What is the worst car in existence?

Sort by date Sort by votes
It's kind of a meme but I think the Tata Nano would be considered the worst car ever, at least the worst car in the last few decades for sure. It was essentially a dirt cheap car made for indians who wanted to upgrade from a motorcycle. Even the cheapest, shittiest japanese or american car from the 80s would beat it in terms of features, comfort, and drivability. It still failed to sell in the indian market because it was so shitty it was still below a motorcycle in terms of prestige and style. Broke indians would laugh at it from their held-together-with-duct-tape motorcycles.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Winner
Reactions: Xenomorphs Are Cute, Manul Otocolobus, Wintersun and 14 others
Upvote 3 Downvote
Gold Train said:
It's kind of a meme but I think the Tata Nano would be considered the worst car ever, at least the worst car in the last few decades for sure. It was essentially a dirt cheap car made for indians who wanted to upgrade from a motorcycle. Even the cheapest, shittiest japanese or american car from the 80s would beat it in terms of features, comfort, and drivability. It still failed to sell in the indian market because it was so shitty it was still below a motorcycle in terms of prestige and style. Broke pajeets would laugh at it from their held-together-with-duct-tape motorcycles.

Click to expand...
Motorcycles of the kind on Indian streets also tend towards better reliability (Honda Cub or similar small-displacement Jap bikes) or simplicity and ease of maintenance (Royal Enfield Bullet, etc) along with a low cost of ownership and operation, as well as having an easier time parking anywhere.
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
malleusmaleficarum said:
jeep
Click to expand...
Jeeps are definitely driven by a lot of douches, and the Chrysler and Fiat produced ones just seem to keep getting worse.

However up until the mid-90's they were a pretty decent brand that almost lived up to the good part of their reputation (rugged-go anywhere, even if you have to have a Toyota FJ pull you out when you break down) and not the bad part (reliability issues and rollover machines). There have been more viable off-roading options since at least the 70's (the aforementioned Toyota FJ Land Cruiser among them) but like Harley Davidson they hang on due to image despite arguably being overpriced and outgunned by numerous other options. I'd take my WRX mudding before I'd hop in a Fiat Jeep.

I stand by the XJ Cherokee as being a very good and surprisingly nicely-handling little off-roader.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Wintersun, A Gay Retard, Amphotericin B and 6 others
Upvote 0 Downvote
Just A Butt said:
i think Camaros are super gay
Click to expand...
To me, the modern Camaro is the best example of a car that looks great on paper but is shit in reality.

Ford modernized the Mustang to the point that the current version is more of a GT car than a muscle car. Not that its a bad thing, the modern Mustang is very good for what it is. Dodge went in the opposite direction with the Challenger and went all-in on being retro. Just built a big fat boat with a V8, and shamelessly aped the original Challenger's styling. And that has worked for them too. The key with the Mustang and Challenger's success is the designers 1) decided what niche they wanted the car to fill, and 2) gave it a usable back seat and trunk.

GM? Seems like they can't decide what they wanted the Camaro to be. They tried to split the difference between the Mustang and Challenger, the Camaro's styling is walking the line between retro and modern, same with the handling and the engine lineup. And on paper, it has the best handling and performance. But in reality, the car itself is useless as a car- the visibilty is crap, the exterior is enormous but the back seat might as well not exist since no adult (or really anyone larger than a toddler) can fit in it, and the trunk opening is so small it limits what can be put in it.

When it comes to performance and handling, the modern Camaros are better performance cars than the F-bodies in pretty much every way, but the F-bodies were by far more usable -as a car- if that makes sense. And that's saying something because F-bodies had their own issues.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: Wintersun, Synthetic Smug, Gold Train and 3 others
Upvote 0 Downvote
Gold Train said:
It's kind of a meme but I think the Tata Nano would be considered the worst car ever, at least the worst car in the last few decades for sure. It was essentially a dirt cheap car made for indians who wanted to upgrade from a motorcycle. Even the cheapest, shittiest japanese or american car from the 80s would beat it in terms of features, comfort, and drivability. It still failed to sell in the indian market because it was so shitty it was still below a motorcycle in terms of prestige and style. Broke pajeets would laugh at it from their held-together-with-duct-tape motorcycles.

Click to expand...
can it take an LS tho
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Feels
Reactions: A Gay Retard and Gold Train
Upvote 0 Downvote
Austin Allegro which was more aerodynamic in reverse and Morris Marina were particularly terrible really anything by British Leyland after the 70's sucked. All Eastern Bloc cars though the Lada was at least pretty rugged and the Trabant had few moving parts in it. The Ford Pinto would explode when rear ended resulting in many deaths and a major class action lawsuit.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Red Hood
Upvote 0 Downvote
Certified_Autist said:
To me, the modern Camaro is the best example of a car that looks great on paper but is shit in reality.

Ford modernized the Mustang to the point that the current version is more of a GT car than a muscle car. Not that its a bad thing, the modern Mustang is very good for what it is. Dodge went in the opposite direction with the Challenger and went all-in on being retro. Just built a big fat boat with a V8, and shamelessly aped the original Challenger's styling. And that has worked for them too. The key with the Mustang and Challenger's success is the designers 1) decided what niche they wanted the car to fill, and 2) gave it a usable back seat and trunk.

