Obviously, we all have our favorite cars. But in many if not most cases, those favorites aren’t exactly a single car; if you’re a Mustang person, you know the four-cylinder turbo Boostang and the V8-powered GT are two very different machines, no matter how outwardly identical-ish they may appear, and despite sharing the majority of their components beyond the most important personality- and performance-defining bits.
Few would argue, however, that a turbo Mustang and a proper GT aren’t both fun high-performance coupes and “real Mustangs.” Meanwhile, there are many examples of car models with a vast chasm of desirability between their “best” and “worst” variants. Let’s tall about them!
I’ll let Stephen and The Bish take the reins:
The Bishop
Growing up, we had a Datsun 280Z and a 1990 Nissan 300ZX; loved those cars. But the Z31 sleepy-eye Z? Bluhhh. The very disco 280ZX wasn’t much better. My dad test drove them and declared that they were “great Maxima coupes, but not Z cars”. I think that’s a fair assessment.
Stephen Walter Gossin
I had a thing for first-generation Sebring convertibles for a long time. The 1997 “all Chrysler” model (Chrysler engine and transmission) in base trim was the worst version, and got a four-cylinder engine. All other models got a Mitsubishi engine. The coupes were pretty much all Mitsu-power (except for the base model having the Neon engine), and the Gen 2 and Gen 3 cars were DCX (read: not Chrysler Corp) disasters with the notoriously bad internal-water-pump-equipped 2.7. Fun fact: the 2010 PT Convertible was the last “all Chrysler” (Chrysler brand) 2-door ever sold.
Your turn! What’s the worst version of your favorite car? Or any car you like. Or don’t even like, but you’re impressed by how great the good version is and shocked by how spectacularly low the not-good model goes. We’re not big on rules, is what I’m saying.
To the comments!
Any Golf with an automatic,it just sucks the life right out of them.
Can I get a big AMEN BROTHER! (use Randy Savage voice)
Any 4-cylinder BMW that isn’t an e30 M3.
The Iron Duke Camaro, why GM why?
GM: “Because we hate you!”
Actually, it was the US Congress who put that engine in that car. Blame them.
Bastards! At least my opinion of them isn’t getting any lower….because it is already at rock bottom.
Next you are going to tell me they are responsible for those catalytic converters in the 1970s.
Which Congress people did the engine swap? I want to know for future reference if I’m in the Washington DC and need to do an engine swap ASAP
LOL
8th gen Honda Accord sedan.
Datsun 260Z 2+2. Not actually a useful 4 seater car, and the stretched wheelbase absolutely DESTROYS the integrity of the design – all the gentle swooping curves of the roof/hatch and side windows become awkward angles.
Dunno if it’s my favorite car exactly, but I had a couple of CRXs and loved ’em. Worst version of that was the 2g DX with an auto. Never drove one, but my 1st was an 89 dx 5spd… Fun but stupid slow, can’t imagine how doggy it would have been with an 80’s slushbox.
I love Firebirds (shocker) but I do not care for the 74-76 style or the LT1s 93-97. Also not a big fan of 69s. The rest I love
I had a 1G Scion xB. Amazing car, just needed a touch more power, perhaps a 1.8 or 2.0 liter.
The 2G xB was just bad in almost every possible way.
I’ve owned four BMW E34 variants and driven many others. I actively hate the early M20 powered 525s. Paired with the four speed auto they were absolute dogs. 0-60 could be timed with a sundial.
I’d love to see you drive a Euro-spec 518i – 14.1 seconds to 100km/h with the available automatic and the original, 113PS engine (whyyyy?). To compare, a Euro 525i with the slushbox reached 100km/h in 9.5 seconds. The Ultimate Turtling Machine.
First/instant thought upon reading headline: 80’s era Audi Coupe. A FWD, non-Turbo version of the Ur-quattro.. Why ?!!?
I have always loved the Lincoln Continental, especially the 4th generation with the suicide doors.
However, the 9th generation was just a disappointment. It wasn’t as nice or robust as the Panther platform Town Car, nor was it a euro competitor like the LS. It didn’t seem to serve much of a purpose. Just kinda meh.
I guess that’s why it lost on Shitbox Showdown a week or so ago.
They are very good at having a 4V 4.6 in them though. So they get points for having the motor I want to yank out installed.
Any automatic E39.
I’ll vote for the third generation MR2. It lost the pop-up headlights and no hard top. It may be a great car and loads of fun, but I could never get past the design versus the first two generations.
