almost...but not quite

A vaguely similar thread on here (about progress, or lack thereof) got me to thinking tonight....is there a car, produced since 2001 that you were expecting to be pretty good...if not great, that was a letdown. Specifically, was it a letdown due to some stupid "little thing" the manufacturer COULD have done, but didn't?

Name the car (please, cars only at this point) and what it would have taken to be a better car. Example: you drove a 2002 Brandxmobile that would have been so great, if only the seats could have moved further rearwards. Or a Brandymobile that had decent power, not great, but decent but didn't make up for it with super gas mileage.

Any new Mazda with the obscene smiley face grill treatment.

Ford Mustang. Test drove one and could not stand the berkeleying head rest. An otherwise apparently nice car ruined because I could not get comfortable.

Pontiac GTO: mushy suspension and just felt... heavy.

I have a pet peeve with Ford Fusions. As a frequent renter, I would go out of my way to choose a Fusion over Camry and other offerings. I really like the Fusion but the one thing that I really hate about them is the wiper function is on the turn signal and more so, that turn signal sits at a 45 degree angle when it is at rest.

Smart Fortwo. I was really thinking this was my next car when announced it was coming stateside. I only need the small amount of room, I'd love a microcar, and it should get great gas mileage right?

Well 37mpg on premium fuel doesn't really impress me, and that transmission felt friggin HORRIBLE when I test drove it - I could forgive the unimpressive gas mileage if only the transmission wasn't so poorly implemented. FInally the dealer was marking them up by about $3000 over MSRP. Wound up buying the Honda Fit.

BMW 1 Series. It's a fantastic car to drive but man is it ugly. The new M version is a vast improvement but... still marginally ugly. I am not sure what it is about the shape - it just looks half baked.

Camaro. Wanted to want it... tried to want it. It is pretty to look at and it has all the numbers... execution is terrible. Weight is terrible. View out of the car is terrible. Suspension is terrible. Interior is terrible.

Oh... wait... you said because of "One little thing".

Salanis wrote: Ford Mustang. Test drove one and could not stand the berkeleying head rest. An otherwise apparently nice car ruined because I could not get comfortable.

The headrests that are not designed for use with the human body are a new government mandated safety feature to help prevent whiplash... so you can't actually use them anymore they are so uncomfortable and push your back away from the seat.

jrw1621 wrote: that turn signal sits at a 45 degree angle when it is at rest.

I hate driving cars where I have to completely remove my hands from the steering wheel to operate the stalks

jrw1621 wrote: I have a pet peeve with Ford Fusions. As a frequent renter, I would go out of my way to choose a Fusion over Camry and other offerings. I really like the Fusion but the one thing that I really hate about them is the wiper function is on the turn signal and more so, that turn signal sits at a 45 degree angle when it is at rest.

As a Fusion owner, I totally agree. Its not a natural place to be. I swing and miss almost every time trying to find it.

At least they did it right on the Fiesta.

I have 4 Dodge vehicles all with the wiper stalk on the left side of the wheel.

Except the 04 Neon which is on the right side...

2001 Chevy Astro Van ( I know you said cars but...) There is NO room for my left leg in the driver's compartment because of the wheel well, but even more annoying is the headlight control is not on the stalk at all, it's a knob on the dash. To take it one step further the daytime running lights thing is automatic, meaning that the headlights come on regardless of the position of the knob, even in the daytime, and you can't turn them off without overriding the computer every time you start the car by pushing the dome light button four times within 5 seconds. The reason I want to be able to turn them off is so I can signal other drivers in front of me without having to use my high beams. Sometimes I just want to turn the lights off and back on for a second to signal to someone that the lane is clear or whatever. So now, every time I start the van I have to push that dome light button so that I, the operator of the friggin van, will have full control over the freakin' lights when I want it. GAH!

Yeah, it bugs me.

For the folks who mentioned the Fusion's wiper stalks....I owned a Ranger and have driven my parent's Tauruses (a '98 and a '03) and wiper stalks and/or their positioning is a recurring sore spot on Fords.

