We all contain multitudes, don’t we? That’s from the title of a novel I’ve never read and if I’m honest I don’t really get the significance of, but somehow it seemed like a good way to start this, because all of us as car lovers do have multitudes of ideas and feelings about all sorts of cars. And alongside the cars we love and admire and hate and revile there are those cars that, while they may not be our favorites, they’re cars that we feel strangely protective about. Cars that we have to speak up and defend when we hear them maligned, because deep down we know they deserve better.
I suspect we all have cars like this, leaking oil in the parking lot of our mind. Cars that we find ourselves in a genuine argument defending, as part of our brains float up and above, watching the conflict, wondering, hey, how did I get here? Why am I yelling at a dude for talking shit about a car I’ve never even owned? And yet here we are.
Mercedes told me for her that car is the Smart ForTwo, and I get that. She’s owned several, and they’re often the target of ridicule, undeserved, I think. For me, I think there’s two: the Fiat 500L, which I’ve defended on these very pages, and also the Yugo, which takes an extraordinary amount of bullshit from the world at large, and I think, needs me to defend it.
I once made a whole video defending this car, which I now own:
Man, now I’m getting worked up again, just imagining all the slights and eye rolls and dismissive comments that Yugos and 500Ls are inspiring, just by being mentioned. But I don’t think I’ll ever stop defending them.
Why am I like this? Who the hell knows? But I bet I’m not alone. I bet almost all of you have some sort of car you will always defend, and I want to know what they are, and why they make you feel the way you do, and how you defend them – everything. I want to know everything, always, forever.
So please tell me.
The Kia Soul. I ended up with one a few years ago and while it wasn’t my first choice and honestly my bar was set really low, it’s been a good car. It’s small but spacious and practical, gets decent gas mileage, has so far been dead reliable, and it’s basic like few modern cars are (which in my eyes is a plus). People talk a lot about how they want a practical, affordable hatchback in the modern market. To that I say here it is!
P38 Range Rover.
Despite their reputation as the “worst Range Rover”, they are built like tanks and the later Bosch ones in particular are quite good. A great mix of the old-school Land Rover experience (and the last RR with the Rover V8) while still being modern and luxurious enough to drive regularly. They also aren’t prone to rust like the Classics and Discos. I have a huge soft spot for these and love my ’01 4.6 HSE.
First-gen Cayenne would have been my other answer (I have an ’04 S), but they are finally starting to get the recognition they deserve.
996
It’s the best 911, particularly the mk1. The last 911 before the major bloat and the one that saved the brand along with the Cayenne and Boxster. Drive one. It’s like driving a Miata compared to a 992
ICE cars
The citroen c15 van. I have never owned one,but when I see one I can’t help but walk over and look at it. I think it because they’re such enthusiastic little car up for anything.
The 91-01 Explorer. Get called Jeeps (F’u), Exploders, Soccer mom SUVs, rollover hazards, etc.
Yes, the had a Firestone recall, yes they had a potential for timing chain rattle from the 4.0 SOHC, yes they had cheap interior plastics.
But man, they were the backbone of the American SUV movement and sold millions. There were 3 badge engineered variants, could be had in 2 door or 4 door; v6 or V8; 2wd, 4wd, or AWD; Manual or Automatic.
And these things are great off road!
I get a lot of “I worry about you” based on what I’ll go to bat for and/or want. The biggest one is the Lancer, though. Boy oh boy, does everyone love to give me grief for the Lancer. I get asked why I haven’t replaced it yet, hear “that’s not an Evo, so it’s bad” too often, hear about the state of Mitsubishi at the moment (as if that’s my fault? I can’t defend that), and blah blah, blah blah blah. It’s a great car, though! It will probably outlive most of its doubters.
My previous answer probably would have been the Cayenne, but for better or for worse, the internet seems to have caught on that Cayenne is always the real answer.
I’m no auto journo like yourself, but I do get blank stares when I defend the Lancer’s poverty-stricken little brother, the Mirage. For what it is: ugly, ungainly, and badly proportioned, it’s also reliable and infinitely better than what got you out of riding the bus back in the 90s and 80s. Wear a paper bag over your head and enjoy the ride!
The Mirage is fine! It does what it says it does: inexpensive transportation.
