Post the ugliest cars you can think of V4 - Kill me edition - General

Best part about those Civics is that the line in the back is a huge bitch to look through. Or at least the first ones where it all started were. And the Type-R is actually worser than the '04 version.

And this is why I stay away from hatchbacks; the styling is too hit-and-miss. One gen they'll be fine, the next they'll look like garbage. I'd much rather put my trust in a company with competent designers, like Mercedes-Benz or Chrysl- [t]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-DF0lfaTF7Y0/Trko8rI0MfI/AAAAAAAACNc/o4Lr6d9zvkU/s1600/Mercedes-Benz-SLK-Class-2.jpg[/t] [t]http://www.dieselstation.com/pics/Mercedes-Benz-BlueZERO-E-CELL-PLUS-car-walls.jpg[/t] [t]http://media.caranddriver.com/images/13q1/494260/2014-jeep-liberty-cherokee-rendered-news-car-and-driver-photo-498641-s-429x262.jpg[/t] [t]http://gearheads.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/chrysler-ecovoyager-031.jpg[/t] oh my

[QUOTE=MrWhite;40169842]And this is why I stay away from hatchbacks; the styling is too hit-and-miss. One gen they'll be fine, the next they'll look like garbage. I'd much rather put my trust in a company with competent designers, like Mercedes-Benz or Chrysl- [t]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-DF0lfaTF7Y0/Trko8rI0MfI/AAAAAAAACNc/o4Lr6d9zvkU/s1600/Mercedes-Benz-SLK-Class-2.jpg[/t] [t]http://www.cartype.com/pics/7513/full/mercedes-benz_blue-zero_e-cell-plus_09_08.jpg[/t] [t]http://media.caranddriver.com/images/13q1/494260/2014-jeep-liberty-cherokee-rendered-news-car-and-driver-photo-498641-s-429x262.jpg[/t] [t]http://gearheads.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/chrysler-ecovoyager-031.jpg[/t] oh my[/QUOTE] Why oh why couldn't we keep our Jeep Cherokees looking something like this: [IMG]http://images1.americanlisted.com/nlarge/1988_jeep_cherokee_28361121.jpg[/IMG] Sure, it's old-fashioned and boxy, but it's the right kind of old fashioned and boxy. If anything the previous generation was very close to getting it right, with the second gen liberty: [IMG]http://www.autogush.com/images/jeep-liberty-2010-01.jpg[/IMG] It looks like an [i]evolution[/i] of the design, while keeping the core principles of it down. I'd still change a few things about the design, but at least it looks like a modern Cherokee. That new one just looks like a Fiat wearing the seven-slot grille, and not pulling it off. Like, at all. Fuck you, Fiat group. Your car styling is bad and you should feel bad.

[QUOTE=MrWhite;40169842]And this is why I stay away from hatchbacks; the styling is too hit-and-miss. One gen they'll be fine, the next they'll look like garbage. I'd much rather put my trust in a company with competent designers, like Mercedes-Benz or Chrysl- [t]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-DF0lfaTF7Y0/Trko8rI0MfI/AAAAAAAACNc/o4Lr6d9zvkU/s1600/Mercedes-Benz-SLK-Class-2.jpg[/t] [t]http://www.cartype.com/pics/7513/full/mercedes-benz_blue-zero_e-cell-plus_09_08.jpg[/t] [t]http://media.caranddriver.com/images/13q1/494260/2014-jeep-liberty-cherokee-rendered-news-car-and-driver-photo-498641-s-429x262.jpg[/t] [t]http://gearheads.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/chrysler-ecovoyager-031.jpg[/t] oh my[/QUOTE] Did Chrysler ever have competent designers? Every single Chrysler car I ever saw made me want to puke my guts out

I think their newer cars are looking better. I didn't really care about the 300 before but I think the new one actually looks pretty good.

