Most overhyped, disappointing car you've ever driven?

Swank Force One wrote: Autocrossers are the exception rather than the norm. Staggered FWD setups are pretty common in Solo work.

True... and even more so with a Mk IV since lowering is the last thing you want to do to those cars to make them handle better. Basically anyone with a lowered VW is a poser.

I don't know if I agree entirely about having unrealistic expectations. Maybe more ignorance.

That was especially the case with the Charger - I'd never driven an old muscle car before and didn't know what to expect and it wasn't like we had web forums back in 1990 to tell me it was going to be a plow-machine.

In the case of the E30, maybe my expectations were too high. I bought the car wanting a car to autocross. Little did I know (and nowhere had I read), the car is probably one of the sh1ttiest cars for autocross ever built unless you want to modify it which was not what I wanted it for. My TDI wagon is more fun to autocross than my E30. And with my primary reason for buying the car dismissed, I've struggled to find anything the car is good for.

Another vote for the WRX as a disappointment. While I liked my 1st one (2002 wagon), my 2nd (2009 hatch) just didn't live up to the hype.

While the 2002 was like a half-price Audi S4 Avant with a crappier interior, the 2009 which was overhyped as a huge improvement to the half-baked 2008 cars, just didn't deliver.

While it did make good power, it had a very cheap, easily breakable rattly interior, it handled like crap, it stopped like crap (even with upgraded pads), and build quality was terrible. And that good power never felt right, either. Acceleration was choppy, the transmission (even with upgraded bushings and a shifter) was awful, and ride quality sucked. I don't think Subaru could ever lure me back after that car.

M030 wrote: In reply to Chris_V: I'm a piss poor driver, too, then because the one I drove was an under steering pig, too

Good that you can admit it. Simply put, if it's understeering, you don't know what you're doing and being a hamfist.

I'll join the piss poor driver club.

In reply to Chris_V:

I'd agree with you, but they ARE understeering pigs UNLESS you trail brake the bejesus out of them. If you're expecting that, you won't be disappointed. If you're expecting it to be a vehicle that can carry momentum, then you'll likely be frustrated. Definitely a in like a lamb out like a lion car.

Vigo wrote: ...but there was absolutely no 'crescendo' to the upper RPMs.

Expecting a Subaru 4cyl to come from the factory without their characteristic lazy, almost tractor-like, sound and feel was your first mistake. With a few well chosen mods, like a properly designed exhaust manifold/header, you might be able to improve that a bit.

Ian F wrote: I don't know if I agree entirely about having unrealistic expectations. Maybe more ignorance.

Since the two tend to be fairly closely related, I wouldn't argue calling it ignorance either.

The internet has definitely revolutionized our ability to learn both the good and bad about a car before meeting it for the first time, but also subjects us to even more potential hype as well...Which is almost universally over-hype.

Chris_V wrote: Simply put, if it's understeering, you don't know what you're doing and being a hamfist.

Or, perhaps the chassis is set up such that it naturally resists turning so you either have to wait too long for it to take a set or trail brake the living E36 M3 out of it to get it to turn. It's probably designed that way to keep you slow-handed heavy footed fools from spinning all the time

I have to say I think I agree with a few of the folks here. Owning a 1.6 NA miata its definitely an engaging car to drive in autocross where the size, ability to throttle steer etc is excellent. But on the road even for a weekend cruise or any highway trip its pretty miserable. However my first love car wise was the Focus SVT i bought new and tracked and I still kind of like FWD. I enjoy the much greater practicality of the cars that tend to have it.

I like a nimble feeling car and can accept that 300+ hp through front wheels would suck but then again I could rather have less HP and less weight. Which is actually why I am eyeing the Fiesta ST a bit more than the Focus ST

It's a great "toy" (the miata) but its not a very good car. You can however beat on it like crazy with almost no regard for anything breaking

An '81 'Vette.

I'd heard people talk up the Corvette for years and when my time came to drive it (my mom's car and I took it for a fillup) I jumped. 20 minutes later I couldn't wait to get out of it. There were exactly zero things I liked about that car.

stan wrote: An '81 'Vette. I'd heard people talk up the Corvette for years and when my time came to drive it (my mom's car and I took it for a fillup) I jumped. 20 minutes later I couldn't wait to get out of it. There were exactly zero things I liked about that car.

In fairness, those were Dark Days Indeed for the 'Vette.

Duke wrote:

stan wrote: An '81 'Vette. I'd heard people talk up the Corvette for years and when my time came to drive it (my mom's car and I took it for a fillup) I jumped. 20 minutes later I couldn't wait to get out of it. There were exactly zero things I liked about that car.

In fairness, those were Dark Days Indeed for the 'Vette.

This, try one new enough to have LS power, or pre 72 or so.

I think people's CLAIMED dislike for high-power FWD has to do with a lack of highway driving. Even my fwd car with 350lb ft of torque , open diff, and 215s would hook up 3rd most of the time. So 100% of the time i was on the highway (which is still a majority of my driving), it is simply a fast car, the end. To be honest, i rarely ever try to put down full power while turning (which doesnt work in a 350 lb ft RWD either), so i just dont run into the downsides that much.

