The most disappointing cars we saw this year from Autospies
12-31-04, 06:45 PM
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
The most disappointing cars we saw this year from Autospies
http://www.autospies.com/article/ind...articleId=3782
The most disappointing cars we saw this year
12/29/2004
The Spies hope all of you are enjoying a great holiday season. Get ready for a busy next three weeks or so...Almost all of the media outlets have a 'Best of' but only the Spies have the courage to bring you the most disappointing cars/trucks/suvs.
This is DEFINITELY a list you DO NOT want to be on.
The most disappointing cars we saw this year
1. 2005 Honda Odyssey- So much was expected with this total redesign since the old van was the standard of the industry. Well Honda, in our opinion you've lost your reign at the top to the Toyota Sienna. The Sienna is a better looking product and it's Lexus-like finish now makes it 'THE' minvan to buy in this highly competitive segment. You guys had your chance and you blew it. The new Odyssey design is 'Frumpy' at best and there are really no revolutionary new features on the latest version. How can we prove we're right? Go try to buy one and you'll here a word you don't hear very often on new cars at Honda dealers...DISCOUNTS! Dealers are ALREADY discounting these vans heavily and are secretly reporting to us they are disappointed in the new product.
2. Acura RL- Is everyone else driving a different version of the RL than us? Or are they scared to death to jeopardize the huge ad dollars Acura is throwing at them? We drove this thing and couldn’t believe how awful this thing drove. It was heavy feeling and the steering was absolutely numb. It felt like a 1995 E-class gone WAY wrong. The suspension is so brittle and stiff (maybe due to the SHAWD?) that is very uncomfortable over rough pavement. Then there was the space issue. This car is TINY inside the cabin! It feels slightly larger than a 3-series and even the TL feels more roomy. Acura will tell you the specs say there is more space in the RL than the TL but we didn't see it. Go sit in both and you make the call. It’s not even close. Now let’s talk about the exterior design. How can their flagship not be the best looking car in their product line? We think the TL beats it there as well. Now price…$50k for the RL? You have got to be kidding us! Not a chance this things worth over $40 grand. The only redeeming feature? The dash/console design and the best nav system on earth. Keep those, scrap the rest and start over. BMW, MB, Lexus and Infiniti are laughing in their halls!
3. Ford 500/Mercury Montego- The only two words we need to use to describe this for you to understand our true feelings are ‘Chrysler 300c’. The 500/Montego are the antitheses of the Chrysler and that IS the key problem with these two must win/destined to lose vehicles for Ford.
4. Jeep Cherokee- After seeing SO many promising concepts at the shows, this one is a real let down. When I saw it for the first time my jaw almost hit the floor. The concepts showed so much promise and excitement. we thought for sure when we saw the Chrysler 300, the Cherokee would be even cooler. Boy, were we wrong!What's up with that front end? YUCK! The most important seller in their product line turns out to be a dud.
5. Cadillac STS- If we had never seen the 300c or the Cadillac Sixteen concept, we may have a more favorable opinion of this car. But WE HAVE and that’s what bugs us about this car. It’s just too darn bland. Where is the ‘Escalade’ of sedans? Why does it have a Chrysler logo? All Cadillac had to do was produce a smaller version of the sixteen and they would have had a winner. The sixteen looked like it meant business…the STS looks like it’s ready for entry at the 2005 Mediocrity convention. So much expected here and so much to gain but they’ve missed the opportunity of a lifetime to really take charge. Our advice to the Caddy team…you’re in like 10th place…ROLL THE DICE!!!!!!
The most disappointing cars we saw this year
12/29/2004
The Spies hope all of you are enjoying a great holiday season. Get ready for a busy next three weeks or so...Almost all of the media outlets have a 'Best of' but only the Spies have the courage to bring you the most disappointing cars/trucks/suvs.
This is DEFINITELY a list you DO NOT want to be on.