[QUOTE=Laserbeams;40182006]Did Chrysler ever have competent designers? Every single Chrysler car I ever saw made me want to puke my guts out[/QUOTE] I love Chrysler, and I find that throughout history, a lot of their cars have been (if not jaw-dropping) at least iconic in some respect. [t]http://www.mad4wheels.com/webpics/hires/00010769%20-%201934%20Chrysler%20Airflow/1934_Chrysler_Airflow_004_9609.jpg[/t] [t]http://www.1zoom.net/big2/5/310257-Berserker.jpg[/t] [t]http://www.carinsurancecomparison.com/Images/dodge-challenger.jpg[/t] [t]http://autocarwallpaper.info/car/chrysler-crossfire-wallpaper-23.jpg[/t] [t]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-w2nWnonkUMw/TlZD5oKX0oI/AAAAAAAAD2c/yTG7m5jfh10/s1600/Chrysler-300C.jpg[/t] These next few are concepts, but they were designed by Chrysler so they still count. [t]http://image.motortrend.com/f/features/consumer/112_0909_60_coolest_cars/29835429+w799+h499+cr1+ar0/chrysler-turbine-car.jpg[/t] [t]http://wallpapers.pupazzo.org/cars/Chrysler%20Firepower%20Concept/Chrysler-Firepower-Concept-widescreen-001.jpg[/t] [t]http://www.thesupercars.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/Chrysler-Imperial.jpg[/t] Yes, Chrysler designs like these seem to be very hit-and-miss; you're either going to love it or hate it. But look at cars like the first image of the Airflow. Despite being the first American car to be designed in such a way, they didn't sell because people thought they looked too strange and weird. A few years later, nearly every car looked like this and a whole era of car design were inspired by and remembered for cues started with the Airflow.

[QUOTE=Biaxailemperor;40175389]Why oh why couldn't we keep our Jeep Cherokees looking something like this: [IMG]http://images1.americanlisted.com/nlarge/1988_jeep_cherokee_28361121.jpg[/IMG] Sure, it's old-fashioned and boxy, but it's the right kind of old fashioned and boxy. If anything the previous generation was very close to getting it right, with the second gen liberty: [IMG]http://www.autogush.com/images/jeep-liberty-2010-01.jpg[/IMG] It looks like an [i]evolution[/i] of the design, while keeping the core principles of it down. I'd still change a few things about the design, but at least it looks like a modern Cherokee. That new one just looks like a Fiat wearing the seven-slot grille, and not pulling it off. Like, at all. Fuck you, Fiat group. Your car styling is bad and you should feel bad.[/QUOTE] This was the last good looking cherokee IMO [img]http://trialx.com/curetalk/wp-content/blogs.dir/7/files/2011/06/cars/1999_Jeep_Cherokee-2.jpg[/img] The back seats still aren't meant for regular sized human beings though.

Chrysler did make some bad decisions along the way. Such as: [img]http://0.tqn.com/d/cars/1/0/0/A/2/ag_10sebringsed_frtrear.JPG[/img] [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/2004-2006_Chrysler_Sebring_sedan.jpg[/img] [img]http://static.cargurus.com/images/site/2007/12/28/15/10/1999_dodge_grand_caravan_4_dr_se_passenger_van_extended-pic-34519.jpeg[/img] [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f9/Chrysler-300M.jpg[/img] But since their recovery from the recession, they've stepped up their game significantly. They've dropped the PT Cruiser and gave us this: [img]http://i.imgur.com/sJh9GJr.jpg[/img] (My Car, a 200S) [img]http://blog.caranddriver.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/2013-Chrysler-300-626x382.jpg[/img] Chrysler 300 [img]http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2012/01/01-2013-dodge-dart628.jpg[/img] Dodge Dart [img]http://www.gtspirit.com/wp-content/gallery/chicago-2011-2012-dodge-charger-srt8/charger_srt8_00.jpg[/img] Dodge Charger [img]http://www.gtspirit.com/wp-content/gallery/2014-jeep-grand-cherokee-srt/00-2014-jeep-grand-cherokee-srt8.jpg[/img] Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT8 You can't deny they've learned their lesson. Except for the new Cherokee thing. Thanks to Fiat for that one.

