50 worst cars of all time - the TIME list.

[Peter Gariepy]

The 50 Worst Cars of All Time (Time Magazine)

1899-1939

1. 1899 Horsey Horseless
2. 1909 Ford Model T
3. 1911 Overland OctoAuto
4. 1913 Scripps-Booth Bi-Autogo
5. 1920 Briggs and Stratton Flyer
6. 1933 Fuller Dymaxion
7. 1934 Chrysler/Desoto Airflow

1940-1959

1. 1949 Crosley Hotshot
2. 1956 Renault Dauphine
3. 1957 King Midget Model III
4. 1957 Waterman Aerobile
5. 1958 Ford Edsel
6. 1958 Lotus Elite
7. 1958 MGA Twin Cam
8. 1958 Zunndapp Janus

1960-1974

1. 1961 Amphicar
2. 1961 Corvair
3. 1966 Peel Trident
4. 1970 AMC Gremlin
5. 1970 Triumph Stag
6. 1971 Chrysler Imperial LeBaron Two-Door Hardtop
7. 1971 Ford Pinto
8. 1974 Jaguar XK-E V12 Series III

1975-1989

1. 1975 Bricklin SV1
2. 1975 Morgan Plus 8 Propane
3. 1975 Triumph TR7
4. 1975 Trabant
5. 1976 Aston Martin Lagonda
6. 1976 Chevy Chevette
7. 1978 AMC Pacer
8. 1980 Corvette 305 "California"
9. 1980 Ferrari Mondial 8
10. 1981 Cadillac Fleetwood V-8-6-4
11. 1981 De Lorean DMC-12
12. 1982 Cadillac Cimarron
13. 1982 Camaro Iron Duke
14. 1984 Maserati Biturbo
15. 1985 Mosler Consulier GTP
16. 1985 Yugo GV
17. 1986 Lamborghini LM002

1990-Present

1. 1995 Ford Explorer
2. 1997 GM EV1
3. 1997 Plymouth Prowler
4. 1998 Fiat Multipla
5. 2000 Ford Excursion
6. 2001 Jaguar X-Type
7. 2001 Pontiac Aztek
8. 2002 BMW 7-series
9. 2003 Hummer H2
10. 2004 Chevy SSR

[Peter Gariepy]

I've owned 4 of these!

Crosley Hotshot, Ford Pinto, King Midget, Corvair.

You?

[1937hd45]

TIME Magazine ???????????????????? They can roll up that issue and...........

[THEHKP7M13]

TIME Magazine ???????????????????? They can roll up that issue and...........

My thoughts too.

[First Born]

Wonder what their criteria was. Looks like personal choices.

[West Peterson]

As I started, I thought perhaps it was marketing "worst flop" kind of list, but then I realized it had to be made by someone who doesn't know anything about cars.

[Robin Coleman]

I can only speak as to my personal opinions, but if most here do not agree the Pontiac Aztec is the ugliest thing ever made I will eat my hat. What was GM thinking? I can't believe this nightmare made it out of the design stage.

[West Peterson]

"On the 50th anniversary of the Ford Edsel, TIME and Dan Neil, Pulitzer Prize-winning automotive critic and syndicated columnist for the Los Angeles Times, look at the greatest lemons of the automotive industry"

[Dandy Dave]

1899 -1939 The Model T ford was one of the better cars of the era. They were tough and durable.

Now a Friction drive Metz on the other hand.....Seems quite a few Metz autos survived because they were always in the back of the shop. Dandy Dave!

[bkazmer]

This group certainly recognizes the technical advances of the Airflow. The Lotus Elite is likewise a technical coup - first structural composite body (earlier fiberglass like Corvette and Kaiser was unstressed body panels).

[keiser31]

Man...Time magazine has it way wrong. Just because a car was "before it's time" it is supposed to be the worst car? I DON'T THINK SO. Someone has their head in the clouds or somewhere unearthly.

[mrpushbutton]

No copper cooled Chevrolet?

[keiser31]

Oh yeah....the Chrysler Airflow was such a poor design that Ferdinand Porsche stole the design and made a zillion on the VW with the same design.

[58Mustang]

One off and experimentals shouldn't be on any list of best or worst. Appearance shouldn't be a criteria either. The Airflows were considered by many to be funny looking, but there was nothing wrong with them from an engineering standpoint. Same with the Aztek, Pacer, Edsel (what's a Ford Edsel?) and the other quirky looking cars. Why select the Zundapp Janus? There were a bunch of odd little Euro scootercars that were as bad or worse than the Zundapp, if in fact it was a bad car.
The "author" of this drivel picked up a few coffee table books and looked for cars that he didn't "like", looked up a few urban myths, mixed it all together with a healthy dose of ignorance and presented his irrefutable facts to a gullible readership. Pulitzer prize journalism at it's best.