The most disappointing cars we saw this year
1. 2005 Honda Odyssey- So much was expected with this total redesign since the old van was the standard of the industry. Well Honda, in our opinion you've lost your reign at the top to the Toyota Sienna. The Sienna is a better looking product and it's Lexus-like finish now makes it 'THE' minvan to buy in this highly competitive segment. You guys had your chance and you blew it. The new Odyssey design is 'Frumpy' at best and there are really no revolutionary new features on the latest version. How can we prove we're right? Go try to buy one and you'll here a word you don't hear very often on new cars at Honda dealers...DISCOUNTS! Dealers are ALREADY discounting these vans heavily and are secretly reporting to us they are disappointed in the new product.
2. Acura RL- Is everyone else driving a different version of the RL than us? Or are they scared to death to jeopardize the huge ad dollars Acura is throwing at them? We drove this thing and couldn’t believe how awful this thing drove. It was heavy feeling and the steering was absolutely numb. It felt like a 1995 E-class gone WAY wrong. The suspension is so brittle and stiff (maybe due to the SHAWD?) that is very uncomfortable over rough pavement. Then there was the space issue. This car is TINY inside the cabin! It feels slightly larger than a 3-series and even the TL feels more roomy. Acura will tell you the specs say there is more space in the RL than the TL but we didn't see it. Go sit in both and you make the call. It’s not even close. Now let’s talk about the exterior design. How can their flagship not be the best looking car in their product line? We think the TL beats it there as well. Now price…$50k for the RL? You have got to be kidding us! Not a chance this things worth over $40 grand. The only redeeming feature? The dash/console design and the best nav system on earth. Keep those, scrap the rest and start over. BMW, MB, Lexus and Infiniti are laughing in their halls!
3. Ford 500/Mercury Montego- The only two words we need to use to describe this for you to understand our true feelings are ‘Chrysler 300c’. The 500/Montego are the antitheses of the Chrysler and that IS the key problem with these two must win/destined to lose vehicles for Ford.
4. Jeep Cherokee- After seeing SO many promising concepts at the shows, this one is a real let down. When I saw it for the first time my jaw almost hit the floor. The concepts showed so much promise and excitement. we thought for sure when we saw the Chrysler 300, the Cherokee would be even cooler. Boy, were we wrong!What's up with that front end? YUCK! The most important seller in their product line turns out to be a dud.
5. Cadillac STS- If we had never seen the 300c or the Cadillac Sixteen concept, we may have a more favorable opinion of this car. But WE HAVE and that’s what bugs us about this car. It’s just too darn bland. Where is the ‘Escalade’ of sedans? Why does it have a Chrysler logo? All Cadillac had to do was produce a smaller version of the sixteen and they would have had a winner. The sixteen looked like it meant business…the STS looks like it’s ready for entry at the 2005 Mediocrity convention. So much expected here and so much to gain but they’ve missed the opportunity of a lifetime to really take charge. Our advice to the Caddy team…you’re in like 10th place…ROLL THE DICE!!!!!!
12-31-04, 08:35 PM
#4
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
I think the BMW 5 series is easily the most disappointing car. They ruined it.
As for AutoSpies...
I doubt Honda is seriously hurting by the new Odyssey design - I think it looks a whole lot better than the old one.
The Ford 500 is no 300C but Ford's 'mainstream car' isn't about testosterone like Chrysler. The 500 has an interior the 300C can only dream of as well.
The RL - can't speak for driving it since I haven't. If it really is small inside, that's very weak. Maybe Honda's more focused on selling them in Japan where most people are a lot shorter.
The Jeep is hideous, agreed.
Finally, the STS - I think it's decent. Good styling doesn't have to be bold and crazy. Look how Audi is now ruining their line-up with 'bold' front grilles.
Just read a review of the STS-V also - yummy....!
As for AutoSpies...
I doubt Honda is seriously hurting by the new Odyssey design - I think it looks a whole lot better than the old one.
The Ford 500 is no 300C but Ford's 'mainstream car' isn't about testosterone like Chrysler. The 500 has an interior the 300C can only dream of as well.
