The automotive world often celebrates sleek designs and groundbreaking performance, but beneath the shine lies a universe of spectacular misjudgments that have become cautionary tales, because for every triumph, there’s a catastrophic failure waiting to be revealed.
This isn’t just about a loose screw or a glitchy infotainment system; we’re talking about fundamental misfires – marketing campaigns that insulted their target audience, design choices that seemed to defy the very concept of aesthetics, and features so poorly conceived they endangered drivers or simply rendered the car useless. These aren’t just footnotes in history; they’re valuable, albeit painful, lessons for any company daring to innovate, especially when venturing into new, unfamiliar territories. Sometimes, the road to failure is paved with good intentions and absolutely terrible execution.
Join us as we take a deep, critical dive into some of the most cringeworthy moments in car history. We’re pulling back the curtain on the decisions, the designs, and the sheer audacity that led to these vehicles becoming synonymous with “failure.” From linguistic faux pas that meant “no go” to luxury cars targeting the wrong demographic, prepare to wince and wonder: “What were they thinking?” Let’s kick off this retrospective of automotive ignominy with our first set of seven truly unforgettable market misses.
1.In the early 1980s, General Motors aimed to expand the Chevrolet Nova into Latin American markets, confident in its solid performance and established reputation in the U.S., but overlooked crucial regional considerations for this seemingly straightforward expansion.
As it turns out, quite a lot, especially when a fundamental linguistic oversight turns your product’s name into a punchline. The brand’s marketing strategists, in what can only be described as a monumental gaffe, seemingly failed to consult a basic Spanish dictionary. In many Spanish-speaking countries, “Nova” translates directly to “no go” in Spanish.
This wasn’t a subtle nuance; it was a glaring, literal interpretation that instantly conveyed an image of a car that simply wouldn’t start or perform. The consequences were as predictable as they were disastrous, with sales plummeting as potential buyers associated the name with a car that would not start. It demonstrates the importance of considering cultural and language differences when entering new markets.
Car Model Information: 2009 Chevrolet Colorado LT Crew Cab
Caption: 1963 Chevrolet Chevy II 300 4-door sedan
Name: Chevrolet Chevy II / Nova
Manufacturer: unbulleted list
ModelYears: unbulleted list
Production: unbulleted list
Class: unbulleted list
Successor: unbulleted list
Categories: 1970s cars, 1980s cars, All articles needing additional references, Articles needing additional references from March 2025, Articles with short description
Summary: The Chevrolet Chevy II/Nova is a small automobile manufactured by Chevrolet, and produced in five generations for the 1962 through 1979, and 1985 through 1988 model years. Built on the X-body platform, the Nova was the top selling model in the Chevy II lineup through 1968. The Chevy II nameplate was dropped after 1968, with Nova becoming the nameplate for all of the 1969 through 1979 models. It was replaced by the 1980 Chevrolet Citation introduced in the spring of 1979. The Nova nameplate returned in 1985, produced through 1988 as a S-car based, NUMMI manufactured, subcompact based on the front wheel drive, Japan home-based Toyota Sprinter.
Get more information about: Chevrolet Chevy II / Nova
Buying a high-performing used car >>>
Brand: Chevrolet Model: Nova
Price: $10,950 Mileage: 127,501 mi.
2. **Mercedes-Benz – A-Class**Mercedes-Benz, a name synonymous with luxury, precision, and engineering excellence, found itself in an uncharacteristic predicament in the late 1990s. The German marque unveiled its compact A-Class model in Japan, aiming to broaden its appeal beyond its traditional affluent clientele and attract a younger, more dynamic audience.
The idea was sound: tap into new demographics to ensure future growth. However, the execution of their marketing campaign became a textbook example of how to inadvertently shoot yourself in the foot. With an ad illustrating a moose test, which revealed the car’s tendency to tip over on sharp turns, the campaign backfired spectacularly.