That trunk is unforgivably hideous, but the hatchback is fine! It’s so lightweight that it’s actually fun to toss around, too. I had one as a rental and I don’t think I turned a single corner on all four wheels (well, pre-concussion, anyway—it was on THAT weekend).
Let’s be real Stef, we know you gave the presentation that made them decide to turn the Eclipse into a crossover. At the Pajero Trials the truth will be exposed.
{ sharpens prison shank made of broken 944 tensioner rod }
Chrysler’s K-cars and all of their derivatives. Except for any one of them that were built with the Mitsubishi 3.0 V6 and/or the Chrysler 4-speed (electronically-controlled) automatic.
Give me any of the 2.2/2.5 engines (NA, turbo, etc.) with either the 3-speed auto, 4-speed manual, or 5-speed Getrag.
**Honorable mention for the Chrysler-Maserati with the Maserati-developed DOHC head on a Chrysler 2.2L turbo. The only Q worth owning.
The RX-7, really the rotary motor. Always hearing “Why do you like an unreliable motor that gets horrible gas mileage and has no torque?” The sound, the simplicity, the F1 level redline capabilities. I just love them. The argument that their reliability can be addressed with help from the aftermarket and knowledge and even besides that, the fact you can tear one down and rebuild it so easily always just gets dismissed.
It’s a real bummer how expensive they have become. I got my first JDM 13B turbo motor and trans for $1500 and rebuild with porting, upgraded seals, dowels, etc cost an additional $1500. Recently I looked around for another 13B-T just to play around with and swaps are $5k now. I don’t care what anyone says, they’re awesome.
Someone should make aftermarket rotary engines to OEM (or better) spec.
I will defend the base non-turbo Fiat 500 to my death. I had one for 12 years and I miss it to this day. It was hands down the most fun car I’ve ever owned. I don’t need no stinkin’ Abarth
My wife and I still have her 2012 Sport 5-speed. Zero issues except for a broken exterior door handle we had fixed. It’s a perfect little car, it’s paid for, and she’ll never let me sell it.
Mine wasn’t even a 5 speed and I still stand by how fun it was.
The automatic wasn’t exactly plan A, but despite the extra $1,000 option cost, it was the cheapest, most heavily discounted 500 on the lot at the time, so I took it and I have no regrets.
I’ve had a few issues and almost all of them were fixed by recalls or warranty work
I ended up dumping it after discovering it was burning coolant at 108k
I would say the chevy chevette and the nova
I find myself defending a lot of 80s and 90s GM designs. Not the engineering. Not the quality. Not the performance (with exceptions). The styling.
GM made some interesting looking cars back in the day that, had they been engineered better, made of higher quality materials, and assembled with a bit more care, would be looked at differently today.
Chevy Corvairs. They’re one of my dream cars, especially the two-year-only Lakewood wagon. I find them endlessly fascinating and it really grinds my gears that they still can’t break association with “Unsafe At Any Speed” and Ralph Nader.
Why, of all cars, did THIS have to be the sacrificial goat on the altar of safety? There was nothing wrong with it! Their supposed tendency to roll over has been debunked by many sources by now, including Hagerty using Ralph Nader’s own Corvair! Yeah, the dude only used that car as the example in his book because he owned one, because it was a good affordable car. Why couldn’t he have owned a Ford Falcon or Chevy II instead, and let the one truly different and innovative American compact car thrive without the burden of a false reputation for dangerous handling characteristics?
Even just recently I was at a car show where someone brought a Corvair, and someone remarked “too bad they would flip over real easy,” which prompted me to go on a rant about how they’re actually fine and were no easier to roll over than regular American cars of the era, and furthermore actually had very good handling.
So yeah, I feel a strangely powerful compulsion to defend Chevy Corvairs and hope to someday have one in the driveway. The American 911 calls to me.
I also feel a need to defend the Ford Pinto, the Suzuki Samurai, the Pontiac Sprint Six cars, the Subaru 360, the Trabant, the PT Cruiser, the AMC Gremlin and Pacer, the Plymouth Cricket, and all generations of Ford Thunderbird because screw it I love them all. Also various uncool/lesser-known platform mates of cool and sought-after cars, which I’m a sucker for (I really wanna import all the Alfa Romeo bits that could potentially be transferred to a Chrysler 200).
