<VV> Re 25 worst cars

[Karl Haakonsen (cityhawk@pobox.com)]

So true. Every one of these "worst" lists is loaded with factual errors and sensationalism. If I ever see such a list that includes the Corvair, I consider it to be poorly researched (and get my eyes ready for lots of rolling before I read it). Like most car people, I can't resist clicking on it to see what made the list, and am usually annoyed. I guess I just read them to pi$$ myself off. Not only if they include the Corvair for all the usual, poorly-informed reasons, but for some of the other cars that often make the cut. Edsel (which surprisingly didn't make this list since it's one of the usual suspects on such lists): Mostly the wrong car at the wrong time introduced during a recession that didn't sell well. While it had some flaws, it objectively wasn't a bad car, just a marketing flop. Gremlin: People like to pick on the Gremlin, which was arguably one of the best cars in this segment in the 1970s. Granted, it was going up against such competition as the Vega and Pinto, so that's not saying much, but they were decent little cars. Either you liked the styling or you didn't. But the writers of these articles make up some "facts" about the cars to back up their opinions that the cars were bad. Everyone likes to include the Aztek, which is a pretty ugly car, though people who have them seem to like them well enough. Again, a marketing/styling flop, not an objectively bad car for its time and segment. And of course, the ill-fated Pinto. As a Corvair fan (and knowing the debacle about detonators being used to exaggerate the fire hazard of the GM pickup saddle gas tanks), I'm skeptical as to exactly how hazardous the Pinto was in rear-end collisions compared to other cars of its size and time, but the bit about "the memo" is the most damning thing about the Pinto. But again, for their time and class, Pintos weren't all that terrible either. But I'd rather have a Gremlin. 
  
The Bricklin? Most of that is tripe also. Yeah, it was a concept that didn't catch on and wasn't particularly fast, but the rest of that is nonsense. My Saturn also has plastic body panels, but the space frame under it is steel, and the cars were known for their safety in crashes. The Chrysler K cars? While we may laugh at their overly utilitarian appearance and lethargic performance today, the K car probably saved Chrysler in the 1980s and was a platform that was used in many a Mopar product for a decade or so, including minivans. The Chevette? while basic and not exciting to drive, they were pretty reliable, cheap cars that were great on gas and GM sold a zillion of them and most people I know who had one remember them affectionately; hardly worth a mention on the 25 worst cars of all time. 
  
Karl in Boston 
  
  
Sethracer at aol.com Sethracer at aol.com 
Fri Nov 25 17:19:12 EST 2016 
  
Whenever you see these lists, just chuckle and move on. Generally speaking, 
these are nothing but a advertising ploy to get you to log onto their 
site, so  they get a few penny's of ad money. The writers would have a real job 
if they  actually knew much about cars. Don't fall for a "Send this to all 
your friends"  pitch. Don't reward the laziness of the "authors" on these 
sites. 

Seth Emerson (today, operating in curmudgeon mode) 


In a message dated 11/25/2016 7:57:09 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,  
virtualvairs at corvair.org writes: 

Check  out #18 on the list. sigh: 



http://www.goliath.com/auto/the-10-worst-cars-of-all-time/XXXX