[QUOTE=SA Spyder;40188461][img]http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2012/01/01-2013-dodge-dart628.jpg[/img] Dodge Dart [/QUOTE] nice mitsubi no wait what

[QUOTE=SA Spyder;40188461][img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/2004-2006_Chrysler_Sebring_sedan.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] My mother owned an 02 Sebring LXi and I just want to say that it is still one of the most comfortable cars I've ridden in. The seats fit me perfectly, legroom was plentiful, there was no strange pressure buffeting from any windows being open, and everything just looked and felt really well thought-out on the inside. In 2000, this car was among several in its class that were essentially big shiny blobs on wheels, so you can't blame Chrysler too much for the styling. it had over 300k miles on it before a deer decided to kiss the radiator, and even then it was able to drive back home and straight into the garage. You know, you see them on the road and laugh at how they look and for good reason, but having grown up with one I can really appreciate it as a car. Really, I don't see what's wrong with the 07-10 Sebring either. Stylistically it's very much in-tune with the rest of the Chrysler lineup of the time, and the platform is apparently good enough to serve the new Chrysler 200 and Dodge Avenger. Eh, even I sometimes think I defend Chrysler a bit too much :v:

It's more or less the same platform as the Mistubishi Lancer (including the Evo) so it's a good platform. The issue with the Sebring wasn't so much the ride quality as much as unreliability and horrible interiors. Creaky plastic everywhere. Still, the ride quality is indeed nice and smooth. My 200 drives smoother and quieter than my dad's Escalade Platinum with magnetic suspension. I don't even know how that's possible but there you go.

you can't really anticipate good build quality from something that is made in japan and then remade(aka broken) by americans

We're hating on shitty modern Chrysler styling, and somehow nobody's mentioned the Cirrus. [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a3/Chrysler_Cirrus_--_01-27-2012.jpg/800px-Chrysler_Cirrus_--_01-27-2012.jpg[/img] That fucking chipmunk face. [img]http://puu.sh/2vkow[/img][img]http://puu.sh/2vkmF[/img] [QUOTE=MrWhite;40189306]My mother owned an 02 Sebring LXi and I just want to say that it is still one of the most comfortable cars I've ridden in. The seats fit me perfectly, legroom was plentiful, there was no strange pressure buffeting from any windows being open, and everything just looked and felt really well thought-out on the inside. In 2000, this car was among several in its class that were essentially big shiny blobs on wheels, so you can't blame Chrysler too much for the styling. it had over 300k miles on it before a deer decided to kiss the radiator, and even then it was able to drive back home and straight into the garage. You know, you see them on the road and laugh at how they look and for good reason, but having grown up with one I can really appreciate it as a car. Really, I don't see what's wrong with the 07-10 Sebring either. Stylistically it's very much in-tune with the rest of the Chrysler lineup of the time, and the platform is apparently good enough to serve the new Chrysler 200 and Dodge Avenger. Eh, even I sometimes think I defend Chrysler a bit too much :v:[/QUOTE] I gotta be honest, it sound like you got really lucky with that one. Almost anyone I know who's owned a Chrysler product from that period had it fall apart well before it should have. Chrysler and it's brands have consistently been rated as some of the most poorly built cars in recent times: [img]http://puu.sh/2vkug[/img]