I always wonder what kind of future the Corvair could have had. Would it have fallen victim to the Malaise era or would GM have beaten Porsche to the rear-engined performance car niche?
It certainly would’ve lost a bit of horsepower during the Malaise era, but otherwise I think it would’ve thrived honestly. It was designed from the get go to be an economy car, and just happened to also be fairly sporty and fun to drive. It could’ve been Chevy’s 1970s compact car instead of the Vega, and given them a leg up on the competition as the fuel crisis wouldn’t have caught them so unprepared.
While it was never a direct Porsche competitor despite racing in a few series, I imagine a few special sporty versions would get made over the years to sort of compete with Porsche, so long as they don’t end up faster than the Corvette.
Speaking of the Corvette though, if Chevy had kept the Corvair’s transaxle in production, we could’ve had a mid-engine Corvette much sooner…
The closest thing we ever got to a Corvair successor was the Chevy Monza, which was named as such because Chevy still had the rights to the Monza name from the Corvair Monza. So if the Corvair had survived into the 70s and 80s, I imagine it could’ve looked quite a lot like the Chevy Monza, as both were semi-sporty economy cars. The aerodynamics of the Monza body would’ve complemented the Corvair platform’s fuel economy quite nicely.
If it were to somehow survive into the 90s, I imagine it would’ve had to follow the same path as Porsche eventually and switch to a water-cooled engine, but still could’ve made for a versatile and compelling package. The Corvair was always available in multiple body styles, which is its advantage against the 911. Where else will you find a rear-engined sedan or station wagon? That layout but modernized would’ve been very interesting to see.
The Corvair was also one of Chevy’s early experiments with electrification, so the GM EV1 could’ve potentially been a Corvair variant instead. If they’d kept the EV1 drivetrain FWD, an electrified 90s Corvair could’ve even kept the gas engine in the back and have been an early hybrid.
Bronco IIs. It’s the true spiritual successor to the 66-77, not the full size. It’s not a great car overall tbh, but it can be a fun little mountain goat.
Also 2 engines, the Ford 2.3 ecoboost and the 6.8 V10. After some early teething issues they both became some of the finest engines they’ve ever put out, but they’re remembered for those early issues.
Not sure if defend is the right word, but I do roll my eyes hard when I see the umpteenth mindless takedown of smaller “crossover” vehicles. They offer what wagons used to offer, with slightly easier access when your back hurts. When there are like 3 wagons available on the market and they all have inferior reliability, the rav4/crv/rdx and the like are the only option, and they do most things pretty well.
My first crossover was a Kia Niro and once I bought it i immediately understood the crossover craze, only after shitting on them for years
The “contain multitudes” thing is a reference to a Whitman poem where the narrator’s mother self deprecatingly says “I am large, I contain multitudes.” to fend off any insulting jokes about her weight leveled at her shy son by his middle school bullies.
I’m late to the party here, and I have to assume your post was made in jest. That said, for clarity, the quote is from Whitman’s “Song of Myself,” from Leaves of Grass (https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/45477/song-of-myself-1892-version). Towards the end (section 51 of 52), he writes:
See, also, this great analysis of how this phrasing has become a pop-cultural juggernaut:
https://www.penguin.co.uk/articles/2020/09/walt-whitman-leaves-of-grass-i-contain-multitudes-twitter-meme
The Nissan Cube with a CVT. Of all of the rentals cars I have rented in the USA, the 2012 Nissan Cube CVT was by far the most fun. The CVT made it a lot of fun with how you squeezed the throttle vs how power got out down. Fuel economy was excellent and it was even fun to zip around. Space was great too.
You, my new friend, are of supremely good taste.
Last October, I purchased a brand-new 2024 Mirage G4. My wife laughed at that first but my young daughters named it “Bluey” after the wildly popular Australian pup and I love it. It now has 5k miles on it and its first oil change has been done. It has no power but the AC kicks ass. It is small but has yet to fail us as now it is my sales call vehicle.
I used to FEEL like I had to defend this littlest of little cars but with a Euro-spec “BLUEY” metal plate on the front and a vanity plate of the same on the rear along with a 6” tall stuffed version of the canine slid into the passenger side “oh Jesus” handle, I get compliments from someone almost daily and my customers just love the thing.
