“God, that looks awful.”
We’ve all uttered the sentence above at one time or another. We’re sitting in traffic and are suddenly faced with something grotesque, something which was undoubtedly “of the moment” for only a moment, and which is now part of recent history best forgotten. But enough about the hooker leaning on a Crossfire.
Today I’m going to ask you to think back in time — up to ten years ago (which may be a challenge for some of our more wizened commenters) — and reflect on car designs. Tell me your pick for the most aged design of 2007-2017.
The rules today are simple — the car you pick must have had a model year between 2007 and 2017. Unfortunately, I didn’t get around to writing this article at the end of 2016, when it popped into my head and made it onto my Spiral Pad of Awesome Ideas.
In following my own restrictions, my pick is now quite different than it would have been last year. But I can still use my prior choice as an example, which is off limits to you, the commentariat, because of my privilege. You see, 2006 was the final model year for this very elite Nissan Altima.
“Man, that Altima 3.5 Luxury was rare!” I hear you typing. But wait — that is, in fact, the very final version of the flagship Infiniti Q45, which ran through the 2006 model year as mentioned above. The Altima-carbon-copy styling, droopy rear end (which was factory spec), expressive blob headlamps, and slightly-too-old interior accoutrements made this my pick for the 2006-2016 era. It looked a bit dated when it was new, and very dated within a couple of years. It is understandably worth very little today.
Now, on to my rules-compliant pick, for 2007-2017.
Look at it. There are few things more sad than a Malibu Maxx when you see them in modern traffic situations. Yes, this Epsilon platform stunner was still on sale in GM showrooms for the 2007 model year. Hard to believe, as I’d always assumed they died a much earlier death.
But I think you get the idea. What’s your pick for the most aged car design of the past ten years? As a bonus, I’ll give you my runner-up answer — the 2007 Suzuki Reno.
2007 jelly bean Ford Taurus. Sold next to the new fusion
https://www.kbb.com/ford/taurus/2007/se-sedan-4d/
You leave that beautiful product of Atlanta Assembly alone!
LOL
Too funny. It’s one of the few cars that started off looking ahead of it’s time… and ended up looking so dated by the end.
Unfortunately, that’s how it goes for many “bleeding edge” designs.
That’s a good point. It either stays looking good longer or looks immediately dated. I’d argue the xc90 prior to this one looked good for a very long time because it was a little bit bleeding edge
I think it’s always the case with bleeding edge designs. I can’t think of one that doesn’t look dated in 10 years. The conservative and boring designs look current the longest.
My personal pick is the 350Z. It also proves the point above. Still available in 2007 unchanged, and it looked very new and futuristic when it was released. It looks very old and outdated now.
In my opinion, the more rounded curves and swoops a design has, the more quickly it ages. Although I can’t put my finger on the reason why, maybe it’s just a precept of human aesthetic interpretation. I could name a few examples, but I think most of us here are well-versed enough in cars to see the point.
’99 – ’02 Mercury Cougar falls into that category to a “T”.
Might as well bring up the 2009 Taurus. Last year of a design that was copied from the 1997 Passat, itself copied from the 1995 Audi A4. And riding on a platform from the 1998 Volvo.
Aged, yes, but that tall greenhouse means usable headroom in the rear, something the current Taurus is sorely lacking.
I think you’ve got this backwards. That Taurus was not a car that looked good at first, and aged badly. On the contrary, it was dismissed at first as being ugly, but it turns out this was only because the front and back were so awful (especially the nasty little pinched-mouth look of the front end.) When they fixed those in 2000 we could see how fine the design really is. The pontoon shape of the side is distinctive without being outlandish, and the greenhouse is gorgeous. Overall, far better looking than the vast majority of cars on sale today.
Ok, assuming we can look past legacy sports cars like the Morgan +4 or the Caterham 7, then my vote is for the GM full-size vans. The GMC safari and Chevy clones look essentially unchanged from the full-size vans I drove camp kids around in the 1980’s, and they were old then!
That’s cause they pretty much were unchanged since the 80s. If it ain’t broke….
Not disputing that they were very dated by the end of their run, but the Chevy Astro and GMC Safari were minivans, not fullsize. They died after MY2005, far outlasting the Ford Aerostar which was their closest competitor, but not allowed under the rules of this game. :)
If you mean fullsize GM vans in 2007, those were the Chevy Express and GMC Savana. They replaced the previous generation of fullsize vans in MY1996.
Of course, especially when it comes to vans and pickups, I think a long time between design cycles is a good thing. It makes for good replacement parts availability.
Thank you, I did mean the full size vans…express and Savana. Pre coffee I got the names wrong.
Buick Rendezvous. OR WAS IT?
All you 4ssholes seem to love your damned CUV’s, so maybe it was ahead of it’s time?
That one did cross my mind, but I had picked on the Rendezvous recently enough, and it’s a CUV like you said. The Malibu Maxx barely fits into any category.
I’d say the Rendezvous was aged the minute it was introduced.
The Rendezvous is absolutely *darling* to me, a prescient and class-establishing CUV from before CAFE began whittling away at their height and boxy cargo space.
GM takes a $h¡t and calls it a Buick, and its your darling. I thought I was supposed to be the one who likes unloved cars, but you got me beat.
Now, go take your 18 nightly horse pills.
Kia Amanti – a bad pastiche of retro ideas.
Definitely looks like a Jag.
I thought it was supposed to be a Mercedes-Benz ripoff.
Definitely looks like an E-Class.
The Sonata had a “Mercedes meets S-Type” look that was far more successful than the Amanti pretending to be a S-Type/E-Class.
Damning with faint praise. That Sonata was still embarrassing.
Came here to say this. That thing looked dated 2 weeks after rolling off the lots.
Good choice.
Damn….you beat me to it.
The Amanti attempted to blend a front end derived from MBZ E Class, a rear end derived from the Rolls-Royce Phantom and wheel rims from a Cadillac Catera. It did not do so successfully.
I would also add to that the Kia Sportage from 2007 which reminds me of the old Pontiac Aztek (which Bob Lutz said reminded him of an “angry kitchen appliance”)
Good takes all around. I’d also add that someone at Kia may have been thinking Daimlerized Jag rather than just Jag.
Yes, the styling is a hot mess.
Yes, its still number one on my list of potential Uber cars.
