Automotive Disappointments

The recent Toybaru buzz has made me think about cars that did not live up to the hype and disappointed me. What cars have disappointed you guys? It doesn't have to be something new.

1. The Nissan Sentra SE-R Spec V (2002): This was supposed to be an Integra Type R killer and the rebirth of the SE-R. It turned out to be neither. Catastrophic engine failure is never fun.

2. Mazda RX-8: I was an RX-7 owner and bought this to be my adult car; it was hinted at that I needed a more "adult" car for my professional job. The car was originally rated at 250hp, which was soon corrected to 232hp. The car actually makes even less than this. The car was fun to drive, but the engine losing compression at 62k miles caused me to sell it with a quickness. I will say that Mazda was top notch in dealing with my warranty issue.

3. Subaru WRX STi (2008): The car simply didn't feel fun to me on the test drive. I don't know if it was due to some electronic settings or whatnot. I wanted it to feel like a sports car, and it certainly did not. The car was a victim of my unreasonable expectations. My mountain bike certainly would have fit in the back just fine, though.

4. 1995 NYG Neon ACR: This car made me hate all things Dodge. Quality was non-existent, and it made my 1985 RX-7 seem like a paragon of awesomeness and reliability. Stuff failed on this car left and right. Windshield wiper motors, heater core, headliner, etc. A ton of stuff went out in the first week of ownership. A guy and his son drove from Chicago to Columbia, SC to buy it from me (for what I paid for it), even though I had absolutely nothing nice to say about the car. Brutal honesty works? Who knows.

I would have to agree with your asessments, but in fairness to the car companies involved the cars you mentioned were developed when the companies involved were trying to cut corners and save a few bucks.

The 2002 SE-R was a further dilution of the original formula, not helped by Nissan's decision to (temporarily?) abandon the sporty car segment. Being built in Mexico did not help this car. The REAL disappointment is the CURRENT Sentra SE-R.

The RX-8? Can you fault Mazda for developing the rotary equivalent of a 1958 Thunderbird? As far as the engine output, several Japanese car makers got caught right about the same time "fudging" the numbers on their more popular cars. If I remember correctly, Subaru did this at least once, and while this was going on, didn't Mitsubishi also come close to a meltdown over their lack of interest in customer warranty claims?

The 2008 WRX STi? Don't most Subie fans acknowledge this car as a low water mark for Subaru? Didn't Subaru make a lot a changes in 2009 and 2010 to the WRX STi to address the disaffection of "fans"?

I guess I should keep my opinions to myself, as I have not driven these cars, or anything else that has come out in the last 10-15 years.

The FR-S and BRZ couldn't live up to the hype.

integraguy wrote: snip I guess I should keep my opinions to myself, as I have not driven these cars, or anything else that has come out in the last 10-15 years.

This is a forum; share your opinion about stuff.

2003 Protege. I'd had a '94 Escort GT which I'd been very happy with for the 4-years I owned it, and thought the Protege would be something of a "spiritual successor". It wasn't.

The Protege didn't handle very well stock, so I started upgrading things on it as they broke/wore out - that included the struts, end-links and brakes(gone by about 20,000mi) as well as both swaybars. By the time I got the handling balanced, I still experienced severe wheelspin from the inside tire at autocross. I also found the seats uncomfortable, and it started to rust-through above the rear wheels within 3-years.

It wasn't a horrible car by any means, but it certainly what I'd hoped for.

Genesis Coupe.

"Genesis Coupe"

Both 4 cylinder and V6? or just one of them?

I ask, because I can count on one hand the number I've seen...tho not sure which engine was "involved".

Saturn. I remember seeing prototype cars at the Philadelphia auto show back around 1985. There was so much hype around the new brand, and the cars didn't turn out so good.

1984 Fiero. So many expectations around what the Fiero should be. It turned out to be a GM parts bin car. Cheap parts at that.

2002 Ford T-bird. So much excitment around the return of the T-bird and that maybe it would go back to it's roots. What a crap can it was, and it sold accordingly.

Go really old school - Edsel. 'nuff said.

2001 Subaru Outback. I really wasn't expecting much, but the car was so bad as to make my Mazda minivan feel like a sports car by comparison. And let's not leave out the blown head gasket or the wonky, juddery clutch.

Hype for the Saturn?

Were you old enough to read when the Vega was introduced? THERE was a car truely hyped all out of proportion to what was presented to the customers. The specs seem truely laughable now, a 2.3 liter engine with either a 1 or 2 barrel carb giving you all of 100 or 110 horsepower. Your choice of a 3 or 4 speed manual transmission (the 4 speed cost extra), and at first a 2 speed automatic transmission. You want an AM mono radio? That will cost extra. Power steering or brakes? Optional, also. But the icing on the cake? Quality control in 1971 was only a dream. Vega engines vibrated so much, the carbs loosened from the intake manifolds. BUT, BUT, the cars handled decently.

integraguy wrote: Were you old enough to read when the Vega was introduced? THERE was a car truely hyped all out of proportion to what was presented to the customers.