The implications were immediate and severe. The unintended implication of the advertisement regarding safety damaged Mercedes-Benz’s hard-earned reputation for quality and reliability, and sales suffered as a result. This proved that when your marketing inadvertently highlights a major flaw, even an established luxury brand can experience significant collateral damage.
3. **Ford – Lincoln in China**Even household names with decades of global experience can stumble when venturing into new territories. Ford, a titan of American manufacturing, learned this lesson firsthand in 2013 with its ambitious attempt to introduce the Lincoln luxury brand to the burgeoning Chinese market. China, with its rapidly growing economy and affluent consumers, presented a tantalizing opportunity for high-end automotive sales.
However, Ford made a critical error by underestimating the profound importance of localization. The Chinese market isn’t merely another sales territory; it demands specific features and designs to align with local tastes and preferences. Ford neglected this crucial aspect, failing to adapt its Lincoln models sufficiently to align with the unique demands and cultural preferences of Chinese buyers.
The result was predictable: lukewarm sales and struggling to compete against established Chinese luxury car brands. This failure underscored a vital lesson for all global manufacturers: true market penetration requires deep cultural understanding, significant investment in localized design, and a willingness to truly adapt to the nuances of the target market.
4. **DeLorean DMC-12**No discussion of automotive marketing failures would be complete without reverently, or perhaps irreverently, mentioning the infamous DeLorean DMC-12. This car, despite its fleeting existence and undeniable cult status thanks to a certain film franchise, is inextricably linked with a series of profound marketing missteps and image positioning issues that ultimately sealed its fate.
The DMC-12 was a car with a dramatic backstory, a stainless-steel body, and gull-wing doors – it *looked* like the future, but its reality was far more mundane. The DeLorean faced several challenges, including production delays and weak image positioning. However, the most significant failure emerged from the movie “Back to the Future.”
While the film famously featured a time-traveling DeLorean, it was the unintended association of the car as a symbol of failure and being outdated that further affected its sales. The DeLorean remains a fascinating paradox: a cinematic legend that was, in the automotive market, a spectacular flop due to its marketing missteps.
Car Model Information: 1982 Delorean DMC-12
Name: DMC DeLorean
Alt: 1983 DeLorean
Caption: 1983 DeLorean
Manufacturer: DeLorean Motor Company
Production: January 21, 1981 – December 1982
ModelYears: 1981–1983
Assembly: Dunmurry
Designer: Giorgetto Giugiaro
Class: Sports car
BodyStyle: coupé
Layout: Rear-engine, rear-wheel-drive layout
Doors: Gull-wing doors
Engine: 2.85 L
Abbr: on
Powerout: 130 hp
Transmission: 5-speed manual ,3-speed automatic
Wheelbase: 2413 mm
Length: 4267 mm
Width: 1988 mm
Height: 1140 mm
Weight: 1233 kg
Sp: us
Categories: 1980s cars, All Wikipedia articles written in American English, Articles with short description, Automobiles with backbone chassis, Automobiles with gull-wing doors
Summary: The DMC DeLorean is a rear-engine, two-seat sports car manufactured and marketed by John DeLorean’s DeLorean Motor Company (DMC) for the American market from 1981 until 1983—ultimately the only car brought to market by the fledgling company. The DeLorean is sometimes referred to by its internal DMC pre-production designation, DMC-12, although this was not used in sales or marketing materials for the production model.
Designed by Giorgetto Giugiaro, the DeLorean is noted for its gull-wing doors and brushed stainless-steel outer body panels, as well as its lack of power and performance. Though its production was short-lived, the DeLorean became widely known after it was featured as the time machine in the Back to the Future films.
With the first production car completed on January 21, 1981, the design incorporated numerous minor revisions to the hood, wheels and interior before production ended in late December 1982, shortly after DMC filed for bankruptcy and after total production reached an estimated 9,000 units.
