Either its been to the moon and back already or its now priced realistically. I’m thinking the latter as I wouldn’t trust a modern GM SAAB to make it to the moon.

    Toyota Auris – Toyota pushing the envelope again. They have managed to make a really boring car (Corolla) into an even more boring one. Well done.

    All Ferrari F430s – OK we get it now, you can make one and then make another one that goes faster, and then another one and so forth. Great. Now, can we have a new Dino please. And make it pretty this time.

    Lexus Hybrids – Let me get this straight. If I buy one the polar bears live, yes ?

    BMW 1-Series (except coupe) – Great, now people who can’t afford a proper 3-series can become pushy, tailgating twerps too. And why is it so HEAVY ?

    “New” US Ford Focus – Well, its transport I suppose. But then again so is a used Civic or just getting a lift with someone who owns a Civic. Or buying a bike. Or a skateboard.

    Everything made by Smart. It just isn’t. I would rather drive a US Ford Focus or even a Chevy Matiz. And I know how bad a Matiz is, I used to own one.

    BMW M3 – Why bother with this when you can save money by buying a 330d and having it chipped to go faster and use less fuel ? Overhyped.

    BMW M6 – Great. Make a 200mph 4-door car and then fit a gearbox so useless my boss can’t get his into his garage. Yes, if I had the money I would buy one though.

    Mazda 5 – Not so much zoom zoom as zzzzzz. I’ve had more exciting times clipping my toenails, and my kid hated it.

    Jaguar X-Type – Mondeo in a posh frock, except the new Mondeo is better and you can get an X-type used cheaper than the old Mundano.

  • avatar
    gamper

    I would like to Nominate the:

    1) Sebring/Avenger Horrid looks, thrashy engines, poor quality materials and craftsmanship
    2) Jeep Compass Fails miserably to live up to the Jeep name.
    3) Dodge Nitro. I have never seen worse fit and finish on any car. Antiquated powertrain.
    4) Subaru Tribeca. Transformed from ugly, to pathetic.
    5) Subaru Impreza. The best Toyota that Subaru has ever built, has the styling to prove it.
    6) Ford Focus. The restyle makes the car look worse, carryover mechanics that should have been put to pasture years ago.
    7) Hummer H2. GM’s reminder to everyone that profits will trump the environment every time.
    8) Scion Xb. The redesign took a great idea and stomped on it with a mainstream design.
    9) Toyota Tundra. Toyota forgetting what made it successful and turning its back on the greenies that have been driving its success.
    10) Chevy Aveo. Without the fuel economy, this car has no reason for being.

  • avatar
    RyanK02

    Here are some of the ones I have questioned recently.

    Chevy HHR – ugly, direct rip off of the lame duck PT Cruiser.
    Chevy SSR – a convertible truck with a Corvette engine at a Corvette price. Worst selling car for Chevy last year.
    Lincoln Mark LT – This only piles on the fad of blingy trucks. A brand known for their ride quality builds a four wheel drive truck. If that doesn’t inspire a “Why?”, nothing will.
    Cadillac Escalade EXT – same as the Mark LT.
    Ford Taurus X – Recycled name, recycled platform, competing side by side with the Edge. And it is fiercely ugly.
    Nissan Versa – Gets worse mileage than a Sentra with a smaller engine, and it is smaller and less attractive.
    Ford Freestyle – How many crossovers do you need?
    Chrysler Crossfire – not attractive, not fast. It is outdated Mercedes technology with uglier sheetmetal. It was discontinued for ’07 because of low sales, but brought back for ’08. (So, it may not qualify for a TWAT, but only on a techicality)

    This goes along with all of the other obvious recommendations. i.e. new Focus, Compass, Sebring, Aveo, Hummer, Nitro. I won’t go on.

  • avatar
    lprocter1982

    I’d also like to nominate the Versa, not because it’s ugly (though it is) but because of the retarded ad campaign Nissan’s got going in Canada right now. They claim the Versa is fuel efficient because it gets 833km per tank. Now granted, that’s good, but kilometers per tank is not how to measure efficiency. If it were, then Mack and International should be advertising their trucks: “Our trucks are the most efficient vehicles on the road! They get over 1500km per tank! Sure, it’s only 8 miles per gallon, but 1500km per tank! Weelaa!”

    If Motortrend can give a COTY award to Ford in the 60’s for their advertising campaign, then TTAC should be able to give a TWAT to the Nissan for theirs.

  • avatar
    kericf

    Jeep Compass “Rallye” Edition.
    Enough said.
    I had the unfortunate experience of being passed by one of these abominations in traffic and my first response was: “OMG, WTF is that thing?”