I hated the looks of this car, but when test driving a 350Z I also test drove one of these and fell in love. I then put the top up and realized my blind spot is about 270 degrees. Had to have the dealer in the passenger seat tell me when it’s safe to merge over. If it wasn’t for the whole “can’t change lanes thing” I think I would have bought it right then and there, despite it being a little tight for someone that regularly traveled with lots of luggage.
In the sport coupe era, how about the general chasm that existed between the base model and the sport model of a given car, models that otherwise looked very similar?
I’m thinking of stuff like Chevy Cavalier, Ford Escort, that sort of car. The base models were complete penalty box cars, but the uplevel stuff could be quite quick/fun/desirable. And often it was only a spoiler and a different set of wheels to tell them apart.
1983 Buick Regal TType is the worst of the G-body turbo Regals (but not the worst turbo Regal or turbo Buick!). With its dated silver/black paint job, living room quality tufted seat cushions and the CARBURETED 3.8 turbocharged engine, it is not worthy of the name. I remain only slightly bitter that I owned one. https://www.reddit.com/r/classiccars/comments/1cuayaa/1983_buick_regal_ttype/
It’s wild how different the Shadow/Sundance was from bottom trim to top trim. You could have something like a Shadow ES with either the 2.5 turbo or the 3.0 Mitsu V6 that was a pretty quick and enjoyable small car. Or you could have a Shadow America with a 2.2 and a 3-speed Torqueflite, and basically no convenience features whatsoever.
Buick Riviera. Many will deride the seventh-generation (1986-1993) and its E-body Toronado and Eldorado cohorts for their unsuccessful downsizing, but they were fine cars in their own right.
It’s the fourth-gen I can’t stand: 1974-1976.
The B- and E-body cars were all redesigned and newly enlarged for 1971, resulting in the controversial (but, to these eyes, good-looking) boat-tail Riviera that lasted from 1971 through 1973. Really, the designers envisioned the shape on a smaller platform, like the A-body, but GM management didn’t think it was premium enough for the Riviera. Thus, the Riviera remained an E-body and the boat-tail was quite a bit larger than intended for the design. Really, it was sort of a B/E hybrid, as the two bodies were closely related, anyhow. The Riviera continued to eschew the E-body longitude-FWD setup for the B-body’s traditional longitude-RWD arrangement.
The 1974-1976 Riviera used the same structure as the 1971-1973, but just looked…dowdier and sloppier in every way, with a terrible example of the Colonnade treatment that was en vogue at the time. I cannot bear to look at one.
As for my favorite Rivieras: the sixth-gen (1979-1985), the eighth-gen (1995-1999), and–of course–the breathtaking original (1963-1965).
As a fellow Riviera fan, it’s either that or the fifth-gen, which was a really obvious “we don’t actually have the new one ready yet, here’s just a thing to tide you over” design.
My favorite is the second-gen though.
Oh, yeah, the 1977-1978 (the only one to be designated a B-body) is definitely the second-worst. But at least it benefitted from the successful B-body downsizing of 1977 and restrained, if unmemorable, styling.
I also like the second-gen (1966-1970); it just doesn’t rate as one of my favorites. Somewhere in the middle, I think.
The second-gen was also the last GM car to use the cruciform frame, aka X-frame. All the other cars and divisions abandoned it after 1964, but for whatever reason, the Riv continued to employ it through 1970.
The 65-69 is my favorite Riviera,the other ones are too busy I think. I do like the boat-tail though.
The 1975-78 Dodge Charger was just awful. Even the Omni/024-based version was better (not the same thing as good). I hated the four-door Chargers of this century, but they were far superior to the “personal luxury” dreck of the 75-78 which were just Cordobas.
Any Mercury Cougar XR7 with the aftermarket dealer installed “Bostonian Edition” package. Yuck
Does that package come with the landau roof and a pack of Newports?
As a child of the ’80s, I had a Testarossa on my wall, and as much of an improvement as the subsequent refreshers are said to be in nearly every way, the 512TR feels off and I can’t stand to look at the 512M. They might be objectively better, but no pop-ups, no dice.
Great answer
Honestly at this point I don’t know if I have a favorite car. However a car I do like is often considered the worst version of said car.