Despite the car having a reputation for poor build quality and an unsatisfactory driving experience, the DeLorean continues to have a strong following, driven in part by the popularity of Back to the Future. 6,500 DeLoreans were estimated to still be on the road as of 2015.
Get more information about: DMC DeLorean
Buying a high-performing used car >>>
Brand: DeLorean Model: DMC-12
Price: $129,950 Mileage: 3,145 mi.
5. **Triumph Mayflower (1949–53)**The Triumph Mayflower, launched in 1949, represents a particularly peculiar chapter in automotive history – an attempt by Triumph to manufacture a luxury small car that, as its name suggests, was to appeal mainly to the US market. The ambition was evident in its name, suggestive of Pilgrim Fathers and American roots, and its aesthetic cues drawn from prestigious vehicles like the Rolls-Royce Silver Dawn.
While sharing components with the Standard Vanguard and featuring an engine based on the Standard Ten, the Mayflower’s most striking, and ultimately disastrous, characteristic was its design. Its body was largely inspired by the Rolls-Royce and Bentley luxury limousines of the era, but was much smaller, thus making the design and proportions look rather odd. James May called it the ugliest car ever built, saying about it “Its details are ugly, its overall proportions are ugly, its very concept – as a car to appeal to Americans who believed they were directly descended from the Pilgrim Fathers – makes one shudder.”
Compounding its visual affront was its abysmal performance. The body was also rather heavy, which combined with the small motor made the car underpowered and slow, reaching a top speed of 63 mph (101 km/h). Stuff.co.nz included it in an article on Cars that should never have been built, saying about it: “It always looked like the misshapen out of scale miniature of the larger, more elegant Renown model, viewed in the distorted reflection of a fairground mirror.” The Mayflower stands as a monument to how misguided design and a fundamental lack of performance can sink even the most ambitious of market aspirations.
6. **Nash/Austin Metropolitan (1954–62)**The Nash Metropolitan represents another early, and ultimately failed, attempt by a US car maker to produce a small car “which would be mainly used as a second car.” This wasn’t just any small car; it was intended to be “a big car in miniature” by its main developer George Mason. Crucially, it was also one of the first cars specifically designed for and marketed towards women, being advertised as “a motorized shopping cart for affluent urban gals.”
Developed in co-operation with British Austin Motors, who also produced it at their Longbridge plant, making it the first US-developed car to be entirely produced in a different country. Despite having large marketing efforts put into the project, it never sold as well as planned and ended up as a commercial failure. The main reasons for this were considered its poor performance, poor handling, poor reliability, and the small market for small economy cars on the US market.
In an era of rising prosperity where American tastes gravitated towards bigger, full-size cars, the small economy car market proved to be far too niche for the Metropolitan’s aspirations. Brian Sewell of The Independent called it “one of the nastiest cars ever built.” Money Inc. included it in its list of the 20 worst cars ever made, calling it “One of the biggest bombs in automotive history and definitely one of the worst cars ever made.” The Metropolitan’s story is a testament to how misjudging market trends and combining poor engineering with uninspired marketing can turn even a novel concept into an “abject failure being the worst of both worlds.”
7. **Renault Dauphine (North American version) (1956–67)**The Renault Dauphine, a car that found considerable sales success and a measure of respect in its native Europe, where it is seen as one of the forerunners of the modern economy car, met a starkly different, and overwhelmingly negative, reception across the Atlantic in the United States. While Europeans appreciated its practicality and affordability, American consumers were confronted with a vehicle utterly unsuited to their driving conditions and expectations, leading to its ignominious inclusion on multiple “worst cars” lists.
The primary complaints centered on its utterly anemic performance and its notorious unreliability. A period review of the Dauphine by Road & Track magazine found that the Dauphine took 32 seconds to accelerate to 60 mph (97 km/h) from a standstill. Autoblog included the Dauphine on its list of “The 20 Dumbest Cars of All Time” and it was included on Time’s list of the “50 Worst Cars of All Time,” with writer Dan Neil calling it “The most ineffective bit of French engineering since the Maginot Line.”