The RL - can't speak for driving it since I haven't. If it really is small inside, that's very weak. Maybe Honda's more focused on selling them in Japan where most people are a lot shorter.
The Jeep is hideous, agreed.
Finally, the STS - I think it's decent. Good styling doesn't have to be bold and crazy. Look how Audi is now ruining their line-up with 'bold' front grilles.
Just read a review of the STS-V also - yummy....!
12-31-04, 11:12 PM
#6
Lexus Champion
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 2,175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by nthach
I feel that DC's Hemi is just as played out as VTEC.
As for the STS - I agree with Bit - it's hardly as bad as AutoSpies would have readers believe. The fact that it doesn't look like a dropped Escalade doesn't bother me as it does the editors that wrote this lumpy piece. The interior is first-rate and is never mentioned.
If I had the money right now - I'd spring for a V8 Rear Drive STS w/ the 18" wheel "sport" package. Maybe not as good as the GS - but if we ever want competition that's as good - we're going to have to reward companies (especially American ones) headed in the right direction after, literally, decades of heading in the wrong one.
M.
01-01-05, 01:53 AM
#7
Lexus Test Driver
Audi A6 - definitely huge disappointment. Styling and performance both suck. 
Every car magazine has criticized this car.
Not sure why the Caddy STS is on the list, i think its not too bad.
Every car magazine has criticized this car.Not sure why the Caddy STS is on the list, i think its not too bad.
Trending Topics
01-01-05, 07:03 AM
#8
Lexus Fanatic
I would have to agree with the new BMW 5-series being one of the worst. At the D.C. show BMW had several new 5's (except the M5, scheduled for the Detroit show) and a two-year-old previous-generation 525 to represent its Certified Used Car Program. I am not exaggerating here....the old car literally felt like a a tank comparted to the new one. The difference in hardware and door solidness was astounding. And the old car, of course, did not have I-Drive.
I have to disagree with the Ford 500 / Mercury Montego being disappointing. I think they are fairly nice products, though with the typical American cheapness in hardware and plastics. There have been a lot of comments about these cars not being able to stand up to the new Chrysler 300 and Dodge Magnum, but that was NOT the intended mission of these cars. They were intended to replace existing Ford products, not compete one-on-one with Chrysler products with Hemi options. It could be argued that, with a full load in them, with AWD, or in hilly terrain, these cars are going to be borderline underpowered with the 203 HP V6....though the CVT will compensate for this somewhat. The only real concern I have with these cars is the durability of the CVT transmission.....(maybe the reason for the lower-power V6) which the Ford people say is the same ZF design produced for the Audi V6. The Ford and Audi units are the first applications of this type of transmission outside of comparably low-torque 4-cylinders ( 3 cylinders in the old Subaru Justy), and only time and experience in the hands of consumers will show it they can take a V6's torque and hold up..
Two other things about this car also need to be pointed out. First, with all the complaints about the low power level, this car has more standard HP then either the Magnum or 300C (203 vs. 190). It simpy lacks an engine option, that's all. Second, with an infinite number of gears, the CVT transmission is so efficient.....durability questions aside.......that unlike the conventional Chrysler / Mercedes automatics in the 300C and Magnum, it makes the BEST possible use of EVERY one of those 203 horses, power and mileage-wise.
And one final comparison between the Ford and Chrysler products....the Ford and Mercury had the AWD option right from the start. Chrysler and Dodge delayed it almost a year.
Mike.......as far as the new Acura TL is concened, ( though I don't necessarily agree with this ), it must be pointed out that the old TL was considered my many in the auto press to be too much of a Japanese Buick.....stodgily and conservatively styled, with a soft ride and flaccid steering. That.....along with the higher unsprung weight of the SH AWD components underneath, probably explains the much firmer feel and ride of the new one. I myself liked the feel of the old car....I am not a sucker for a stiff ride myself.....but I was probably in the minority there. Fortunately the new AWD system should filter out torque steer, which would probably be at unacceptable levels with the new 300 HP V6 if it were front-drive.