[Peter Gariepy]

Are they off base on many of the selections? Sure.

Regardless, I love that a high circulation magazine is talkn about antique cars!

Remember the old saying: "There is No Such Thing as Bad Publicity".

[poci1957]

I agree and said when I first saw the list recently that it is obviously made up by someone who knows nothing about cars, probably exactly in the manner 58Mustang describes above.

What rankled me the most was including the Model T. The writer made his argument saying the Model T was cheap and harsh and the Yugo of it's day, or something like that. I think we all can agree the T was utilitarian, especially at it's peak in the early 1920s. But unlike the Yugo the quality of it's engineering, manufacture, and materials was state of the art in the early days. Plus, the early cars were not the cheapest on the market but represented great value. One could buy a cheaper car but not find a better value circa 1909. The writer should write about something else and be embarassed with his ignorance here. Of course, we all know such lists are usually handled in this manner, but once again factual errors about old cars are dispensed to the public and they will not know the difference.

[mrpushbutton]

Oh yeah....the Chrysler Airflow was such a poor design that Ferdinand Porsche stole the design and made a zillion on the VW with the same design.

Are we talking VW bug? I thought the engine was in the rear and was air cooled? or are we just talking basic body construction? that was different too, the Airflow was body-on-frame. A huge, hard to build, even harder to crash-repair body at that.
The Airflow turned out to be a wonderful, revolutionary car, but only after a very rough start-up period, whic is probably where Time based their judgement.
Between the problems launcing the Airflow and the public rejection (in large numbers) of the styling the car almost killed Chrysler Corporation, Were it not for the traditionally designed Plymouth and the incredible value it represented at the time. Plymouth sales kept the company afloat.

[poci1957]

On the Airflow, I would contend the Time writer only knew that part--that the styling was controversial and poor selling. He likely knows nothing of it's revolutionary nature.

I would like to mention the listing of the Explorer and Excursion SUVs of the 1990s. I hardly find the Explorer to be one of the worst vehicles of all time, and FOR IT'S PURPOSE the Excursion was probably the very BEST. That purpose being a 3/4 ton SUV with room for 8 or 9 and capability to tow a 10,000 lb trailer. In that use it was an absolutely great vehicle.

[keiser31]

On the Airflow, I would contend the Time writer only knew that part--that the styling was controversial and poor selling. He likely knows nothing of it's revolutionary nature.

I would like to mention the listing of the Explorer and Excursion SUVs of the 1990s (which should give you an idea where this article is coming from mentally and politically). I hardly find the Explorer to be one of the worst vehicles of all time, and FOR IT'S PURPOSE the Excursion was probably the very BEST. That purpose being a 3/4 ton SUV with room for 8 or 9 and capability to tow a 10,000 lb trailer. In that use it was an absolutely great vehicle.

Yep....the exterior design of the Airflow was the part that did not buy the public's praise. That is what I meant to say. The average buyer out there knew only that they did not like the looks. They had no idea about the technology or construction of the cars.

[Skyking]

1997 Plymouth Prowler???????????????????? The idiot probably never drove one.

[TG57Roadmaster]

A friend regularly forwards Dan Neil's L.A. Times column to me, and, after the first paragraph read (I started with the '71 Imperial, eventually reading them all), there was no doubt as to the TIME piece's authorship.

I love his wordsmithing, and certainly don't agree with all his choices. Few writers today can match his wit and style, but to say he doesn't know cars is baseless and mean-spirited. The only glaring red herring I found was the Airflow/Airstream gaffe, as we all (should) know they were two vastly different cars.

Given the challenge of creating a similar list (Best or Worst) wouldn't we all be subjective? Enjoy it for what it is, one very talented man's take, with plentiful doses of tongue-in-cheek.

TG

[keiser31]

We all have our opinions as to what is the worst made car. I mentioned Chevy Chevettes once in the same context and got a ration of.... by some guy who had one and said that it was the greatest thing since sliced bread (to him). We used brand new ones where I worked at Budget Rent-A-Car in San Diego in 1976 and the radiators sprung leaks at about 75-100 miles on the odometers. Then they got worse from there. I am sure that all makes have lemons in the bunch.

[keiser31]

I drove a DeLorean once. It rode like a lumber wagon, but so did 1965 Mustangs. That does not mean they should be on the "worst car" list.

[poci1957]

Well, no chance of me debating Chevettes, that is for sure.

[keiser31]

My dad told me once that he thought the 1929 Chevrolets were horrible cars because "they had weak axles that would snap like a twig." Now, does that make it the worst car? No, but you could not convince my dad of that.