Beyond its sluggishness, another major issue that severely tarnished its reputation was its alarming susceptibility to rust. A 2008 retrospective article in The Independent said: “as soon as the US market had come to grips with the Dauphine’s swing-axle manners and useless acceleration, they were pole-axed by its abysmal corrosion record. It would take only one New York winter of driving on salt-strewn roads to give a Dauphine front wings that resembled net curtains.” Renault themselves tacitly admitted to the Dauphine’s flaws in American print advertisements, marketing its successor, the Renault 8, as “The Renault for people who swore they wouldn’t buy another one.”
Alright, gearheads and connoisseurs of automotive blunders, if you thought the first seven entries were a bumpy ride, buckle up. We’re just scratching the surface of the industry’s most spectacular own goals. We’ve covered the linguistic landmines and design disasters; now, prepare to delve into an even deeper abyss of chronic mechanical woes, safety scandals that launched entire government agencies, and vehicles so fundamentally flawed they became symbols of entire political systems. This isn’t just about a bad quarter; this is about legacy-damaging, reputation-shredding, long-term notoriety.
From East German symbols of economic malaise to American safety controversies and British reliability nightmares, our next seven vehicles represent a crucial chapter in the grand, often hilarious, saga of automotive history. These are the cars that didn’t just miss the mark; they launched themselves into a different zip code entirely. Let’s fire up the engine of ignominy and continue our journey through the annals of vehicular infamy.
8. **Trabant (1957–90)**Ah, the Trabant. If you wanted a car that perfectly encapsulated the “charm” of East German communism, you got it. Introduced in 1957, this two-stroke marvel quickly became an accidental symbol of economic downturn, a vehicle that, despite its owners’ derisive affection, was undeniably obsolete the moment it rolled off the line. Its duroplast body, a marvel of recycled materials, and perpetual production shortages only added to its dubious legend.
The Nova’s engine, a primitive two-stroke design, was notorious for appalling fuel economy, minimal power, and excessive smoke, a mechanical antiquity that automotive writer Eric Peters perfectly described as producing a ‘billowing contrail of smoke’ and a transmission that required ‘at least a fifth of Stolichnaya to deal with effectively’.
The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and German reunification brought the Trabant’s true competitive disadvantage into stark relief. As East Germans streamed west in their beloved Trabants, many promptly abandoned them in favor of more sophisticated Western, French, and Japanese competitors. Time magazine’s Dan Neil famously called it “the car that gave communism a bad name” and “a hollow lie of a car constructed of recycled worthlessness.” Edmunds.com, not one to pull punches, ranked it the 9th worst car of all time, flatly stating it’s “one more reason why Communism is evil.”
Yet, despite being the butt of jokes across Germany and the subject of comedic films like *Go Trabi Go*, the Trabant has found an unlikely second life. It’s cultivated a strong cult following, becoming a recognizable, nostalgic symbol of the bygone GDR era—a piece of “Ostalgie.” It seems even the most abysmal automotive failures can, over time, earn a peculiar kind of affection, proving that sometimes, even a car built from “recycled worthlessness” can capture hearts.
9. **Edsel (1958)**When Ford Motor Company launched the Edsel in 1958, it wasn’t just another car; it was a grand statement, a $400 million investment aimed at carving out a new, prestigious niche between its entry-level Fords and the mid-tier Mercury. Marketed with a hype-fueled fervor that promised a “plutonium-powered, pancake-making wondercar,” the public was primed for something revolutionary. The ambition was palpable, and the marketing machine was in overdrive.
The reality, unfortunately, was far less wonderous. Despite featuring innovative elements like self-adjusting brakes and automatic lubrication—features that would eventually become industry standards—the Edsel was, at its core, a redecorated Mercury, largely comprised of existing Ford and Mercury components. The monumental marketing build-up simply couldn’t deliver on its lofty promises, leaving a public underwhelmed by what felt like a slightly gussied-up version of what they already knew.