Chrysler aside, I have difficulty believing that 2012 cars from VW, Infiniti, Mazda, etc. fall under the average whereas they're supposed to be incredibly well-built and reliable cars. Plus, brands that fall under the same company are separated by quite a bit. Hyundai is quite better than average whereas Kia is much lower? Volvo is less reliable than average? I'm gonna call horseshit on that entire graph. I'll accept that Chrysler is less reliable than the average because there's still some Daimler heritage stuck in and Fiat hasn't flushed it all out yet, but there are numerous questionable points on this graph that seem go totally to against reality. The answer after looking it up: it's based on a relatively tiny sample, and every sample may give totally differing results (which explains why Consumer Reports and JD Powers almost never agree with one another). So yeah, it's a misleading graph that should be taken with a grain of salt. Here's the 2013 one. Look at how much it has changed, and how some top players and now in the bottom. The study is bullshit. [img]https://pictures.dealer.com/j/jdpower/1048/d113c91c0a0d02b701d3ac6eb051e9f9.jpg[/img]

"have any problems with your ford __?" "I CANT GET MY PHONE TO SYNCH WAAAHHHH" *marks one problem for ford*

[QUOTE=SA Spyder;40189552]Chrysler aside, I have difficulty believing that 2012 cars from VW, Infiniti, Mazda, etc. fall under the average whereas they're supposed to be incredibly well-built and reliable cars. Plus, brands that fall under the same company are separated by quite a bit. Hyundai is quite better than average whereas Kia is much lower? Volvo is less reliable than average? I'm gonna call horseshit on that entire graph. I'll accept that Chrysler is less reliable than the average because there's still some Daimler heritage stuck in and Fiat hasn't flushed it all out yet, but there are numerous questionable points on this graph that seem go totally to against reality. The answer after looking it up: it's based on a relatively tiny sample, and every sample may give totally differing results (which explains why Consumer Reports and JD Powers almost never agree with one another). So yeah, it's a misleading graph that should be taken with a grain of salt. Here's the 2013 one. Look at how much it has changed, and how some top players and now in the bottom. The study is bullshit. [img]https://pictures.dealer.com/j/jdpower/1048/d113c91c0a0d02b701d3ac6eb051e9f9.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] Well the ratings for Dodge, Chrysler, and Jeep seem pretty consistent. Also, don't think Chrysler started going to shit when they were assimilated into Daimler, they were building junk cars long before that (when was the last time you saw a Dodge Shadow on the road?).

[QUOTE=SA Spyder;40189552]Chrysler aside, I have difficulty believing that 2012 cars from VW, Infiniti, Mazda, etc. fall under the average whereas they're supposed to be incredibly well-built and reliable cars. [/QUOTE] Some of the newer VWs have less than stellar reliability - the new Beetle (the redesigned one) has mediocre-at-best reliability. [editline]7th April 2013[/editline] According to Consumer Reports, that is.

Wroong thread

[QUOTE=Super_Noodle;40194877]Well the ratings for Dodge, Chrysler, and Jeep seem pretty consistent. Also, don't think Chrysler started going to shit when they were assimilated into Daimler, they were building junk cars long before that (when was the last time you saw a Dodge Shadow on the road?).[/QUOTE] Chrysler builds RAM and it doesn't look that consistent. It's a bullshit test if a 2012 RAM is an unreliable POS and a 2013 RAM is one of the nation's more reliable trucks, considering there's no difference between the two model years.

I put 2 pallets of grass in the back of a ram before using a forklift. Dodge nu liked it. Shit gave me the chills putting that second pallet on their, everything started cracking and making weird noises. :tinfoil:

i got 220 problems and a land rover is all of them

[IMG]http://www.bricabrac.it/files/images/bab_annunci_automobili_7F9xNs_annuncio.jpg[/IMG] Holy shit i hate this car. And now, the despisable Ssangyong models, probably designed in North Korea from the look of them: [IMG]http://quotazioni-auto-usate.motorionline.com/foto-modelli/ssangyong-actyon.jpg[/IMG] Ohhh, the Rodius. Chubby smug on the front: [IMG]http://media.motorbox.com/data/contenuti/0000006699/img/640/ssangyong-rodius-ad016d7152643bf37e4d59357812cce0.jpg[/IMG] A fucking lard-spilling ass on the back: [IMG]http://www.carsbase.com/photo/SsangYong-Rodius_mp82_pic_35770.jpg[/IMG] And now, the award to the saddest car goes to... [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1c/SsangYong_Musso_front_20080320.jpg[/IMG] The Musso! It reeks of depression, poor thing.