I drove an 81 vette, total crap to drive. C3s would be way better with an engine that is simultaneously smaller and more powerful. If i bought a c3 with no engine i would NOT put a v8 in it. Id put better seats in it , THEN probably a turbo 4 cyl or a strong v6.

try one new enough to have LS power,

I dont really think you can fix a c3 with power. They are a E36 M3ty car that you really have to like the styling of to want to own. Their exterior looks, and the view out over the hood, are about the only good things about them, and the view out over the hood is only good if its not physically hurting you to sit in that stupid thing.

Duke wrote:

stan wrote: An '81 'Vette. I'd heard people talk up the Corvette for years and when my time came to drive it (my mom's car and I took it for a fillup) I jumped. 20 minutes later I couldn't wait to get out of it. There were exactly zero things I liked about that car.

In fairness, those were Dark Days Indeed for the 'Vette.

Even a C4 was a monstrous leap over those smog choked wet noodle chassis'd things.

Vigo wrote: I think people's CLAIMED dislike for high-power FWD has to do with a lack of highway driving. Even my fwd car with 350lb ft of torque , open diff, and 215s would hook up 3rd most of the time. So 100% of the time i was on the highway (which is still a majority of my driving), it is simply a fast car, the end. To be honest, i rarely ever try to put down full power while turning (which doesnt work in a 350 lb ft RWD either), so i just dont run into the downsides that much. I drove an 81 vette, total crap to drive. C3s would be way better with an engine that is simultaneously smaller and more powerful. If i bought a c3 with no engine i would NOT put a v8 in it. Id put better seats in it , THEN probably a turbo 4 cyl or a strong v6.

try one new enough to have LS power,

I dont really think you can fix a c3 with power. They are a E36 M3ty car that you really have to like the styling of to want to own. Their exterior looks, and the view out over the hood, are about the only good things about them, and the view out over the hood is only good if its not physically hurting you to sit in that stupid thing.

I dunno, my fellow chuckers 71 convertible, as ridiculously flexy as it is (can't open the doors with it jacked up) is much more fun to drive with the 450 hp it makes now rather than the 300 it came with.

In reply to Bobzilla:

IDK if I would call the '84 a total improvement over the 81-2......

In reply to Vigo:

Its what we had to learn too, granted several of us have figured out how to make a taurus handle, stop, and for that matter.....put its power down. The big power guys still can't though.

In reply to yamaha:

In terms of suspension, chassis and brakes? Oh hell yeah.

Ferrari F355 Spyder. Fat and clunky.

Jeff

Non--V first gen CTS stick. Everyone said it had great handling, but it was a mushy barge to me. I was driving an 03 Grand Cherokee at the time, and it seemed less ponderous. Seldom have I gotten out of a test drive and told the salesman outright that I simply do not like the car. I wanted to like it, too.

In reply to Vigo:

So you'd build a Pontiac Banshee? I'd really like to too, one day.

1965 Porsche 356. Drove exactly like my 72 Beetle. Wasn't any faster than the Bug, either. Very nicely screwed together car, though

'04 GTO Mushy shifter, numb steering, and surprisingly disappointing. My Mazda3 felt sporty after that drive. Sad.

Javelin wrote: In reply to Vigo: So you'd build a Pontiac Banshee? I'd really like to too, one day.

Had to google that. Seems pretty cool!

All cars were/are overhyped:

My brother and his friends were on about his 400 hp 67 Pontiac GTO. At the time I had a very fast Yamaha RD350, his GTO ran a high 13 1/4 mile but compared to the RD it was slow. Throw in the fact that the Yamaha also handled and actually had brakes and no contest.

iROC Z may take the cake for most overhyped, bloated dead feeling beast. Mustang GT..............same as Camaro but both cars make fun A-sedan

Datsun Z cars...............most of them in stock trim are slower than 1.6 Miata.

Miata as much as we all love them let's face it, they are not earth shattering.

I could go on about everything form WRX (econobox base) CRX (see WRX) to several Porsches and Ferraris.

By contrast I've always beloved it's hard to overhyp certain bikes, ride a TZ250U through to A and you'll see why some of us love 2 stroke GP bikes, 1000cc sport bikes won't dissapoint. Throw in any open class 2 stroke motocross bike, nothing like 70 hp 240lb bike on a narrow single track.

Other vehicles that likely don't disappoint are top fuel dragsters, modern F1 cars and any jet fighter ever made.

I think all cars are fun but we car nuts tend to make more of them then they really are.

                                Tom

dbl post

SilverFleet wrote: Another vote for the WRX as a disappointment. While I liked my 1st one (2002 wagon), my 2nd (2009 hatch) just didn't live up to the hype. While the 2002 was like a half-price Audi S4 Avant with a crappier interior, the 2009 which was overhyped as a huge improvement to the half-baked 2008 cars, just didn't deliver. While it did make good power, it had a very cheap, easily breakable rattly interior, it handled like crap, it stopped like crap (even with upgraded pads), and build quality was terrible. And that good power never felt right, either. Acceleration was choppy, the transmission (even with upgraded bushings and a shifter) was awful, and ride quality sucked. I don't think Subaru could ever lure me back after that car.

weird, i have a 2012 and I would say the opposite of everything you said lol. Really everything. Especially ride quality and rattling. There is no rattling what so ever and the ride quality is great.

Maybe there is a big difference between the earlier and the later STI-style body cars.

Lemon? Because honestly it's the best car i've owned.