I can’t help but hear the opening music to the song “Bittersweet Symphony” when looking at it. Basically the entire bit before the singing starts.
I may keep a jar of Grey Pupon in it, just in case.
Dodge Challenger is essentially unchanged since 2008, the platform it is on is even older. Toyota Tacoma is another one of those designs that milk it for all it is worth.
As an aside, I hope to come back and read these comments later and find no mention of the political landscape. Man, is that shit getting old.
I’ll drink to that last paragraph. Not really, but in sentiment. ;)
Bush totally stole the election from Gore. Those [email protected] election officials screwed him!
<—— aged political comment for aged design post :-)
Yes, I think we’re all suffering from TDP: Trump Depressive Psychosis.
The 2007 Elantra is pretty ugly.
2008 Ford Focus. Somehow manages to look more dated than the 2000-2007 models.
Good one. What a hopeless penalty box of a design. Such contempt for its buyers has rarely been expressed by a manufacturer’s design.
Yeah, I liked the first gen (North American) Focus design but the 2008 re-design was just awful. Looked cheap and silly from day one. They recovered nicely with the third gen, though.
I usually prefer two-door to four-door styling, but to me the second-gen NA Focus two-door seemed to be channeling the two-door Toyota Echo in its upright frumpiness.
I’ve got a 2011 Focus (same body style). It’s styling hasn’t aged well but it’s been dead nuts reliable since I bought it new.
Jeep Wrangler, of course. It’s basic design goes back to WWII, and its evolution has been so slow and subtle that a new one always looks just like one from 20 years before.
It works and it’s a classic, but it’s like the old Beetle – this year’s version is the same as last year’s, and so on.
All small Nissans, Fiat 500L, all Honda CR-Vs, Honda Accord Crosstour, Buick Encore, all Acuras with the beak grill, and 2017 Ford Mustang.
2007 Taurus Fleet – taken
2007 Chevy Uplander – was always ugly http://o.aolcdn.com/commerce/autodata/images/CAB70CHV302B0101.jpg
2007 Suzuki Forenza – https://i.ytimg.com/vi/9ccfM6EOqtg/maxresdefault.jpg
Another fun QOTD.
I’d have to offer up the 2007 Hyundai Accent. The “egg” version.
I guess you could put all Hyundais (and Kias) into that category.
It’s funny you brought up an Infiniti, because I was going to say the 2009 Altima.
Failing that, I proudly foist an easy target: the 2014 Kia Sedona.
Oooo that is a good pick. It looks about 20 years old in and out.
Pontiac Grand Prix. The previous two generations have aged better. Especially the 5th generation that was 88-96.
The final Bonneville almost made my list. But looking at photos it felt wrong to criticize the last large Pontiac.
Isn’t the G8 the last large Pontiac sir?
Damnit!
Is a Holden-wearing-an-Arrowhead really a Pontiac?
And I’m back in the game! Lol
Yes it is.
Well, it’s the last large FWD Pontiac. I’m okay with the Bonnie. I think it looks better than the GP.
I’ll give you Bonne in certain colors. Black, or that super pearl metallic, and we’re good to go.
http://spidercars.net/wp-content/uploads/images/2005-Pontiac-Bonneville_13943.jpg
Yep.
Dats a nice Bonnie.
I forgot about this one. With its mis-proportioned grill, wonky tail light bulges continuing the trunk and just plain wrong rub strips, GM got all the sides wrong, and it looks just terrible now.
The grille was so bad. Yuck.
No way, I love the original W Grand Prix.
Well…the ones with squinty 77-78 Firebird headlights and nice body color trim, anyway.
I love the early W Body GPs. The 2004-2008, not so much. I love the 88-96. I don’t know why. Maybe it transports me back to a more simple time.
My favorite old W-body was the Cutlass Supreme coupe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldsmobile_Cutlass_Supreme#/media/File:Oldsmobile-Cutlass-Supreme-Coupe.jpg
We give automakers crap for making a car for too long, but that also means that the original design was solid.
I like almost all early W-Bodies. The Cutlass may be the best.
The only early W design I have true hate for is the Lumina. Something so odd about it, as if GMs Design Studio drew something up in 1975 to predict what a sedan would look like in 1995.
No Lumina is good. The early Z34 coupes are the best of the lot though.
The reason the Lumina looks like what it does is that the design was originally done around 1985 or so when GM was developing a plethora of midsize cars (H-body, W-body, L-body) and it was supposed to be on another platform.
I agree with the Cutlass coupe being best and the Lumina being…ill-advised. Now if only the Cutlass and GP had had factory 3.8 power…
The last Cutlass Supreme coupe was a car I owned and loved for a few years. I had a 94 which had that great final body style, but still the interior from ’88. It was a weird mix.
Adam, agreed. My cousins 2006 Grand Prix is still sitting here waiting on parts. Its awful to look at, and the rear seat is like sitting in a coffin. I’m sick of looking at it. I told him months ago what parts I needed to fix it, but he steadily puts it off.
I’m tempted to put it in N and roll it down the hill. Smashing into a pine tree could only improve its looks, and at least it wouldn’t be the first thing I see when stepping off my back porch.
The grille is so unsettling.
@Dan re: 1995 Lumina
Sit inside a 1986-1988 Taurus, then sit in a 1995 Lumina.
Its like they took a gen one Taurus dash, added a passenger airbag and used a screwdriver to pry odd the “TAURUS” badge and glued a “LUMINA” badge in its place.
Still better than the 1973 Oldsmobile dash in the first gen Lumina. I swear, its like they spend all their styling budget on the exterior (which was a waste) and forgot to do the dash. So, they just stuck the Celebrity dash in and called it a day.
Clearly they were counting on only selling the car to people who were such strong GM loyalist that they had never even sat in a Taurus or Accord.
I might get a sheet thrown over me and the the $h¡t beat out of me for saying this, but the 1988-1994 Tempo dash was more modern than the first gen Lumina’s IMO.
I remember reading an article on the new-for-’88 Tempo where they said the dash looked more like something you’d find in a Honda rather than an American economy car. I agree.
The “ribbon” speedometer on the first gen Lumina was hilarious – especially compared to the dashes of the other W bodies.
“Well we wouldn’t want Uncle Clem to be turned off by that new fangled dash like in the Grand Prix so lets give him what he’s been looking at since about 1970.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_HHR#/media/File:2007ChevroletHHR-001.jpg
Icky.