The Edsel’s distinctive ‘horsecollar’ grille became an instant object of ridicule, likened to a toilet seat or ‘an Oldsmobile sucking a lemon,’ with even the tail lamps criticized as ‘ingrowing toenails,’ a bold aesthetic choice that failed to impress and landed it on lists of the ugliest cars.
However, the Edsel’s catastrophic commercial failure—generating losses estimated between $250 million and $350 million—wasn’t solely due to its divisive looks. It suffered from deeply flawed marketing, significant build quality issues exacerbated by shared production lines, and critically, its release coincided with an economic recession that saw American consumers shifting away from large, medium-priced cars towards smaller, more economical models like the Volkswagen Beetle. So, while the grille remains infamous, the Edsel’s true downfall was a perfect storm of timing, strategy, and execution.
Car Model Information: 1958 Edsel Citation
BirthName: Edsel Bryant Ford
Caption: Ford in 1921
BirthDate: [object Object]
BirthPlace: Detroit, Michigan
DeathDate: [object Object]
DeathPlace: Grosse Pointe Shores, Michigan
Occupation: Automobile executive
Title: Ford Motor Company
Spouse: [object Object]
Parents: Henry Ford,Clara Bryant Ford
Relations: Edsel Ford II
Children: Henry Ford II,Benson Ford,Josephine Ford,William Clay Ford Sr.
Categories: 1893 births, 1943 deaths, 20th-century American businesspeople, All Wikipedia articles written in American English, All articles with dead external links
Summary: Edsel Bryant Ford (November 6, 1893 – May 26, 1943) was an American business executive and philanthropist, who was the only child of pioneering industrialist Henry Ford and his wife, Clara Jane Bryant Ford. He was the president of Ford Motor Company from 1919 until his death in 1943.
He worked closely with his father, as sole heir to the business, but was keen to develop cars more exciting than the Model T (“Tin Lizzie”), in line with his personal tastes. Even as president, he had trouble persuading his father to allow any departure from this formula. Only a change in market conditions enabled him to develop the more fashionable Model A in 1927. Edsel also founded the Mercury division and was responsible for the Lincoln-Zephyr and Lincoln Continental. He introduced important features, such as hydraulic brakes, and greatly strengthened the company’s overseas production.
Ford was a major art benefactor in Detroit and also financed Admiral Richard Byrd’s polar explorations. He died of stomach cancer aged 49. Henry Ford temporarily reassumed the presidency of Ford Motor Company on Edsel’s death, then Edsel’s eldest son, Henry Ford II, succeeded Henry as president of the company in 1945.
He was also a member of the board of directors of American IG, the American subsidiary of the German chemical conglomerate IG Farben.
Get more information about: Edsel Ford
Buying a high-performing used car >>>
Brand: Ford Model: Edsel
Price: Not Priced Mileage: 68,904 mi.
10. **Chevrolet Corvair (1960–64)**At its debut, the Chevrolet Corvair was a darling of the automotive press, critically praised and popular with consumers. Its innovative rear-engine layout was a bold departure for an American manufacturer, earning it a loyal following. But like many high-concept designs, the Corvair harbored a fatal flaw that would ultimately not only tarnish its reputation but also fundamentally alter the course of automotive safety in the United States.
The problem lay deep in its engineering: a swing-axle rear suspension system coupled with its rear-engine configuration. This combination made the Corvair notoriously tricky to handle, especially for drivers unaccustomed to its unusual dynamics, leading to an alarming number of highway accidents. It was a ticking time bomb of unstable oversteer, waiting to catch unsuspecting motorists off guard.
Ralph Nader’s 1965 book, *Unsafe at Any Speed*, singled out the Corvair for corporate negligence, especially after GM admitted to declining crucial suspension upgrades for cost reasons, further igniting a consumer safety movement that forever changed the industry.