There was a lot of desire in the auto press for the new TL to be rear-drive with a V8, but perhaps Acura did not feel it was worth the cost and time to engineer an entirely new chassis from scratch. They don't have quite the development money or budget that Lexus does.
I also saw the new STS at the show and I have to rate it a little higher than you do. First of all, unlike the CTS and SRX that preceded it, the STS has a REAL interior....beautiful medium-color wood paneling all over the dash, steering wheel, and console. This is the interior that the CTS and SRX SHOULD have gotten and didn't. They both look and feel like cheap econoboxes next to the new STS. Second, the STS will offer an AWD system with the V6 that the CTS lacked from the start. Third, the STS has much better fit-and-finish than any other Cadillac currently on the market, except possibly the XLR. Fourth, while it certainly is not a cheap car, it is not outrageously priced for what you get.
I have to disagree with the Ford 500 / Mercury Montego being disappointing. I think they are fairly nice products, though with the typical American cheapness in hardware and plastics. There have been a lot of comments about these cars not being able to stand up to the new Chrysler 300 and Dodge Magnum, but that was NOT the intended mission of these cars. They were intended to replace existing Ford products, not compete one-on-one with Chrysler products with Hemi options. It could be argued that, with a full load in them, with AWD, or in hilly terrain, these cars are going to be borderline underpowered with the 203 HP V6....though the CVT will compensate for this somewhat. The only real concern I have with these cars is the durability of the CVT transmission.....(maybe the reason for the lower-power V6) which the Ford people say is the same ZF design produced for the Audi V6. The Ford and Audi units are the first applications of this type of transmission outside of comparably low-torque 4-cylinders ( 3 cylinders in the old Subaru Justy), and only time and experience in the hands of consumers will show it they can take a V6's torque and hold up..
Two other things about this car also need to be pointed out. First, with all the complaints about the low power level, this car has more standard HP then either the Magnum or 300C (203 vs. 190). It simpy lacks an engine option, that's all. Second, with an infinite number of gears, the CVT transmission is so efficient.....durability questions aside.......that unlike the conventional Chrysler / Mercedes automatics in the 300C and Magnum, it makes the BEST possible use of EVERY one of those 203 horses, power and mileage-wise.
And one final comparison between the Ford and Chrysler products....the Ford and Mercury had the AWD option right from the start. Chrysler and Dodge delayed it almost a year.
Mike.......as far as the new Acura TL is concened, ( though I don't necessarily agree with this ), it must be pointed out that the old TL was considered my many in the auto press to be too much of a Japanese Buick.....stodgily and conservatively styled, with a soft ride and flaccid steering. That.....along with the higher unsprung weight of the SH AWD components underneath, probably explains the much firmer feel and ride of the new one. I myself liked the feel of the old car....I am not a sucker for a stiff ride myself.....but I was probably in the minority there. Fortunately the new AWD system should filter out torque steer, which would probably be at unacceptable levels with the new 300 HP V6 if it were front-drive.
There was a lot of desire in the auto press for the new TL to be rear-drive with a V8, but perhaps Acura did not feel it was worth the cost and time to engineer an entirely new chassis from scratch. They don't have quite the development money or budget that Lexus does.
I also saw the new STS at the show and I have to rate it a little higher than you do. First of all, unlike the CTS and SRX that preceded it, the STS has a REAL interior....beautiful medium-color wood paneling all over the dash, steering wheel, and console. This is the interior that the CTS and SRX SHOULD have gotten and didn't. They both look and feel like cheap econoboxes next to the new STS. Second, the STS will offer an AWD system with the V6 that the CTS lacked from the start. Third, the STS has much better fit-and-finish than any other Cadillac currently on the market, except possibly the XLR. Fourth, while it certainly is not a cheap car, it is not outrageously priced for what you get.
Last edited by mmarshall; 01-01-05 at 07:09 AM.