Hahaha. My parents had a 2007 HHR. I think they got it for $11K, new. Now my sister has it because beggars can’t be choosers. She thought they were going to lease her a Prius C, but a car transport truck dropped off tha HHR turd for her instead.
I think HHR might be the best answer.
Funny how popular compact crossovers are now, but in the first few years they were still figuring out what people wanted and were still in love with retro styling.
I was thinking PT cruiser but the GM version serves just as well. Ford had a 49 Ford and a retro Tbird that stuck around about long enough for a cup of coffee. All of them fit the bill intentionally. To give credence to my geezer cred, I liked them all when they came out.
You guys remember when America thought Hummers were cool? When I see an H2 today, in 2017, I feel a little embarrassed for them.
I’ve thought about buying one because I still think they are cool, and they are getting cheap too!
I’m amazed, because they actually hold their resale value rather well. I would think people would have dropped them like hot-potatoes, but evidently not. And still, there’s nothing quite like a Hummer (wasn’t that their slogan at one point?)
there’s nothing quite like a Hummer…
Whether it was their slogan or not that’s a true statement. ;-)
There’s nothing quite like a Holden.
Hummer: Like Nothing Else.
Definitely dated.
H2s, to me, have always projected a sense of inexplicable outward aggression and a juvenile need to be noticed.
The H3s are a much more reasonable size. Not a very good vehicle overall, though. Fantastic off road but kind of a one-trick pony. Pillbox greenhouse, cheapo interior, a wheezing donkey-slow 5-cylinder plus a 5000lb curb weight to provide Toyota Yaris acceleration with an incredible thirst for fuel (14/18 mpg).
That’s why you get the V8 one!
Now you’re at 4-cylinder Camry acceleration and 13/16 mpg!
But, then you can say it’s an H3 Alpha. Top dog! rawr! rawr! rawr!
To me the H3s are like the CLAs.
“Hey I’m poor but I dream of being rich and want people to think I’m not broke”.
I can’t help but see the H3 buyer as “This car is not capable and is useless, but I want to be able to brag that I bought a Hum-Vee, despite it really just being an overpriced Chevrolet”
But maybe I’m biased.
Do you know much about the vehicle you’re talking about? Or are these just assumptions misconstrued as facts?
The H3 is far more capable than a TrailBlazer, and they were somewhat related but were not the same vehicle.
The H3 was based on the first gen Colorado. Again, the TrailBlazer was related but not the same. Case in point: the TrailBlazer had an Inline 6, the H3 had the I-5 from the Colorado.
For something not capable, please name a period mainstream (so not a Land Rover or Land Cruiser) SUV other than the Jeep Wrangler that is as capable off road. The Toyota 4Runner comes close, but of sheer off road ability, I would pick the H3 over it.
Nissan Xterra or possibly a crew-cab Frontier/Tacoma.
I argue that they still don’t match the H3’s abilities. Just because it didn’t suck off road like an Explorer or TrailBlazer doesn’t mean its a trail king.
Look at its approach and departure angles, its 4 wheel drive systems, it was not a poser SUV like the cartoon styling suggests.
Picking the Nissan Juke or Cube seems almost like shooting fish in a barrel. The current Civic hatch seems like it will be a perennial contender. The original Ridgeline was a poke in the eye. Chrysler offers the hunchback 2007 Sebring sedan and the bug-like Jeep Compass. The front end of the original Subaru B9 Tribeca makes me long for the halcyon days of the Edsel.
This is news to me.
I didn’t like the cube, but I don’t think it looks outdated. I also think the Juke still looks very modern. I also think the Compass looks fine on the road.
How about the new for ’07 Chrysler Sebring?
http://www.conceptcarz.com/images/Chrysler/chrysler-Sebring_2009_image-04-1024.jpg
The style job was always the opposite of right, but now it’s aged to imperfection.
What a splendid and realistic backdrop for that Sebring.
It’s the help’s car. The master and mistress of the manor will shortly be wanting her to move the damnable thing off the main drive and to the rear of the estate before the neighbors spot it.
Well, since we’ve named a bunch of late-2000s Dodges to the list, let’s just add the Avenger, and decree the entire Chrysler and Dodge lineup sas the worst aging…
Except, of course, for the 300C.
I was going to go for something easy like the PT Cruiser, but instead I’ll go for a subtle one, the sixth-gen Sonata.
A drastic departure from the plain, starchy fifth, it sports a “four-door coupe” profile and offbeat use of chrome. I’ll admit, I was pretty stunned when I saw it, but even then many said it would date fast, and it has. It is now an utterly anonymous car, and I’d argue it’s aged worse than the plainer 5th gen.
Hyundai itself toned down the slinky styling for the current 7th gen.
Yep, I was saying that about the Sonata. Way too swoopy and incongruous.
I like the early 00’s Sonata. But thats because it was square and boring, how I like my cars. I always hated the cockroach looking newer Sonata.
+1 on the Sonata. I didn’t think it would age well, and it really hasn’t.
I’d also say the same for the seventh-generation Honda Accord, and for the same reason.
+1 on the last-gen Sonata. I turned my mother away from it (mostly) because I thought it wouldn’t age well (style-wise at least). When it first came out, it caught my eye, but something inside of me just made me feel it wouldn’t look very appealing five years down the road. It’s cousin, the Optima, seems to have faired a tad better in the “aging well” department.
For some reason, I’m only now softening to the 7G Accord. Knowing what the rest of the world got instead is what really gets my goat.
Personally, I’d say that Sonata’s styling has aged fairly well.
Now, the cars themselves…that might be another story.
Except for the hybrids tail lights…
Have you seen the 6th gen hybrid tail lights? My goodness, I feel like I’m looking into the future, literally.
Previous-gen Ford Mustang. Retro is dead and buried.
Man, that’s harsh. I’d still love me a last-gen GT.
What’s funny to me is that my lady loves the 1965 to 1973 Mustang and the 2005 and up Mustang. Can’t stand any of the other designs even though she was born in 1983 and came of age when the Fox Body Mustangs were as common as dirt.
Your lady has good taste in cars. She sounds like a keeper.