[IMG]https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTipY15SVYD4dXM45lJdLXZJIhvOxoRqXbtHPjY7dsAc9NNpTDU[/IMG] my fiance has one of these unholy monsters. im waiting for it to break down so i can get rid of it. [IMG]https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRF7vRZPvjuNaQItNNMVNFO5nmUU5ZvNDX9S8B7OSPU8z7uk-Do[/IMG] the fiat multipla everybody!!

[QUOTE=dax364;40292074][IMG]https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTipY15SVYD4dXM45lJdLXZJIhvOxoRqXbtHPjY7dsAc9NNpTDU[/IMG] my fiance has one of these unholy monsters. im waiting for it to break down so i can get rid of it. [/QUOTE] Yeah, those things are unholy monsters. I lost my last car by sliding UNDER one of those things. Next thing I knew it was leaking gas on my windshield. Fucking terrifying.

[QUOTE=Lomme;40288656]The Musso! It reeks of depression, poor thing.[/QUOTE] I saw a Musso in person the other week, I actually think they're quite good looking. They're really "plain" and unassuming, they just have a certain character to them.

[QUOTE=Biaxailemperor;40294419]Yeah, those things are unholy monsters. I lost my last car by sliding UNDER one of those things. Next thing I knew it was leaking gas on my windshield. Fucking terrifying.[/QUOTE] how did that happen

[QUOTE=Biaxailemperor;40294419]Yeah, those things are unholy monsters. I lost my last car by sliding UNDER one of those things. Next thing I knew it was leaking gas on my windshield. Fucking terrifying.[/QUOTE] This is a very confusing post. From what I can tell, you somehow managed to side your car underneath a Taurus wagon and you were terrified by the fact that fuel was dripping onto your windshield and not by the fact that you and your car were apparently being crushed by a 1500 kilo piece of[sp]plastic, mostly[/sp].

[QUOTE=dax364;40298105]how did that happen[/QUOTE] My brakes failed during rush-hour traffic and I slid underneath. My car was a Saturn SW, which is naturally low to the ground. The Taurus went on top of my hood. [editline]16th April 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=MrWhite;40299139]This is a very confusing post. From what I can tell, you somehow managed to side your car underneath a Taurus wagon and you were terrified by the fact that fuel was dripping onto your windshield and not by the fact that you and your car were apparently being crushed by a 1500 kilo piece of[sp]plastic, mostly[/sp].[/QUOTE] I'm not saying it wasn't terrifying to get into the car crash, but when it's leaking gas onto your windshield, and your motor is still hot, well, that is a fire waiting to happen. What isn't terrifying about that?

[QUOTE=Biaxailemperor;40300186]My brakes failed during rush-hour traffic and I slid underneath. My car was a Saturn SW, which is naturally low to the ground. The Taurus went on top of my hood. [editline]16th April 2013[/editline] I'm not saying it wasn't terrifying to get into the car crash, but when it's leaking gas onto your windshield, and your motor is still hot, well, that is a fire waiting to happen. What isn't terrifying about that?[/QUOTE] It's just strange to read that you were underneath another car. At first it sounded like you misrepresented thee incident, but if the car was actually on top of your car then yes that's fucking terrifying.

[QUOTE=MrWhite;40304181]It's just strange to read that you were underneath another car. At first it sounded like you misrepresented thee incident, but if the car was actually on top of your car then yes that's fucking terrifying.[/QUOTE] People always do a double-take when they hear that. No biggie. Luckily there were only minor injuries to all parties, though my car had to be scrapped. No good when the engine's crushed. Word of advice: Do not, under any circumstances, get a 1993 Saturn SW that is in poor condition and use it as your daily driver. It may get you from point A to B, and save some gas on the way, but that's all the good it will do you. What a piece of shit.