GM? Seems like they can't decide what they wanted the Camaro to be. They tried to split the difference between the Mustang and Challenger, the Camaro's styling is walking the line between retro and modern, same with the handling and the engine lineup. And on paper, it has the best handling and performance. But in reality, the car itself is useless as a car- the visibilty is crap, the exterior is enormous but the back seat might as well not exist since no adult (or really anyone larger than a toddler) can fit in it, and the trunk opening is so small it limits what can be put in it.

When it comes to performance and handling, the modern Camaros are better performance cars than the F-bodies in pretty much every way, but the F-bodies were by far more usable -as a car- if that makes sense. And that's saying something because F-bodies had their own issues.
Click to expand...
You hit the nail on the head. The thing about the Mustang is, even in the gas crisis years with the Mustang II, Ford seemed to have a pretty solid idea of what it wanted to do with the nameplate and has always kept the appearance "sporty" (which of course had a nebulous and changing definition over the years) and with-the-times. The Camaro was dead for years because GM didn't know what the fuck to do with it, and the original Challenger I think only existed for a few years in the seventies as more or less a rebadge of the Plymouth Cuda.

I don't think most Mustangs ever achieved halo car status, but they've been a constant for the brand that always pulls in interest, and Ford tends to choose the right moment to refresh. Ford does a lot of dumb things but the Mustang, as a RWD car (and not the shitty SUV version) tends to be in their better decisions. They know it's important to their brand.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Certified_Autist
Upvote 0 Downvote
Chevy Citation
Cadillac Cimarron
Pontiac Sunbird/the rest of the GMs with that body (Cavalier etc)
Dodge Spirit/Plymouth Acclaim/Chrysler LeBaron with that body
Plymouth Sundance/Dodge Shadow
Mopar K-cars (all of the fuckers)
Chevy Aveo (ridiculous little thing)
Geo Metro and Suzuki Swift
Hyundai Excel
Chevy Astro Vans
That stupid Chevy Lumina van thing
Ford Pintos/Mercury Bobcats (though once you have a bladder in the tank they're not awful except for the Pinto wagons with the automatic, fuck those)
Hummer H2s (literally just a Chevy Tahoe with worse aerodynamics)
Mercury Comet/Ford Maverick
Toyota Priuses (it's mostly about the drivers tbh, the South Park episode was a bit on the nose)
Ford Tempo/Mercury Topaz (utter shitboxes)
That fucking SmartCar (I think it's made by Mercedes technically)
Old Volkswagen Rabbits
 
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: Wintersun and SCSI
Upvote 1 Downvote
Nissan Jukes just because of how fucking ugly they are while also being inexplicably popular, it feels like almost every street is blighted by at least one. I just don't understand why anyone would drive something so hideous to look at.
Nissan_Juke_Mk1_-7.jpg
 
  • Agree
  • Islamic Content
  • Horrifying
Reactions: Xenomorphs Are Cute, Meat Target, Wintersun and 7 others
Upvote 0 Downvote
Penis Drager said:
View attachment 3405090
The Geo Metro is ugly as sin and literally loses mileage if you have fat people riding with you because the engine is such a weak little bitch.
Click to expand...
Unless you've found some sort of loophole with the laws of thermodynamics, that's true of all cars.

Edit: the worst car of all time was, of course, the Volkswagen Beetle.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: A Gay Retard
Upvote 0 Downvote
Penis Drager said:
View attachment 3405090
The Geo Metro is ugly as sin and literally loses mileage if you have fat people riding with you because the engine is such a weak little bitch.
Click to expand...
I think its cute.

If I had one I'd swap in a RWD Chevette drivetrain with a supercharged Buick 3800 engine. Keep it totally stock looking from the outside, and have fun surprising people at stoplights.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
If we're talking about modern cars, the 2013-2019 Nissan Sentra. Most shitboxes are only so because they're decontented or built poorly; that generation of Nissan Sentra was specifically designed to be the single most miserable car on sale, on top of being built like shit. Like, the older Sentras from the '90s are unironically more pleasant cars in every way. That's how fucking bad this generation of Sentra is.

1655691343049.png
They handle like it'll roll over around every corner while simultaneously riding as comfortably as sliding down your stairs in a cardboard box, ass-first. Loud as shit on the highway, while also getting really shitty fuel economy because the garbage transmission robs the anemic engine of whatever overtaking power it has - oh yeah, the same transmission that is prone to shitting the bed at 100,000 miles like in most Nissans, which will likely total your Sentra when that happens. About the only thing going for it is that has a decent size back seat. Literally any other car of the same vintage is better than the Sentra. Civic, Corolla, Cruze, even the Focus would be a better choice. If you see one for sale, don't you dare try to buy it. I'd recommend test driving it and driving it into a guardrail so it can be scrapped and turned into a better car.

Worst car ever would probably be the Chevy Citation. It's platform has been described as "front wheel drive, rear brake lockup." Putting just a little bit too much pressure on the brakes would cause the rear to lock up and send you careening into the curb/incoming traffic. That's on top of it being prone to engine failure and having typical '80s GM build quality (i.e. none).
 
  • Like
Reactions: sniggered
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back