I’m a Mustang person, I’ve owned three new ones over the years and I still own one. I liked the ’64 1/2 – ’70s, especially ’67 – ’70, but I was never able to stand the bloated, blocky ’71 – ’73 from the minute they hit the showrooms (the unfortunate and short-lived “Bunkie” Knudsen attempt to move the Mustang toward the “personal luxury” segment). I also didn’t care much for the Mustang II or the early Foxes, but by the mid to late Fox years they had gotten a lot better. In fact, my second new Mustang was a ’93 LX 5.0 5-speed in Electric Red. I had that car for ten years and wish I still had it. She loved to run. I didn’t like the SN95 much, the criticism of which (too curvy) led to the New Edge Mustangs of ’00 – ’04, which brought back the slab sided, harder-edged (hence the name) styling of the 1st generation ‘Stangs. The Edge cars could look nice depending on their options and color, and the ’03 – ’04 SVT Terminators are still legendary. I didn’t like the 2005 5th gen restyle for a few years (I thought its “mouth” was open too wide) but by 2010 they looked a lot better (smaller mouth), and 2014 is my favorite recent model year. The 6th gen Mustang is ok but a little too curvy and a bit awkward-looking from certain angles, IMO.
I’ll name a few offenders:
1) Honda Element
2) Honda Ridgeline
3) First-gen Dodge Charger (could be that so many of them have devolved into ‘hood crawlers…)
4) Dodge Caliber
And my nomination for the one from that era that’s aged the best:
Chrysler 300C. Still tasty today.
3) 2000s Dodge vehicles (could be that so many of them have devolved into ‘hood crawlers…)
4)
Fixed!
True, but a lot of early-to-mid-2000s Dodge designs still hold up pretty well today. The Intrepid, Neon and first-gen Durango come to mind. All of them troll the ‘hood quite stylishly.
But the Charger was ugly when it was brought out and looks worse today.
Think of the 07 Durango. BLEH
http://www.cstatic-images.com/stock/900×600/240503.jpg
Yep. And the Chrysler Aspen looked even more ridiculous.
But the first-gen Durango still looks pretty good today. And you see a lot of them around. Chrysler had good stuff going on before the Anschluss.
Here in salt land, the gen 1 Durango died many moons ago. I haven’t seen one in quite some time.
And the Voyager rear end bothered me on those.
Cars don’t rust as much here, Corey…but the reason, as it turns out, is that the climate here is arid, despite the fact that we get a good amount of snow. Colorado uses mag chloride versus salt, and technically, it’s just as corrosive as salt.
But we also have very low humidity here, and 80-90% of the time, it’s sunny and dry. You never get rainy days in the winter (or any other time of the year) like you’d get where you live.
So, here, the mag chloride (or salt) doesn’t have as much moisture to interact with.
That’s probably why cars rust more in your neck of the woods, or in the upper Midwest. Salt + humidity = rust.
Exactly. Having grown up in Ohio I can tell you two stories from the Northwest part of the state.
1984 Chevy Malibu sedan, two tone brown, copper interior, few options except the V8. Purchased my a little old man who died a few years after. Widow kept it and it lived almost every night in the garage. Rarely driven in poor weather and it was NOT a heated garage. Concrete floor and fairly weather tight.
The old lady finally passed in about 1992. The kids sold it off to the dealer where it had been purchased. Body panels were straight and rust free. They got it up on the lift and you could literally poke your hand through the frame due to the rust.
My Dad’s cousin Bruce owned a body shop. He picked up a 1st gen Dakota Sport with the V8 pretty cheap. Two wheel drive short-bed, gorgeous paint and body. No damage he was just looking for cheap wheels for himself.
He put it on the lift at the body shop (one of those ones that lifts the car by the middle, letting the suspension hang). The truck came off the ground and started to break in two at the point the bed and cab met. Soft rusty frame.
Mike, I’m detailing a first gen Durango SXT this afternoon (I’m halfway done, taking a break at the moment). 144K on it.
Its the one I mentioned before that I was sure was powered by a giant box fan, given the noise and the acceleration.
I agree regarding the first gen Charger, the only place it EVER looked good was in dark blue as a government fleet car in NCIS.
No. The 300 was gross until 2011.
Actually, I’d say the 2011 300 shrank the original design’s balls.
If I didn’t know that all the old 300s were basically used up or trashed by now, I’d love a cherry one. In Inferno Red. With the Heritage Package.
http://www.conceptcarz.com/images/Chrysler/chrysler_300c_heritageEdition_manu-06_01.jpg
I agree with Adam. The first-gen 300 was a daring concept that (as always with DaimlerChrysler) was ruined by a million obviously cheap details. It looks like a gangsta Caliber.
The second gen actually added refinement adequate for the price point.
If Corey wanted to choose a 2006 Infiniti he could have allowed a dozen years for the question. But choosing 2007-17 makes me wonder how many fingers he sports as this is an 11 model year span.
As someone who owns an Accord coupe, wants AWD and won’t shell out the cash for an Ac-cord-ura, my choice had to be the Crosstour. I look at the styling as the modern answer to original Eagle. To add more hilarity to the mix I have an older cousin who owns a Crosstour as does my wife’s younger cousin.
The automotive mullet known as the Chevy Monte Carlo. If you think the exterior is bad, there are dog kennels with nicer interiors.
I’ll agree with this, except that the last Monte didn’t “age” badly — it was horrible from the second it was introduced. As a bonus it’s also possibly the worst-packaged FWD car ever built.
Mercedes has been incapable of designing anything that ages gracefully since the 90’s. Original CLS and R-class looked cool when they came out, not at all now. Also +1 on the last-gen Sonata. Also vote for the Sedona/Entourage and Spectra. Most Korean cars, really.1
That’s not true – the W210 E-class has aged very gracefully. But you are right that most of their other cars from this period haven’t
Whoops, meant the W211
I largely agree. One of the issues I’ve had with Mercedes is how badly they age…
I just think of the GIANT headlights that were synonymous with mercedes in the 2000s…
Came in here to place my vote for the original CLS. The cars were beautiful new, but I only see them for sale on those shady third owner lux car specialty lots in tougher parts of town now.
2005 to 2010 Optima and 2009 to 2014 Subaru Legacy.
Generic sedan, size medium.
This is so noticeable on the Legacy cause the previous gen was excellent to behold.
I would actually argue the opposite, generic vehicles like those age better because no one really looks too hard at them. They don’t stand out enough to be noticed.
This, Mandalorian.
I agree, that’s the point I was trying to make about the Suzuki Reno. It doesn’t age poorly because it didn’t make much of an impression when it was new.
Its the wildly futuristic models that tend to age poorly. Some more so than others.
Exactly right. How could I have left off the Optima? I liked it when it first came out but then it aged so quickly. Just a horrible design.
This doesn’t meet the rules… but a fairly well-kept 2-door Oldsmobile Intrigue passed me the other day. It really didn’t look as good as I had remembered it. As for 2007-2017 designs, I’m with those who think almost no Nissan or Infiniti looks right new and most look even worse a few years down the road.
No such thing as a 2 door intrigue – perhaps you saw an alero.
This should have been a thing.
I saw the original 2-door Alero concept in the flesh at an event in ’97. That thing was gorgeous and looked different in all the right places from the one that got built. They should have made the concept version.
I love the Alero coupe. Just drop the 3400 boat anchor most were saddled with.
Give me a coupe with a 2.4L mated to the Getrag 5 speed and I’ll forgive the poor build quality.
My bad…yes, an Alero.
All 2017 full sized pick ups. Fugly is as fugly does. Enough said.
+10
I am going to have to pick the Lexus NX. My god that thing is hideous. Perhaps even the entire current lexus predator look. Part of me wants to like it, but its difficult to look at on a car that is supposed to be luxury/classy. It comes off as just gawdy at times, especially on models that have no sporting intentions.
I am the president of my home owners association and I have considered issuing blight citations to the two owners of the NX in my hood, citing deed restrictions that require unsightly yard waste to be garaged or placed beside/behind home until garbage pick up day.
The Volkswagen Tiguan looks like it just rolled out of a time machine from 2002. With its rounded, frumpy design and decade old VW styling cues, it looks like the logical follow-up to the ’99 Passat rather than something sold new in 2017.
We have a winner. No wonder VW is itching for a new crossover to sell, there current one doesn’t look like it was made during this decade.
Since it debuted in calendar-year 2006 in the rest of the world, the Tiguan’s basic bodyshell *is* from another decade. They put new fascias and a revised interior in it to bring it more-in-line with the then-newish Golf Mk.6 for 2012 or so, but yeah, it looks its age.
I think the Equinox and Terrain have also aged poorly, mostly due to their plastic-fantastic interiors and wide swaths of small, incomprehensible buttons.
I test drove the Equinox (I think it was a 2010) before buying my Enclave. I thought it drove nice enough, although the four-banger was a dog–too much car for the engine. Maybe the six cylinder makes it more tolerable. And yes, the cockpit felt dark and depressing (the plastic didn’t help here). It’s interesting that even though my Enclave’s design is a couple model years older, it feels like a fresher design. Then again, it’s a Buick. Maybe a Traverse is a different story.
And the new 2018 Tiguan looks dated before it even hits the streets.
The 2017 Lexus IS. Makes me gag every time I see it.
Cars should never be inspired by origami.
I was actually going to say the 06-12 Lexus IS. Park one next to a 3 series and it’s hard to deny which has aged better…
Origami? I had assumed those creases came from the designer crumpling the paper into a ball and throwing it into the waste basket.
I can’t think of anything that has aged poorly.
The cars from ten years ago that look bad now were unattractive from the start. It’s not as if there ever was a golden age for the 2007 Amanti or Sebring.
Excellent point. If it started out bad, chances are it won’t improve with age.
Although I think more people warmed up to the oval 1996-1999 Taurus/Sable years after it left production.
The currently on sale Buick Cascada looks very dated.
Agreed. But, that could be because it is. Its one of those “not a new car, just new to us” things.
Rumour has it that the Cascada started life as the next gen Saab convertible, before GM got rid of the Swedish marque.
Even in the European lineup (Opel/Vauxhall) it sits awkwardly, bigger than an Astra (Verano), smaller than an Insignia (Regal)
Second-gen Scion xB. The first gen was daring and efficient, the next-go-round mutters “we kinda gave up.”
Considering that the last-of-breed 2015 looked exactly like the 2008, yeah they kinda did.
Nobody said Mitsubishi Mirage?
+1 – the Mirage looks like it was launched in 1999. Which is sad because Mitsubishi had sharp designs in the 1980’s relative to Nissans and Toyotas of the time with models the Mirage, Galant, Sigma and Pajero.
2007 lincoln mkx. The chrome front, enough said. Also, the 2007 ford escapes and taurus’s.
The refresh of the MKX really aged the original vehicle. The all new 2015 MKX aged it even more.
the Nissan Titan. I couldn’t believe they were selling the SAME truck from 2003-2015.
Now this is one of those cars thats tricky, because when I look at pictures, they don’t look THAT bad…
But when I see them on the road I think “OMG- Thats awful”. They had some really odd colors over the years like the seafoam green.
A seafoam green Nissan Titan with the trademark yellowing headlights and clearcoat peel? Youd think the thing was from 1995, and then you find out it was a 2015 and think “WHHHAT???”
Cadillac SRX.
YES!
This is a good suggestion. The gen 1 SRX is just a mess.
Did the people who designed everything aft of the c pillar know what the rest of the car was going to look like?
How could they? Clearly they were visually impaired.
Not fooling anyone, it’s clearly a CTS with a fiberglass shell on the back.
First-Gen 06-16 Jeep Compass. They started ugly, stayed ugly for a decade, and as they age, get even uglier. That bulbous front bumper. Square wheel wells with disproportionately small wheels. The 7-slot grille slapped on a Caliber. The hey-I’ve-got-round-headlights-like-a-Wrangler poseurness. Yuck.
I always think of the pre-refresh Compass the Wrangler’s mentally challenged little sister. Mom had a fling with a meth junkie and then an alcoholic during her pregnancy, and it shows.
Slapping a Grand Cherokee nose on it helped.
Not an easy question to answer because there are numerous ways of defining ‘dated’. I don’t want to fall into the trap of simply naming an ugly vehicle (ie. Crosstour), so I’ll define it as a design that looked fresh and attractive to a large audience when it launched but is tied so deeply to the period of its birth that it just looks old.
2007 VW New Beetle
2007 Chrysler PT Cruiser
2007 Ford Mustang
Honorable mention goes to the category of conservative mainstream cars that looked OK/innocuous back then but just seem faded and old now: That Malibu Maxx, the Kia Rio, the Taurus, the 2008 Corolla.
Four nominations from me (some of which have been mentioned already):
-’07 Dodge Charger. It looks like it was designed by a 13-year-old, reflecting their idea of cool at the time.
-’07 Lexus IS. Kind of the same affliction as the Charger, plus the fact that a lot of the ones I’ve seen look like they’ve been used up within an inch of their life.
-’07 Infiniti M45. It’s not wholly unattractive (taillights aside), but it was staid-looking then, and only more so now. My impression of it is also probably shaped by the number of them I’ve seen with completely hazed-over headlights.
-’07 Subaru Impreza. I guess this one is easy to pick on since it was the second refresh of the new-for-2000 model. I don’t think it’s unattractive (aside from the stupid aero grille), but the 2008 model left it light years behind stylistically.
Edit: I have an M35, the revised version, and I disagree! I was thinking you meant the M45 from the early 00s.
You are excused because the M45 is completely forgettable. What is even sadder is it was Infiniti’s top of line vehicle at the time.
M45>M56>Q70
It’s -still- the top of the line vehicle.
I’ll hold off until they rename it Z100. This way, I’ll know it’s top of the line, pure flagship Infiniti.
I loved the first M45, just needs the flatter JDM Nissan front clip.
-’07 Subaru Impreza. I guess this one is easy to pick on since it was the second refresh of the new-for-2000 model. I don’t think it’s unattractive (aside from the stupid aero grille), but the 2008 model left it light years behind stylistically.
Methinks you are confused. The 2006 and 2007 Impreza’s had the same body style and larger 2.5L engine. They were coined the “Hawkeyes”. Then the 2008 came out and was a stylistic dud; so bad that it was refreshed for 2009.
Huh? I was thinking of the one below, which as far as I know lasted until the 2007 model year, which was the second facelift of the second generation:
http://static.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/images/Auto/izmo/286623/2007_subaru_impreza_wagon_angularfront.jpg
Which was followed by this, first sold as a 2008:
http://media.ed.edmunds-media.com/subaru/impreza/2008/oem/2008_subaru_impreza_4dr-hatchback_25i_fq_oem_1_500.jpg
As far as I know, the third-gen got a very slight update with a different grille, but was otherwise basically the same until the 2012 model came out.
I’d say the 07-08 Acura RL. Seems like they were too forgettable for anyone to have already mentioned. Its still hard to understand how they got the ’04 TL so right and that car so wrong.
The RL never really was a standout. The original one was even blander…
I’m going to go on record and predict the current Chevrolet Cruze and Malibu will not age well stylistically. The Cruze is way too fussy in its detailing, with a swoopiness that screams cheap to me. The Malibu is just too generic overall, and the squinting headlamps hark back to the 1980’s. Now I have no issues with car styling from the 80’s, but it just doesn’t work here. Oh, and those DRLs that look like they are about to fall off, who approved that?
I’ll buy that for a dollar.
Impala aside, current Chevy design language is lost on me. The Malibu and Cruze look squished. The first gen Cruze was a good looking car to me.
How about the Land Rover LR3.
I know its a retro design, but I bet most people don’t realize how dated it still looked in the mid to late 2000s. The Discovery 3 was actually sold through 2009!
The LR4 looks like a rocket ship compared to the LR3.
I don’t think the Range Rover faired much better, but I guess it can be argued that its jeepesque, but even the interior to me looks dated.
Is there a reason why 2011 Crown Victorias have not been mentioned yet?
In my defense I have a 2008 MY of its Mercury sister.
Panthers are classics, not aged designs!!!
A Panther is the definition of non-descript. It is ageless and timeless.
I’m going to defend the Maxx and Crossfire. They look dated now because they’re distinctive, nothing before or since looks like they do(whether or not that’s a good thing is left as an exercise for the reader). Most of today’s SUVs and 4-door-coupes will be spared the “curse” of looking dated because they all look like each other, they’re eminently forgettable.
I won’t defend the Q45, it shouldn’t be possible for a car to be that horrible AND bland, but there it is.
I never minded the Malibu Maxx either- as you say, it was distinctive, and that was something in short supply with the duller-than-dishwater sedan version.
I genuinely like the Maxx. I’ve even put them on my list of acceptable Uber cars, despite my reservations about their reliability.
Oldest styled with fewest styling updates
Hindustan Ambassador
Caterham 7
VW Beetle (air-cooled)
I saw a Chrysler Crossfire yesterday with a PapaJohn’s Pizza gizbob on its roof.
Hilarious.
Well at this point they are pretty stinking cheap, even pristine examples. I feel bad for that kid if he ever has to replace the 12 spark plugs in his 6 cyl engine or it munches its camshaft position sensor like they are known to.
So much knowledge, wasted in a dead end job educating our youth.
Well I plan on selling cars in retirement but that’s roughly 15 years away.
F-body Camaro and Firebirds. Hard to find one that doesn’t look like junk. Because new ones looked like junk.
Huh, a 2007 or newer F-body? Probably not.
Indeed, *any* F-body missed the cutoff by five full years.
I’d say the previous-gen Durango and especially its chromed out cousin, the Aspen, aged pretty badly. The previous 200 / Sebring didn’t do well, either. In general. Chrysler’s attempt to make every car look luxurious—without actually putting in the work to make that a reality—has aged very poorly.
So did the heavy-refresh version of the Focus, which was 2008-2011.
Agreed.
I don’t hate the 08-11 Focus, but a stylish and fresh design it was not. This isn’t something I would actually seek out to buy, but if I needed wheels and one came up in my price range and in decent shape, I might pull the trigger.
Maybe I only tolerate it because it was home to the only Focus coupe?
Indeed. And let’s not get into the various GM cars of that era that feel terribly dated. I can think of ten right now.
I agree – the 2008 Focus managed to look older than the 2007.
Yeah, the ’08 Focus didn’t age badly, it was “meh” from the get-go.
I know exactly one person who owns one.
Her previous vehicle was a late 1990s Cavalier, so from that, the 2009 Focus she has now was a step (albeit a tiny one) in the right direction.
People! You’ve got to never forget the hideous abortion leftovers that led to the GM deathwatch series! Uplander, Terraza, and Relay…True story. I know a woman (not all that bright) who owned a 2 year old Uplander, and the dealer actually refused to take her Uplander in C4C!
Gen2 Insight. I’m a Honda fanboi, and I can’t stand it.
Any Infiniti, Buick, or Oldsmobile from the 90’s. Nothing good or positive with those brand models of the 90’s.
Again, perhaps READING THE ARTICLE would help. 1990s cars are not from 2007-2017.
Hell, even the headline gave you that much information!
Headline TL:DR
Sorry Cory, I don’t get the acronyms. Explain.
TL:DR
Too Long : Didn’t Read
Ha! I have a feeling a lot of my long-winded comments fall into that category for many of the B&B.
QX50 and 70. Eww.
The Suzuki Reno is a totally anonymous hatch. Yes, it’s a piece of hot garbage, but I have no idea how someone could mention it as having aged poorly, given what Aveo hatches look like. Wasn’t it designed by that Italian studio?
I’m a big Hyundai fan, but yeah, I never liked that 2007ish Sonata. All other generations were quite handsome. But hey, it sold well.
Oddly, that was my favorite Sonata of all time. That’s not saying a whole lot, actually. Lets put it this way: its the only Sonata I could actually see myself owning.
This is based on styling alone, because…
They do not age well mechanically. I see plenty of examples with less than 150k with “engine knocks” or some other mechanical disaster.
C3 C3 C3 C3 C3 C3 C3 C3 C3 C3 C3 C3 C3 C3 C3
thetruthaboutcars.com/2017/01/mercedes-gets-more-into-mobility/#comment-8896073
Now don’t you start!
I’m starting to think C3 is a prophet of our lord, 3800.
The Convent of Trigger and Vacuum protests this addition.
Pontiac Aztek. Dated and ugly too.
There was no 2007 Aztec.
No, but they were still selling them brand new in 2007. I think they sold something like 75 of them until the supply ran dry.
If anything, the Aztek, along with the ZDX, look BETTER now than they ever did. They were prophets that showed up looking alien, but blend in just fine nowadays.
That does not mean either of them are a masterpiece, but they definitely go against the premise of this question.
Ugh…No. Just no. The Aztec was ugly 10 years ago and it’s just as ugly today.
If we ask this same question in ten years, my vote will be for the 2017 Civic. It’s ugly now and I can’t see it ever aging well.
Two I haven’t seen mentioned yet:
– Gen 1 CTS (final model year in ’07). I say this as an owner of a Gen 2 CTS. Striking but really unrefined design. Those door handles ugh.
– Mark V Golf (Rabbit) and Jetta. Too-big headlights (virtually 100% of which are yellowed now), blobby shape.
Regarding the Q45 in the article, I remember how those headlights that look so ridiculous now were a major selling point at the time. I remember print ads with close-ups of the lighting elements and a parrot sitting on top of them or something. About as logical as the ads for the original Q45.
Yes, I believe the Q45 was the first production car to feature such an arrangement of HiD lamps like that.
For some reason, I love that headlight projector design, even if the rest of the car around it is utterly terrible.
The JDM Cima and President are much less homely, though still look like big marshmellows – which is a real shame, because the 2nd gen Q45 was very attractively designed.
Look up a picture of the first CTS’s interior if you want a good laugh. Made of leftover Saab NG900 and Nintendo 64 parts, with a big freakin’ 5.25″ floppy drive in the middle!
It seems the consensus is big headlights = dated. That wasn’t my criteria for making my list, but as it happens all of these do have big, tall headlamps, so maybe that’s part of why they look old.
Cadillac DTS – More than any other car I can think of, this one looks the most like it wandered in from the last millenium, yet it was built though 2011. Even when this car was new in 2006 it looked old. Of course it was just a facelifted 2000 DeVille, but *that* car looked old when it was new, too.
VW Passat – the model currently for sale has always looked a bit dated, not merely conservative and bland as it’s frequently described. The previous 6th-gen car looked newer.
Dodge Nitro 2007-’12 – not sure if this looks dated or just ugly.
GMC Envoy – there were a half dozen rebadged versions of this one, including several from now-orphaned brands (Oldsmobile, Saab, Isuzu), but I’m picking the GMC for a few reasons. Along with the Isuzu, it has the tallest, squarest headlamps. Unlike some of these TrailBlazer variants, the GMC offered that oddly proportioned 3-row extended version, which had a bumped-up roof over the 3rd row and had the proportions of a minivan. And then there was the Envoy XUV; evidently someone at GM thought that since the mid-’60s Studebaker Wagonaire was such a big hit, surely their was untapped demand for a new wagon/pickup truck tweener. It looked just like the 3-row version without actually having a third row.
– Ford Transit Connect first-gen. Looks more than one generation older than the current model (which I quite like).
I think some of your examples miss the point.
If the car was already very dated in 2007 (Taurus bodystyle was 7 years old, for example), then the fact that it hasn’t aged well is a moot point. Same for Crown Vic and Nissan Titan. Just my opinion.
My picks:
Chrysler Sebring
Honda Crosstour
Nissan Juke (argument could be made for damn near all Nissans)
BMW’s coupe CUVs
Mercedes-Benz CLA/GLA
Lexus predator grille models (all)
I think blandly styled cars age far better than most, so the Suzuki Reno is disqualified IMO. It isn’t good looking and no, I have no fondness for it, its just too bland to age at all really.
might be too old – caddy xlr
before anyone badmouths is, the Jag S Type, which I still own and love
… and I was glad I scrolled down before mentioning it.
Yes they’re nice cars, but compared to the XF and ‘new generation’ Jags, the entire 2007 sedan range – X type, S type and XJ look dated.
The Bugatti Veyron. By a decade. Maybe not completely fair since the concept was made in ’99. But what other supercar (hypercar?) manufacturer finalizes the design before even starting to develop the actual car?
Hence it looked (and was) over 5 years old before the first one was even sold in 2005
1. Cadillac XLR. It looked like car that should have ceased production in 1999, not 2009.
2. PT Cruiser. Can’t believe that thing lasted until 2010. Every time I see one, I can picture the wife saying, “honey, remember when we were cool, way back when the PT Cruiser was hot?”
I know it’s wrong, but I want an XLR. Mostly because it’s wrong.
Nah, man…not the XLR – that thing still looks futuristic. Turns my head, anyway. But then again, so does a ’83 380SL.
2016 Chevrolet Camaro! It was nice for the 2010-2015 cars with their take on modern retro but the “’69 Maro” look is played out.
Amen.
Pre-facelift Chevy Trax. Looks like they designed it in 2004 and forgot about it. When I first saw one, my first thought was, “Hmmm…which 2004 Saturn was that?” But no, it was a new 2015 model!
Mercedes GLK: someone really liked the 2001 Toyota Highlander. Also, the dinner-fork wheels (http://www.originalwheels.com/mercedes-wheels/images/mercedes-glk-class-rims-85276-b.jpg) that 80% of them (base model) came with look like Pontiac leftovers.
Agreed on the Trax. I’d have put it in my list had I remembered it.
Its just so forgettable, can you blame me? Lol
Gen 2 Ford Focus. While the RoW moved forward, the American model was an exercise in cost-cutting.
The unbelievable blankness of the design is especially egregious on the rear lid.
I actually know the guy that was tasked with the ’08 Focus redesign, he said he was given really strict parameters that he had to follow when he did it, so the end effect was not one of his greatest hits, but those in charge were satisfied.
For the record, he’s really good at what he does, you would be surprised at some of the things he has done!
My list narrows down to specific cars, dont wanna list all of Lexus or whatnot:
1. Toyota Yaris, its okay visually but with its 4-speed auto, 1.5 litre 4 cyl, and its Tercel inspired suspension, the Yaris is still very much stuck in 1995. The latest Mazda-based Yaris only makes the original redundant.
2. The Nissan Juke will age just as well as the Pontiac Aztek did, ugly, but it will find a cult in time.
3. Most recent Honda Civic hatchback, which looks much like an older Hyundai Elantra mixed in with Nike shoes.
Allante.
Which Allante model was available new in 07?
Robert be careful. Nanny trolls are here to check your post.
Nanny trolls = people who don’t think 1997 was 10 years ago?
-or-
Nanny trolls = people who read the title and the article?
You made the idiotic posts, its not our fault for pointing it out. A troll would be more like someone who posts without any consideration for the article, not the people who point out that fact.
John, thank you.
Also, the Mitsubishi Galant that could still be bought new in 2012 looks like one of those “developing world” cars based on a decades-old platform but haplessly festooned with ugly bumpers and plastichrome to make it look “modern”. If I had never seen one, and you told me it was from Paraguay and based on a 1988 Mazda 626, I’d believe you.
Well Proton in Malaysia does sell Mitsubishi-based cars, I believe…
I briefly considered it for Uber duties. I mistakenly assumed that because it looks so bloated, it would be very roomy. But, it isnt.
And I also had this thought: “maybe there’s a reason so many newer examples are selling for the same prices as cars 10 years older.”
Great example of a nanny troll.
You seem to be taking this harder than necessary.
Na, just easy to mess with people that type like they drank to much caffeine.
The ’88 Mazda 626 looks a decade newer than it is, and arguably newer than the next generation or two of the 626.
The only car worse than a a Malibu Maxx was the standard Malibu sedan. The exterior and interior of the car looked almost east-bloc quality. These cars were so far behind everything else in the segment that they helped give Hyundai/Kia credibility in the market.
The only thing that always gave me pause on that generation of Malibu was the shifter. It looked like it didn’t belong with the rest of the interior.
http://tinyurl.com/gpptd56
I gave a Malibu SS (because 3900 V6 in midsize car) careful consideration but that shifter!
The remarkable thing is how much better that generation’s interior was than the previous one. GM really had a hole to climb out of in the ’90s.
http://images.gtcarlot.com/pictures/17058633.jpg
I’m with Dal. I’ll take it over the previous gen any day.
As a lifelong arrowhead fan the Pontiac G6 particularly the GXP version with it’s walrus tooth like grill and out of proportion rear wing. Not that it was a bad car. The Eplison platform offered a 3.9 VVT which for GM was quite advanced. At least it was not full of body cladding like 90’s era Pontiacs.
2017 Prius. (drops mic, turns back, walks off stage.)
QX50, QX70 hideous vehicles all versions. Updating the name every few years doesn’t change how hideous they look. Rear hatch makes them look like upside down bathtubs. Take a look at an older model. That mess of buttons on the dash look awful.
Most aged does not mean the same as ugly. With that said, the QX50 definitely looks like it’s from 2008.
The Infiniti vertical headlights are also nothing to keep around. Everyone I see is discolored and cracked.
2007 Suzuki aerio
I thought they were rare, but they kept showing up in my body shop and I was always hunting for odd moldings and clips
As a counterpoint I offer the 2007 Nissan Murano. Despite the slightly decked hood, à la the PT Cruiser, this car looks organic and interesting ten years on. I have no idea what they’re like to drive or own but the design had legs IMHO.
How dare you insult my Infiniti Q45. This has been much better looking than anything that Lexus has ever come out with
Don’t fret: my 2007 CTS-V is a victim of the fledgling ‘Art & Science’ design language. It looks like the box it shipped in – but I adore it. Also, I can’t say ‘Art & Science’ without yelling the latter word in an English accent.
Current Toyota Prius– because tailfins just needed to come back!
2011- ish Infiniti QX56.
Over 250 comments and nobody mentioned the Saturn Ion?
Pontiac G3
Chevy Aveo hatchback
Smart For two
From the Imitation is the Sincerest Form of Flattery School of Design:
2007 Kia Amanti
http://www.velocityjournal.com/images/stk/2007/ki2007amanti20112717m.jpg
Looks like some design student aped an (already ugly) Jag-you-ah S Type, from memory, while taking Quaalude.
2008 Jag-you-ah S Type!
http://momentcar.com/images/jaguar-stype-7.jpg
Kinda retro cool in ’99 when it premiered, then 9 years later, it looks like a Kia Amanti. Snicker.
Toyota Matrix – Boring and riced out at the same time
Pontiac Torrent – If anyone remembers the song from its commercial (“Struggle” by Ringside), it’s aged as well as that song
Nissan Sentra B16 – Looked like a French car for the third-world. Oh, wait.
Honda Element (can I get that in there?) – Good idea in theory, but reeks of the era between the ’90s and noughties where some thought everything was gonna go Dave Matthews
Couple of marques where their entire range look dated a decade later:
– Jaguar – X type, S type and last of the ‘old school’ XJs
– Peugeot – the pointy lights and blobfish styling of their x07 generation hasn’t aged well, the new x08 range seems to be a bit sharper
I would also say that the Mazda 6 introduced in 2007 hasn’t aged that well, especially as the replacement model is such a good looking car.
The newest Honda Civic. Does anyone like that strip of chrome across the front?