Although a later NHTSA report suggested properly maintained Corvairs handled comparably to their contemporaries, the controversy spurred the creation of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and mandatory safety testing, with even former GM executive John DeLorean admitting Nader’s criticisms were valid.
Car Model Information: 1964 Chevrolet Corvair Monza
Caption: 1964 Chevrolet Corvair Monza
Name: Chevrolet Corvair
Manufacturer: Chevrolet
Production: July 1959
Platform: GM Z platform
Chassis: Unibody
ModelYears: 1960–1969
Assembly: United States,Kansas City, Missouri,Oakland, California,Van Nuys,St. Louis,Flint, Michigan,Belgium,Canada,Mexico,South Africa,Switzerland,Venezuela
Class: Compact car
Successor: Chevrolet Vega
Layout: Rear-engine, rear-wheel-drive layout
Categories: All Wikipedia articles written in American English, All articles lacking in-text citations, All articles needing additional references, All articles with dead external links, All articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases
Summary: The Chevrolet Corvair is a rear-engined, air-cooled compact car manufactured and marketed by Chevrolet over two generations from the 1960 through 1969 model years. The Corvair was a response to the increasing popularity of small, fuel-efficient automobiles, particularly the imported Volkswagen Beetle and American-built compacts like the Rambler American and Studebaker Lark.
The first generation (1960–1964) was offered in four-door sedan, two-door coupe, convertible, and four-door station wagon configurations. A two- and four-door hardtop, as well as a convertible, were available as second-generation variants (1965–1969). The Corvair platform was also offered as a subseries known as the Corvair 95 (1961–1965), which consisted of a passenger van, commercial van, and pickup truck variant. Total production was approximately 1.8 million vehicles from 1960 until 1969.
The name “Corvair” was first applied in 1954 to a Corvette-based concept with a hardtop fastback-styled roof, part of the Motorama traveling exhibition. When applied to the production models, the “air” part referenced the engine’s cooling system.
A prominent aspect of the Corvair’s legacy derives from controversy surrounding the handling of early models equipped with rear swing axles, articulated aggressively by Ralph Nader’s Unsafe at Any Speed but tempered by a 1972 Texas A&M University safety commission report for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) which found that the 1960–1963 Corvair possessed no greater potential for loss of control in extreme situations than contemporary compacts.
To better counter popular inexpensive subcompact competitors, notably the Beetle and Japanese imports such as the Datsun 510, GM replaced the Corvair with the more conventional Chevrolet Vega in 1970.
Get more information about: Chevrolet Corvair
Buying a high-performing used car >>>
Brand: Chevrolet Model: Corvair
Price: $29,988 Mileage: 74,787 mi.
11. **Hillman Imp (1963–76)**The Hillman Imp arrived in 1963 with the lofty ambition of challenging the wildly successful BMC Mini, presenting itself as a modern, innovative small economy car. Initial media reception was largely positive, praising its contemporary design, commendable road handling, an all-aluminum engine block, and the clever practicality of an opening rear window paired with a folding backseat for ample luggage space. It truly looked like a contender ready to shake up the small car market.
The Imp’s initial promise quickly dissolved due to mechanical and production issues; despite the Mini pioneering front-wheel drive, the Imp stuck with a rear-engine, rear-wheel-drive layout, further hampered by poor quality control at its Linwood plant and a rushed design with unresolved fundamental problems.
The list of owner complaints was a litany of headaches: frequent failures of gearboxes and water pumps, persistent engine overheating due to inadequate cooling, and a generally abysmal standard of production quality with noticeable panel fitment issues. These chronic reliability problems didn’t just annoy owners; they systematically chipped away at the Imp’s reputation, ensuring it never achieved the sales figures, or the widespread affection, of its Mini rival.