Iron Duke powered 3rd Gen Camaro. With a manual they were pushing over 40 MPG stock back in the day in a RWD car with a solid rear axle…
Every car I really really wanted, but couldn’t afford 🙁
Compared to a top trim 02 supercharged SSEi like mine a base spec Bonneville SE was quite a lot more plebian feeling, if still a great car. Softer suspension, less interior goodies, some rare ones even had a bench seat and spoiler delete, all that and a lack of boost really makes one wish they picked at least an SLE instead to gain more features that fit the idea of the car’s Luxury with Attitude tagline.
As far as Miatas go, it’s undoubtedly a PHRT Automatic NC. Heaviest, least cargo space, fugliest (IMO the hard top looks terrible up) and the Automatic adds to the bloat (relative) and lack of engagement (also relative of course)
I’m an NC apologist, but even I can’t apologize for that variant.
For those not in the know, “PHRT” is power-retractable hard-top.
I agree that’s the worst MX-5 Miata by a good margin.
PRHT, ackchually.
Indeed!
Damn, I have an NC2 PRHT, but the PHRT sounds pretty bad :-). Mine has a 6MT and as far as I know, the same cargo space as the soft top. The hard top drops into the same well as the soft top.
A PHRT stinks the worst when it’s silent.
Don’t I know it. My very-flatulent-this-afternoon dog is lying under my desk, at my feet, stinking up the place.
Good plan. I always blame the dog too.
Yah I remember that being a huge deal, a hardtop convertible that doesn’t take up trunk space! A Miata is still a Miata and as such it’s still awesome, but the PRHT NC is the worst Miata to me, just because it’s big and weighs 400lbs over my NA, and with the hardtop, too much of that weight is up high.
According to wikipedia the PRHT loses the little storage cubby behind the drivers seat, but that’s a spot nearly no NC/ND owners even knows exists haha. I can absolutely forgive the PRHT if its a manual, I just prefer soft tops. But couple the PRHT with an Auto and why buy a Miata in the first place? What you actually want is a Volvo C70.
Came to say the same, though I would not have remembered to include the auto aspect. Just the NC PRHT. Not just because the name is terrible.
I came here to say this. 100% agree.
As an owner of an NC1 PRHT 6MT GT, I’d like to refine this to the NC2 PRHT automatic in less than GT trim.
If you’re going for the GT, the extra few pounds mean a whole lot less than the amenities (e.g. heated leather seats, and mine’s been “customized” with intermittent wipers and the Magic Top module), and if you’re buying a car like this, storage really isn’t a major consideration.
As for the NC2, I never did like the shit-eating-grin mouth on any of that era’s Mazdas, and intentionally went back to an NC1 when I bought it.
All that said, I came here to say the consensus is my NC is the worst of the litter. I like it just fine, but I probably can’t fight the masses on this topic though.
Love my NC2 PRHT GT 6MT. The best Miata… one that actually has room for real people, storage space (PRHT same storage as soft top and NC has more storage than any other generation), comfortable in almost all weather conditions with the security of a hard top always at the ready and a full on convertible (not powered targa like the ND RF coupe). Shove that in your glove box! Oh, wait… your NA, NB or ND doesn’t have one!
Nope only ND has no glove box! My former NA had a surprisingly large glovebox actually! Also you’ve got a manual so it’s a total pass. IMO I want a Miata to be as pure, light, and nimble as possible, and the NC PRHT is the furthest any Miata has gotten. That said, I’d take an NC1/2/3 PRHT with a 5 or 6 speed manual over any generation of Miata with an automatic.
Had a 94 R package, and they came along and got rid of the the pop-ups (daytime running ya know), the awesome heritage finger pull door handles (accessibility ya know), and touted a trunk you could put two golf bags. Took me 20 years to forgive then enough to get an ND.
Answering the Question: Miata NB
Any 2WD Wrangler.
With a 4-cylinder.
Unreal that these were actually made.
Also See: Any 2WD 4Runner, which really should be called the 2Runner
Anytime you see a suspciously cheap 3rd or 4th gen 4runner for sale its almost always a “2 Runner” Also here in Tennessee 2wd suvs were kinda the norm until the past 10 years or so. Things like Suburbans, Explorers, CR-V though.
Also any Toyota pickup or 4Runner with the 3vz. 1988 to 1994 They are still a dog power wise and get 15mpg. Then timing belt service. And headgasket issues. Some go 300k no problems, some blow them and are fixed with no other issues. Then some blow with under 100k miles and melt the whole engine down. Just buy a truck with the trusty 22R 4 banger or a newer one with the bomb proof 5vzfe