My social life doesn’t seem to require me to defend any cars.
Sometimes the Prius, which is fine even if it would be better with an LSD to conserve the front tires.
Oh, Edsels and Pacers, and Edsel Pacers. People who know about them have some opinions. You think if AMC had not used the name of an Edsel, maybe the Pacer might have done better?
It seems a lot of people just know those cars for being sales flops or unpopular due to the styling, but don’t really understand what the issue with those vehicles was, so they jump to conclusions about what the car was like.
I’ve seen many people call both cars “lemons” when that couldn’t be further from the truth; the AMC straight six being bulletproof reliable if you took basic care of it, and the Edsel being no different than any other Ford or Mercury car under the skin.
I also blame association and confusion with the Chevy Vega for giving all the 1970s American compact cars a reputation for unreliability, when really it was just that one Chevy. People never believe me when I tell them the Pinto was actually a decent car aside from the gas tank issue, and that the cars were recalled so they don’t even have the explodey problem anymore and the wagon versions never did to begin with.
AMC’s only perceivable sin was making cars which looked funky and lasted long enough to become cheap first cars for people who no longer found such styling cool, and who likely had to deal with a decade or more of delayed maintenance and wear. Edsel’s only sin was marketing promising the future and delivering what was already the status quo, just in time for a recession no less. They were all fine cars, just a bit harmlessly odd.
Living in the Midwest and working at a GMC dealership, I find myself defending small cars constantly. I’m a firm believer in not buying more car than you need which is ironic when I constantly sell Yukons, Sierras and HD pickups.
My 3 series feels huge but I have a kid and a german shepard I only occasionally gripe that it’s not a wagon. I’d drive a smaller RWD sedan if they made one! Everybody here in the Midwest wants a bigger vehicle than their neighbor and it just feels so primitive to think that way!
How bout jellybean F150s? Good trucks, and unlike these modern, overagessive trucks, you could see over the hood!
There are dozens of us that like them!
It’s OK to be wrong
My Tesla Model S.
Yes, the guy is a nutjob and Tesla stans have become totally unhinged.
But the car is truly amazing, and it is not like the guy came up with it all by himself (definitely to a much lesser extent than the absurd Cybertruck). Plus, the early Tesla community used to be much more positive and welcoming, and many of those people are still there.
EVs in general. For daily drivers, there’s a lot of reasons why they are the better car in most cases.
For me it would have to be the C4 Corvettes (’84-’96). People love to hate these cars, especially other Corvette people, but they were really pretty decent cars for their time. In the early years, they held their own against their competition (beating many) and really gave GM a big step forward on turning the Corvette into a damned fine sports car.
The L98 and LT1/4 were reliable and decently powerful for their time with plenty of modding opportunities. Plus there’s the uber-hawt DOHC 5.7L LT5 in the ZR-1. The 700R4 was pretty mushy but that’s every auto from that period. The ZF6 (manual) was very nice (got one). The 4+3 (got one too) is a bit weird but it’s fairly reliable when treated well.
It hung on a bit too long due to GMs internal problems (see All Corvettes are Red book) and the refresh in 90-92 didn’t help it enough. GM took too long to get the C5 out there so the rest world had time to pass it by. The biggest problem is really just the people that pick them up cheap and beat the carp out of the poor things.
The Leyland P76. It always seemed to appear in the various books that were purported to be lists of “The World’s Worst Cars”, but without any mention of how advanced its design was for the time, and with little justification provided to explain why it was included.
Having owned and abused 3 of them, I could never find any reason why it deserved to be ridiculed. Every time I have talked cars with someone who has criticised them, it turns out that they have never owned one, driven one, ridden in one or often never even seen one, but most people I’ve met who have driven or ridden in one seem to at least respect them even if they don’t like how they look.
The 80’s Monte Carlo SS. Bone stock, an entirely adequate vehicle.
But may you don’t want bone stock. Well, the aftermarket has had nearly forty years to work. Want more power? Any number of larger small blocks, LSs, and even the current LTs are bolt-in. Want a stick? Third pedals and manual-ready color-matched center consoles are easily available. Wheels, brakes, suspension, honestly, take your pick!