The Imp’s commercial failure critically damaged its parent, the Rootes Group, leading to its takeover by Chrysler in 1967, and despite production until 1976, it remains a legacy of missed opportunities and quality nightmares, frequently appearing on lists of ‘worst cars’.
12.While the Subaru 360 was a modest success in Japan as a practical Kei car, its 1968 American debut, spearheaded by Malcolm Bricklin, became a masterclass in failure, exploiting a loophole in safety standards that ultimately proved detrimental to the brand.
Marketed with the disarmingly honest, if not entirely appealing, slogan “Cheap and ugly does it!”, the Subaru 360 carried an MSRP of just $1,297. While it might have been cheap, “ugly” was certainly a matter of opinion, and it quickly garnered the attention of critics like *Car and Driver*, who dubbed it “one of the ugliest cars in history” and “the most bulbous bubble ever to putt-putt.” But aesthetics were merely the beginning of its problems.
The truly damning indictment came from *Consumer Reports*, which famously labeled it “unacceptably hazardous.” Their testing revealed a car that took a glacial 37.5 seconds to reach 60 MPH, was “dangerously structurally deficient” in a 30MPH crash test against a standard vehicle, and featured bumpers “virtually useless against anything more formidable than a watermelon.” The review concluded with a palpable sense of relief from the testers, who found it “a pleasure to squirm out of the [car], slam the door and walk away.”
Unsurprisingly, the 360 was a commercial failure in North America. Imports ceased in 1970, with many unsold units languishing in stock for years, spawning urban legends of them being crushed or pushed into the ocean. While the 360 was a dismal start, it’s a testament to resilience that Subaru of America, after this ignominious beginning, eventually found incredible success, proving that even the most embarrassing blunders can be overcome with time and better cars.
Car Model Information: 2021 Subaru Crosstrek Base
Name: Subaru 360
Aka: Subaru 450
Manufacturer: Subaru
Production: 1958–1971
Assembly: Subaru#Manufacturing facilities,Ōta, Gunma
Class: Microcar
BodyStyle: Sedan (car),cabrio coach,station wagon
Engine: List of Subaru engines#Two Cylinder,List of Subaru engines#Two Cylinder,List of Subaru engines#Two Cylinder
Length: 117.7 in
Abbr: on
Disp: flip
Width: 51.2 in
Wheelbase: 70.9 in
Height: 54.3 in
Weight: 900 lb
Successor: Subaru R-2
Doors: Suicide doors
Layout: RR layout
Related: Subaru Sambar
Designer: Shinroku Momose
Categories: 1960s cars, 1970s cars, Articles with short description, Cars discontinued in 1971, Cars introduced in 1958
Summary: The Subaru 360 is a rear-engined, two-door city car manufactured and marketed by Subaru from 1958 to 1971. As the company’s first mass-produced automobile, production reached 392,000 over its 12-year model run.
Noted for its small overall size, 450 kg (1,000 lb) curb weight, monocoque construction, swing axle rear suspension, fiberglass roof panel, and rear-hinged doors, the inexpensive car was designed in response to the Japanese government’s light car or Kei car regulations and its proposal for a larger “national car,” both intended to help motorize the post WWII Japanese population. The 360’s overall size and engine capacity complied with Japan’s Kei car regulations.
Nicknamed the “ladybug” in Japan, and ultimately superseded by R-2, the 360 was one of Japan’s most popular cars and was available in a single generation in two-door, station wagon (“Custom”), “convertible” (a sedan with a roll-back fabric roof) and sporting variants. The two-door sedans’ model code is K111, while the wagon is known as K142. Ten thousand were sold in the United States, imported by Malcolm Bricklin and advertised as “Cheap and Ugly.”
The nameplate 360 derived from its tax-limited engine displacement: 356 cc.
Get more information about: Subaru 360
Buying a high-performing used car >>>
Brand: Subaru Model: 360
Price: $21,000 Mileage: 51,370 mi.