You have to take your hand off the wheel to work them as they aren't as close to the steering wheel as your "typical Japanese sedan's".

And I've never been crazy about the turn signal/wiper combo some car companies use. One of the greatest wiper stalk designs I remember using was in my 280Z. For the "wipe" function there was a "flap" on the right hand stalk that you just needed to nudge to get that 1 or 2 times passes out of.

The Smart, on the other hand, got great mileage with it's original powertrain, a diesel engine. But even in Europe they complain about the transmission. M-B is developing the next one in conjunction with Renault...it will be based on the next Twingo.

I liked the original diesel Smart - with the exception of the transmission. Talk about "lag and lurch" – it made CVTs seem positively sporty. I got lots of hate mail from Smart forum weenies after I reviewed it. It's not an automatic, don't you know, it's a clutchless manual and I needed to "learn" how to drive it... Drove the electric version at the Brabus factory in Germany though, it was pretty cool other than being only 40 hp. Smart with a manual tranny would be the way to go IMO.

The 2008 STi I test drove was a major disappointment. It just wasn't fun to drive. I ended up with an Rx8 instead.

I've always been surprised that Smart could never figure out that the tranny needed a 3rd pedal or a CVT. Do you suppose it's a "German thing"? And it's sort of ironic that a car that would seem to beg for a plug-in powertrain will perhaps get one but by the same token it will take an already overpriced for what you get car into the realm of stupidly expensive for what you get.

Those M-B engineers....such crazy guys.

HiTempguy wrote:

Salanis wrote: Ford Mustang. Test drove one and could not stand the berkeleying head rest. An otherwise apparently nice car ruined because I could not get comfortable.

The headrests that are not designed for use with the human body are a new government mandated safety feature to help prevent whiplash... so you can't actually use them anymore they are so uncomfortable and push your back away from the seat.

Other thing that got me about that was talking to the dealer and asking, "Is there any way you can replace this headrest with something that doesn't suck and matches the car? I can not possibly be the only one who thinks a headrest pointing 45* forward is a moronic idea." I think they suggested that I could find a headrest from like a taurus or something, but that there was nothing they could do about it.

350Z's are great until you use the brake pedal.

Small thing? GM got rid of the rear seat little hook things so I can hang my dry cleaning in my Impala.

So I contact Chevrolet. These were deleted in the safety of side air bags and they told me to contact my dealer.

jrw1621 wrote: I have a pet peeve with Ford Fusions. As a frequent renter, I would go out of my way to choose a Fusion over Camry and other offerings. I really like the Fusion but the one thing that I really hate about them is the wiper function is on the turn signal and more so, that turn signal sits at a 45 degree angle when it is at rest.

What do you think of the brakes? I drove a rental one and the brakes gave me no feedback at all. The car slowed and stopped well enough but the pedal gave no resistance. Are they brake by wire?

dogbreath wrote: 350Z's are great until you use the brake pedal.

Agreed. I thought it was hysterical my Speed 3 brakes were an order of magnitude better in everyway than the brakes on my 350.

So I stopped by the Honda dealership on a whim after work to check out the CRZ. I'm not in the market, so I didn't bug any of the salespeople. No matter, I looked at the sticker, and there was a $5,000 markup written up under "market demand" and "additional profit." Wowza! I think it's neat for a new $20k car. For a $25k car? Fugghetaboutit.

lizard wrote: 350z Either needs 100 HP more or 1000 lbs less...

By "or", you of course mean "and".

MitchellC wrote: So I stopped by the Honda dealership on a whim after work to check out the CRZ. I'm not in the market, so I didn't bug any of the salespeople. No matter, I looked at the sticker, and there was a $5,000 markup written up under "market demand" and "additional profit." Wowza! I think it's neat for a new $20k car. For a $25k car? Fugghetaboutit.

That's not the car's fault, that's the shiny happy dealer.

Believe me, I haven't written it off, but it's perhaps a sign that says "don't bother looking at what you can't afford right now, doofus."