Worst cars of the 2000s

Just like the title says. Article:

http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/1071/worst-cars-of-the-2000s/

A related article from Time. The 50 worst of all time:

http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/completelist/0,,1658545,00.html

I am ashamed. My mom had an Aztec, my grandma had a Catera, and I had a Sunfire...key word had. Now we all own Japanese or German cars, no complaints.

I do agree on the sunfire. Mom had a sunbird and wanted to trade up to the new model.. she went home with her old car after looking at the new one... and THAT is saying something

How much challange material is on that list?

I don't think the Echo or the X-type deserve to be on that list, and the Vehicross is a competent commuter-type SUV in an extremely ugly shell.

Am I the only one who likes the look of the Vehicross?

I did find interesting their observation that a used 2002 X-Type retails for about $7k while a 2002 Civic retails for about $8k. True, this alone does not make the Jag a bad used purchase (maybe even a bargain) but does not speak well of the resale if you bought the Jag new.

Seems to me that the Echo does not belong.

Vehicross is a personal taste opinion issues but not a "bad car (truck)"

I'm floored. They went after the Smart (rightfully so) like it was an American car.

Even more surprised when I remember its also one of the darlings of the "green" movement. Whats next, the truth about the Prius?!

Agreed, Echo doesn't belong.

If the Jag's are that cheap, first off, I'll take one. and second- Think that AWD would fit on a earlier Taurus?

I'd like to nominate just about any early 00's GM product. The engines had serious quality control issues, and the shop at my place of employment changes at least 3 3400, 1 3100, and 1 4.3l of that vintage weekly. We probably swap at least 3 3800s a month too, so they're not much better.

Oh yeah, and the early Eco-tech's lose timing chains and self destruct like it's their job.

i thought the vehicross was pretty neat...

and as ugly as i STILL think they are i'd prob own an aztek, also think the caddy catera could be fun... somehow in there as much as I hate the sunfire i kinda dug it's shape... then again at that point I thought my '87 grand am was awesome... lol... drove a sunfire though and i hated every second of it... poor ergos, uncomfy, underpowerered... hopped into an 86 mr2 and was SO much more comfy (rented the sunfire to get the mr2)

and lastly... as much as I hate the shopping kart look of the echo... i'd happily drive one... wish we got the hatch version though

I once drove a rented Sunfire convertible in the L.A area. The cowl and A-pillar shake was so bad I'm amazed the windshield didn't shatter.

On paper, the ForTwo is pretty awesome. Sequential manual, RWD, mid-engine.

On paper...

I think in the right hands the Caddy could be a lot of fun. You would have to induce overstear, but that is acheivable.

Oh, and engine swap somehting rediculous into any of them and i'd drive it.

trying not to hijack the thread, have you seen the "Worst Cars to Insure" list?

http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/1125/safety-agency-lists-best-worst-cars-to-insure/

I'd agree that the Smart is not so smart, at least in this country. In Europe, they are offered with a little diesel engine that gets, IIRC, 60+ mpg or better. Here, we get a gas engine that delivers 41 at best.

To me, paying as much as a Corolla for such a tiny car, and still only getting 41mpg, is ridiculous. Why not buy the Corolla, get 35mpg and have a fighting chance of survival if you have an accident?

While living in Germany, I once saw a Smart stood up on its taillights on the side of the A5 Autobahn.

I always thought the Vehicross was awesome. It looks like an Audi All-Road that had too many gamma rays and got angry.

A note on the X-Type since I own one (an '04 with a manual trans)...

It is a good value, but probably a bad Jaguar, and that's why it makes the list. What you get is a dependable AWD car that looks nice. It is however small for a sedan and suffers some quality issues (although rather superficial in my experience). Its biggest crime is that it doesn't do anything particularly well and is a mix of very good, and not so good components. Fit and finish is on the poor side, but some of the interior materials are very nice. This strange dichotomy is what turns people off I think. I bought mine because it was a relatively cheap awd car and looked pretty. It makes a perfectly serviceable daily driver.

My wife loves her xtype but we bought it used. REAL glad we didn't buy new. We had to replace the xfer carrier. This wasn't cheap but we still have less than 12k in the car all told, and other than an odd habit of eating headlamps, it's been trouble free. Handles nice, too.

Am I the only one who wants a Smart car?

I too have always liked the Vehicross. I also like the Catera. I used to own a 97 Cavalier and didn't have any big problems with it. Though according to Aaron Robinson from C&D my Z24 was a bit different from the more pedestrian Cav / Sunfire crowd.

96DXCivic wrote: Am I the only one who wants a Smart car?

I think so.

I wouldn't minda a smart, so long as it is equiped with a 'busa engine and trans...

I liked the list. I have to disagree with the group though, the echo totaly belongs on the list.

i would replace the vehicross with some GM product.

I think the echo belongs too....and the smart. The only Smart I've found interesting was the Smart Roaster I saw while in Turkey.