13. **VAZ-2101/Lada Riva/Zhiguli (1970–2013)**The VAZ-2101, known variously as the Lada Nova, Lada Riva, or Zhiguli in export markets, presents a fascinating dichotomy in automotive history. In its Soviet homeland, this ruggedized Fiat 124 was an immensely popular model, a symbol of accessibility and a common sight. Yet, its journey to Western export markets was met with a chorus of critical disdain, cementing its reputation as a fundamentally flawed vehicle owing to its old-fashioned technical layout and truly poor build quality.
British motoring journalist Jeremy Clarkson, never one to mince words, famously declared it “simply the worst car in the world.” His descriptions paint a vivid, brutal picture: a steering column “welded to the dashboard,” brakes that inexplicably caused the car to “speed up a bit and turn left, violently,” and an engine that sounded “plainly been lifted from a cement mixer.” He also noted its remarkable, if unrefined, durability: “It’s like a cockroach. It could survive a nuclear blast. It’s amazingly tough. It can stand up to hammer blows but not water.”
Beyond Clarkson’s eloquent savagery, other publications echoed the sentiment. *The Telegraph* described it as “Poor to drive, uncomfortable and basic in the extreme,” while *Sellyourproblemcar.com* called it “an all-round disaster.” Its tank-like handling, negligible engine performance (running on what Clarkson dubbed “spicy water” 76-octane petrol), and boxy design meant that even by the time it rolled off production lines in the 80s, it felt like a relic from a bygone era.
Despite its enduring image as a “symbol of the decline of the Russian automobile industry” in the West, the Lada enjoyed extraordinary sales in the Soviet Bloc, becoming the third-best-selling car of all time globally and one of the longest-produced. It’s developed a strong cult following, particularly in Russia and former Soviet states, transforming into a recognizable cultural icon. It’s a testament to sheer resilience and availability that even a car so universally panned in one market can achieve legendary status in another.
14. **AMC Gremlin (1970–78)**The AMC Gremlin, unleashed upon the American subcompact market in 1970, was an attempt by a smaller manufacturer to stand out against the giants. It did stand out, alright, though not always for the right reasons. A controversially shortened version of the AMC Hornet, the Gremlin arrived with styling that could only be described as unique, earning it immediate and lasting derision for its odd proportions and decidedly out-of-date technology.
*Time* magazine included it among the 50 worst cars of all time, with Dan Neil articulating the collective bewilderment: “Teague’s design team basically whacked off the rear of the AMC Hornet with a cleaver. The result was one of the most curiously proportioned cars ever.” Beyond its chopped-off aesthetic, the Gremlin was also “awful to drive,” burdened by a heavy six-cylinder motor and “choppy, unhappy handling” due to a compromised rear suspension. Its limited virtues were few, and its flaws were many, including vacuum-operated windshield wipers that hearkened back to a much earlier automotive era.
The critiques were relentless. CNN positioned it on its list of “The Ten Most Questionable Cars of All Time,” pondering whether it was “a daring leap forward by an innovative underdog or as a desperate attempt to do something – anything – that would stand out.” *Car Talk* placed it 4th on their “Worst Car of the Millennium” poll, and CNBC didn’t hold back, including it on its list of the ten ugliest cars of all time.
Author Eric Peters playfully captured its signature design feature as the “distinctive ‘What happened to the rest of your car, buddy?’ look.” With a shocking lack of modern features like disc brakes, radial tires, and electric windshield wipers, the Gremlin truly felt like a throwback. It remains an infamous symbol of AMC’s desperate, yet memorable, attempts to carve out a niche in a fiercely competitive market, solidifying its place as a quintessential automotive oddity.
These automotive failures, from laughable linguistics to hazardous designs, serve as stark, often hilarious, reminders that even established manufacturers can stumble, offering profound lessons in market research, engineering integrity, and the crucial art of listening to customers.