  • avatar
    dulcamara

    Gotta be the Camry. Not even CU wants it anymore.

  • avatar
    dawgone

    ok my turn,
    1)ford 500/taurus, i liked it better when it was the flintsone mobile.
    2)honda ridge line, a truck that wants to be ,but is not a truck.I thought imports were ecomonical.
    3)pontiac/ or buick anything. useless brands.
    4)jeep compass/patiot/liberty,who ever said give me liberty or give me death wasn’t talking about these jeeps.
    5)PT cruiser- retro -please, retarded maybe
    6)expedition el-landyacht that needs roll over outriggers.rides like the ocean anyway
    7)hyundai-enough said,10 year warranty on crap is still crap.
    8)ford superduty-8 miles to the gallon-diesel-what were they thinking?
    9)kia-refer to 7 or 3
    10)saab-ugly from 10 miles away

  • avatar
    Jerome10

    Ok, I’ll chime in. Why not.

    Mercedes R Class. Wrong car, wrong market, wrong company, wrong price. What idiot over in Stuttgart thought it would be a grand idea to build a luxury minivan, forget the rear sliding doors (perhaps it can’t be “luxury” with such a low-class (and highly practical) feature), make it cost a gazillion dollars (how big of a market is there really for rich people, with kids, who want a minivan-looking luxury wagon?), look like crap from every angle, and carry the minivan stigma at a price point where such a stigma is not acceptable?

    Did I already mention it costs a gazillion dollars for a cool factor of zero?

    Why oh why?

    Oh, I forgot, “its a Mercedes-Benz, that’s why”. Pffft.

    Otherwise, a few others I might like to throw on the list:

    -Porsche Cayenne. See above post regarding R-Class, only to a slightly lesser degree.
    -Jeep Compass. A really sissy looking Jeep. Awesome! (not when the much cooler looking and more capable Patriot is sitting right next to it).
    -Isuzu Ascender. Can’t make a TrailBlazer any more old-school and un-cool right? Wrong. 1) Remove bowtie. 2) Glue on Isuzu badge.
    -Kia Rio. At least the Aveo has some decent style.
    -Nissan Versa. Looks like a French car. Sucks like a French car.
    -Suzuki Forenza. A blown up Aveo, only with far worse styling. A direct throwback to the Daewoo Leganza days.
    And finally (and this may be stretching it), but:
    -Toyota Corolla. Spooky handling. Terrible seats. Bland exterior. Sea of gray interior. Sport and cool factor of zero. If it wasn’t drop-dead reliable, NOBODY would be interested in this car.

    So there ya go :)

  • avatar
    Jerome10

    Oh, and I forgot the Honda Ridgeline. Guess I would have thought that ribbing (for nobody’s pleasure) ended with the latest Pontiacs. Apparently General Motors must have sold said ribbing to Honda in exchange for V6 engines in the old VUE Redline.

    Add to it that it can’t really tow much, can’t really go off road, can’t really haul much, only has a V6 engine and still gets crappy fuel economy really sinks it.

  • avatar
    Jerome10

    And yet one more I forgot.

    Chrysler Sebring. Perfection of mediocrity. They definitely checked off every box in the requirement list and then hit the showers.
    Engine? Check.
    Seats? Check.
    Wheels? Check.
    Horrible style? Check.
    Terrible all-new 4 cyl engine? Check.
    Old school 4 speed tranny? Check.
    Ribbed hood? Check.
    Rock hard seats? Check.
    Huge waiting list from Avis, Hertz, Alamo, and Thrifty? Check.

    Great job boys!

  • avatar
    capdeblu

    I would like to nominate the Saturn P-on no excuse me Ion for worst car of the year. How Saturn could take a relatively funky car the SL and turn in into this is beyond me. Once upon a time Saturns sold for sticker price. They couldnt give the Ions away.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • GregLocock: Unfortunately Tim Healey’s grasp of schoolboy physics is lousy. If a heavy car hits a light car...
  • DenverMike: Sorry Tim, it’s not just the initial cost. Automakers are throwing stupid complexity at vehicles...
  • mcs: I think the supercars definitely need electrification. It’s the only way to keep them near the top of the...
  • MorrisGray: So you think it is okay for everyone to be buying trucks and SUV vehicles but we need to get stricter...
  • Land Ark: There were a lot of people who dismissed the video when it came out. People claimed the Impala was modified...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Matthew Guy
  • Timothy Cain
  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber