QOTD: Which Vehicles Sucked Compared to the Previous Generation?
On Monday, I asked you to tell me about vehicles that improved greatly compared to the prior generation; new models which were instantly and vastly superior to their predecessor.
Today, we’re going to flip it and talk about generational failures. Which vehicles were downgrades compared to the previous generation?
The failure may have been in the sales charts, where a new generation entered into a market that had moved on to other competitors, or a different type of vehicle altogether. Maybe quality fell off a cliff, or powertrain options were not as robust or as plentiful. Or perhaps the styling was so bad as to be off-putting to the consumer.
I thought long and hard about the example I’m about to give you. Here’s the last of the good Chrysler Fifth Avenues.
In 1989, you could purchase the last model year of the rear-drive M-body version of the Fifth Avenue/Diplomat/Gran Fury. The brown beauty pictured here is an ’87, because I can’t find great pictures of an ’89 model. Just as well, as the landau top grew for 1988-1989 and looked ill-fitting. Check out the interior.
Luxury, solidity and comfort abound, and the ancient Torqueflite automatic will get you there and back. The reliable Slant Six (until 1983) or 5.9-liter V8 powering these big beasts might suck down fuel through a carburetor (as late as 1989!), but don’t worry about that. You’ll be comfortable in the rich, plush environment. An environment which indeed was still available in Boudoir Rouge Velvet or Corinthian Cow or whatever. It even had an airbag (1989 only, not pictured)!
Then the calendar flipped to 1990, and the M-body was past its sell-by date because it was not a K-Car variant. Here’s what you ended up with that year:
Look at it — it’s awful. The trim looked like it was falling off straight from the factory. This Fifth Avenue was joined only by the Chrysler Imperial sedan on the large Y platform (the Imperial died in coupe form back in 1983). The Y was, of course, a very stretched K-Car underneath all the wood panel and landau. Let’s look at what you lost between 1989 and 1990.
- A full eight inches of length
- Rear-wheel drive
- Reliable Torqueflight
- Build quality
- V8 option
- Dignity
And, to add insult to poverty, the price increased by over $2,000. At least a red (lower quality) velour interior was still available. Happily, the Y platform luxury vehicles died after 1993, when they were replaced by the much-improved LH Platform New Yorker and LHS.
I’ll stop myself now, so you can give your own examples of vehicles that failed between generations.
[Images: eBay; Classic Cars Mark]
Interested in lots of cars and their various historical contexts. Started writing articles for TTAC in late 2016, when my first posts were QOTDs. From there I started a few new series like Rare Rides, Buy/Drive/Burn, Abandoned History, and most recently Rare Rides Icons. Operating from a home base in Cincinnati, Ohio, a relative auto journalist dead zone. Many of my articles are prompted by something I'll see on social media that sparks my interest and causes me to research. Finding articles and information from the early days of the internet and beyond that covers the little details lost to time: trim packages, color and wheel choices, interior fabrics. Beyond those, I'm fascinated by automotive industry experiments, both failures and successes. Lately I've taken an interest in AI, and generating "what if" type images for car models long dead. Reincarnating a modern Toyota Paseo, Lincoln Mark IX, or Isuzu Trooper through a text prompt is fun. Fun to post them on Twitter too, and watch people overreact. To that end, the social media I use most is Twitter, @CoreyLewis86. I also contribute pieces for Forbes Wheels and Forbes Home.
More by Corey Lewis
Latest Car Reviews
Read moreLatest Product Reviews
Read moreRecent Comments
- Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh *Why would anyone buy this* when the 2025 RamCharger is right around the corner, *faster* with vastly *better mpg* and stupid amounts of torque using a proven engine layout and motivation drive in use since 1920.
- Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh I hate this soooooooo much. but the 2025 RAMCHARGER is the CORRECT bridge for people to go electric. I hate dodge (thanks for making me buy 2 replacement 46RH's) .. but the ramcharger's electric drive layout is *vastly* superior to a full electric car in dense populous areas where charging is difficult and where moron luddite science hating trumpers sabotage charges or block them.If Toyota had a tundra in the same config i'd plop 75k cash down today and burn my pos chevy in the dealer parking lot
- Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh I own my house 100% paid for at age 52. the answer is still NO.-28k (realistically) would take 8 years to offset my gas truck even with its constant repair bills (thanks chevy)-Still takes too long to charge UNTIL solidsate batteries are a thing and 80% in 15 minutes becomes a reality (for ME anyways, i get others are willing to wait)For the rest of the market, especially people in dense cityscape, apartments dens rentals it just isnt feasible yet IMO.
- ToolGuy I do like the fuel economy of a 6-cylinder engine. 😉
- Carson D I'd go with the RAV4. It will last forever, and someone will pay you for it if you ever lose your survival instincts.
Comments
Join the conversation
Chrysler 2nd gen LH's. Worse engines, worse interiors, uglier styling, and the Ultradrive fiasco still in full swing.
Both of these were foisted upon us during the Damlier-Benz occupation of Chrysler... *Gen 2 Dodge Durango---they took a really good looking and versatile vehicle (Gen. 1) and hit it with the ugly stick. The styling reminded me of the old tin toy blimps from the 30's/40's (complete with the wheels suffering from a comically narrow track).The plasticy hell-hole of an interior didn't help things much, either. *Gen 3 Dakota--let's take a really good-looking, popular vehicle, bloat up the outside, cheapen the interior, jack up the price beyond the Ram 1500, and watch sales drop like a rock.