Nissan 370Z Forum - Inside line's 100 worst cars

Nissan 370Z Forum (http://www.the370z.com/)

- Other Vehicles (http://www.the370z.com/other-vehicles/)

- - Inside line's 100 worst cars (http://www.the370z.com/other-vehicles/47070-inside-lines-100-worst-cars.html)

Rooster89

12-23-2011 12:06 AM

Inside line's 100 worst cars

100 Worst Cars of All Time

Quote:

90. 2000 Saleen S7: With 550 hp onboard, theoretically it was awesome. But actually it was fragile and just smelled like a kit car. Twin-turbo version came in 2005 at 750 hp with a $585,296 sticker.
...

74. 1979 Datsun 280ZX: The fatter, clumsier, overwrought successor to the original Z-car. It sold well through the disco era, but sucked and is universally unloved today.
...

45. 1969 Porsche 914: Originally designed as a VW, this midengine, four-cylinder breadbox was never a "real Porsche" to the hard-core. OK, even the medium-core didn't think it was a real Porsche.

Sometimes I wonder if Insideline is the only non corrupt car mag, or just a bunch of trolls.

So read through, and enjoy. PS Flame away at insideline if you want, but the majority of the cars on that list belong there.

m4a1mustang

12-23-2011 12:14 AM

Meh... like everything else it's just filler designed to get some attention. 100 cars... that is A LOT. Of course there are going to be some on the list that don't make much sense.

They got the Pontiac Aztek right, though.

Red__Zed

12-23-2011 12:14 AM

lolwat at some of that list.

Srt4 and ariel atom on the list, and the mustang ii is the only mustang.

m4a1mustang

12-23-2011 12:18 AM

The fact that they complain about the lack of practicality of an Ariel Atom is proof enough that they don't "get it."

Red__Zed

12-23-2011 12:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 1460523)

The fact that they complain about the lack of practicality of an Ariel Atom is proof enough that they don't "get it."

But it has no roof! And where do I put my groceries?

shadoquad

12-23-2011 12:41 AM

Love it. The Darwin awards of automotive engineering, hackneyed design, and overly ambitious marketing.

FL 4Motion

12-23-2011 12:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red__Zed (Post 1460545)

But it has no roof! And where do I put my groceries?

that's exactly why when wife and i were looking for a new sporty car, we didn't go with the atom. :icon08:

shadoquad

12-23-2011 12:44 AM

I definitely agree, though, that the Atom doesn't belong on that list, or else you have to put every other track toy on there.

FL 4Motion

12-23-2011 12:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shadoquad (Post 1460553)

I definitely agree, though, that the Atom doesn't belong on that list, or else you have to put every other track toy on there.

they should add the shado mobile to their list, cause once a car's been shadofied, it's ruined for all others. :icon23:

shadoquad

12-23-2011 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FL 4Motion (Post 1460557)

they should add the shado mobile to their list, cause once a car's been shadofied, it's ruined for all others. :icon23:

That's why the celebrities I nail fall off the Maxim 100

FL 4Motion

12-23-2011 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shadoquad (Post 1460560)

That's why the celebrities I nail fall off the Maxim 100

:bowrofl:

Rooster89

12-23-2011 12:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 1460517)

They got the Pontiac Aztek right, though.

I just don't get why I SEE SO MANY OF THEM! I liken the exterior to the prius's down syndrome cousin.

m4a1mustang

12-23-2011 01:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rooster89 (Post 1460567)

I just don't get why I SEE SO MANY OF THEM! I liken the exterior to the prius's down syndrome cousin.

Apparently they sold like 30k a year for the first three years. A lot of them were rentals.

To put that number in perspective, they needed to sell 75k per year just to break even.

FL 4Motion

12-23-2011 01:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 1460576)

Apparently they sold like 30k a year for the first three years. A lot of them were rentals.

To put that number in perspective, they needed to sell 75k per year just to break even.

:eek:

:icon14:

m4a1mustang

12-23-2011 01:08 AM

Yeah it was an epic failure.

Isamu

12-23-2011 01:51 AM

wow... there isn't any sort of order either..

you can't even begin to compare some of those cars

shadoquad

12-23-2011 08:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isamu (Post 1460609)

wow... there isn't any sort of order either..

you can't even begin to compare some of those cars

Clark, those are the worst cars ever, in their book, and you have to admit, some of them were pretty horrid.

I'm glad the Aston Martin Cygnet made that list.

m4a1mustang

12-23-2011 08:41 AM

They put the 1953 Corvette on the list because it was "slow and has a 2-speed transmission." :icon14:

I'm sorry but the '53 Corvette was a revolutionary car that just about started the growth of the sports car market.

phelan

12-23-2011 11:10 AM

lol the daewoo nubira! i forgot about those idiots.

b1adesofcha0s

12-23-2011 11:56 AM

Can't believe they put the Ariel Atom in there :shakes head:

I guess since the V8 version isn't in there, the engine made all the difference :icon17:

m4a1mustang

12-23-2011 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by b1adesofcha0s (Post 1461002)

Can't believe they put the Ariel Atom in there :shakes head:

I guess since the V8 version isn't in there, the engine made all the difference :icon17:

It made it more practical, since that is what they were bitching about. :icon17:

shadoquad

12-23-2011 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by m4a1mustang (Post 1460741)

The 53 vette was a lousy car, tho. Slow and impractical

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:26 AM.