Yes it was and yes I bought into that BS. I still haven't forgiven GM.

I was probably the only person who expected it to be halfway decent out-of-the-box, but the EP3 Civic Si (02-05) gave me the biggest feeling of "meh" I've ever encountered from a sporting fwd Honda. After owning Integras and a 93 Si hatch I had high hopes for the return of the hatchback Si with a K-series motor. The nearly-new one I test drove handled like the minivan it resembled. I at least expected some oomph from the new motor family, but nope. My sohc 1.6 in the 93 felt faster. I realize my EG hatch was quite a bit lighter, but even then the character of the motor just didn't seem as willing (or should I say optimistic?). I hear the type-r of this era was actually good, but what we got was so watered down it wasn't good for much besides commuting. Perhaps the usual mods would wake up what is supposed to be a good chassis? Dunno.

At least things improved with the coupes and sedan Si's that followed. Things seem to be going downhill again though.

BTW - HONDA, BRING BACK THE FRICKIN' HATCHBACK Si!

Klayfish wrote: 2002 Ford T-bird. So much excitment around the return of the T-bird and that maybe it would go back to it's roots. What a crap can it was, and it sold accordingly.

really? from what i heard people thought they would be a limited run and collectors bought them for too much money and got pissed when ford kept making them. now they're just another car. funny thing was they made chevy try to jump on the bandwagon and they built this 'bel-air' concept that was an obvious ripoff of the tbird styling

In reply to Matt B:

the fake vtec in those was really dissappointing, they got the k20a in other markets. if you want to feel what they should have been, drive an acura RSX type S. lots of 8000 rpm fun to be had there.

Not getting the Smart Roadster in the US as promised.

Lamborghini Gallardo. I had so looked forward to driving this car, only to be totally underwhelmed. The SMG transmission is unrefined, unpredictable and brittle. AWD dampens the handling. The interior is a snooze-fest. There are so many more entertaining cars you can buy for the money.

I also had hoped there would be more Volvo C30's but I could maybe still see one of these as a used car if the depreciate at a quick rate.

Matt B wrote: BTW - HONDA, BRING BACK THE FRICKIN' HATCHBACK Si!

+1

jrw1621 wrote: I also had hoped there would be more Volvo C30's but I could maybe still see one of these as a used car if the depreciate at a quick rate.

What's bad about the C30? I always thought it was intended to be a "unique" alternative to a GTi or MS3?

jrw1621 wrote: I also had hoped there would be more Volvo C30's but I could maybe still see one of these as a used car if the depreciate at a quick rate.

Volvos usually depreciate like a sack of coal thrown from a cliff, ask me how I know.

The C30 will follow suit as soon as the teen vampire fad runs its course. You and I will probably have to fight over the only stick shift shipped to North America, however.

2010 Civic. It's my bosses car, and he gave it to me to do some running around, and errands. I was really looking forward to driving it, and interested to see how much better it was than our 06 Cobalt. It was AWFUL. Painfully slow, numb feeling, and horrible handling. I couldn't wait to get out of it. I was shocked. I'd take the Cobalt in a second over that piece of garbage.

Nothing wrong with the C30, I like it but as noted, the manual was rare and the car in general never "caught on" so they are not plentiful.
I guess the first year was '08 so the oldest ones are about 3 years now. I just did a quick run through www.autotrader.com and there are only 10 w/ manual within 300 miles of me. None are under 20k with one exception of a 99k version for $15k. About $8k with 75k or less would be attractive to me.

bludroptop wrote:

jrw1621 wrote: I also had hoped there would be more Volvo C30's but I could maybe still see one of these as a used car if the depreciate at a quick rate.

Volvos usually depreciate like a sack of coal thrown from a cliff, ask me how I know. The C30 will follow suit as soon as the teen vampire fad runs its course. You and I will probably have to fight over the only stick shift shipped to North America, however.

I was just looking at those the other day. The turbo models with manual are still around 17-18k. Hopefully they will be much cheaper in a few years so I can pick one up.

Biggest disappointment- pretty much anything the automotive industry has built after about 2000.

All my disappointments have to do with expectations, not objective reality.

I would say probably the most shocking disappointments i have experienced were stock 5.0 and 4.6 mustangs from the 90s. They were not even remotely fast. After that i started racing them with my modded 3.5L intrepid and laughing.

I was also sort of disappointed by the hemi cars.. magnum, charger, 300 etc. Because as much as i like the idea of a car like that that is fast, i still prefer my 2.7L (plus the modifications i am planning). When you prefer the much-derided base engine over a 350hp v8, it is a strange sort of disappointment.

The ~02 t-bird was mentioned above. I havent driven one but the interior was a big let-down for me. Same for the 05 and '10 mustangs. On all of them i like the outside but wouldnt own one (unless it was free) based on the interiors.