01-01-05, 10:07 AM
#9
Lexus Fanatic
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: California
Posts: 6,084
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't have much opinion about the Odyssey. Didn't drive the RL but I agree with the interior dimensions, I think Acura has been very creative on their interior dimension measurement. As for styling, I agree there as well. Bangle should spend some time with the TL to see how to get it right. And Acura needs to have somebody sit down and look at the RL and realize how unimpressive it is. And yeah, 50K seems like too much, a lot too much. If the new M is as nice as they are saying and the M45 is going to be 48K, it just makes the RL look even more overpriced. If Acura is going to use bimmer and Merc to establish pricing, they are in for a huge disappointment. I have read how some people have liked the 500 and that surprised me a bit. I really aimed to look at it at the SFO auto show and I was thoroughly unimpressed. Interior materials might be equivalent to Chrysler but they didn't seem to be able to use the extra room very well and otherwise it was just boring. I was so put off by it I didn't even go loo at the Montego. Can't see why I would do anything with that other than recommend it to my grandmother. No, she has more style than that.
The STS might drive well but come on GM, just because you spend some bucks on a design theme doesn't mean every car in your lineup comes from pushing the zoom button on the copier. And the interior was OK but nothing special. I drove the CTS-V at Laguna Seca and it impressed me because of the performance but the STS doesn't do it for me. Maybe the hotrod version, have to wait and see. To tell you the truth, I would also put the 300 on this list. They got some things very right with that car, but they also got some things very wrong IMO. I just think if you want them to improve it, you need to let them know it is not the greatest thing ever. I hope DC keeps working on it. I may not be overly thrilled with the Charger but the final product looks better to me than some of the artists misconceptions.
As for the 5, did these guys leave it off the list because it was actually out last year or do they have the memory retention of a gerbil? I thought the 5 might be the size that Banglization would work best on. As it turns out, it is worse than the 7. And the materials and build quality have declined more. Interior is another big step backward. Didn't even have to mention the i Drive ubertech abomination. As for other disappointments, I wouldn't let the GTO or bimmers roller off the hook either. Fortunately both of them are setting abysmal sales numbers.
The STS might drive well but come on GM, just because you spend some bucks on a design theme doesn't mean every car in your lineup comes from pushing the zoom button on the copier. And the interior was OK but nothing special. I drove the CTS-V at Laguna Seca and it impressed me because of the performance but the STS doesn't do it for me. Maybe the hotrod version, have to wait and see. To tell you the truth, I would also put the 300 on this list. They got some things very right with that car, but they also got some things very wrong IMO. I just think if you want them to improve it, you need to let them know it is not the greatest thing ever. I hope DC keeps working on it. I may not be overly thrilled with the Charger but the final product looks better to me than some of the artists misconceptions.
As for the 5, did these guys leave it off the list because it was actually out last year or do they have the memory retention of a gerbil? I thought the 5 might be the size that Banglization would work best on. As it turns out, it is worse than the 7. And the materials and build quality have declined more. Interior is another big step backward. Didn't even have to mention the i Drive ubertech abomination. As for other disappointments, I wouldn't let the GTO or bimmers roller off the hook either. Fortunately both of them are setting abysmal sales numbers.
01-01-05, 11:07 AM
#10
Lexus Fanatic
Originally Posted by RON430
Bangle should spend some time with the TL to see how to get it right.
If the new M is as nice as they are saying and the M45 is going to be 48K, it just makes the RL look even more overpriced. I have read how some people have liked the 500 and that surprised me a bit.
The STS might drive well but come on GM, And the interior was OK but nothing special. I drove the CTS-V at Laguna Seca and it impressed me because of the performance but the STS doesn't do it for me.
As for the 5, did these guys leave it off the list because it was actually out last year or do they have the memory retention of a gerbil? I thought the 5 might be the size that Banglization would work best on. As it turns out, it is worse than the 7. And the materials and build quality have declined more. Interior is another big step backward. Didn't even have to mention the i Drive ubertech abomination. As for other disappointments, I wouldn't let the GTO or bimmers roller off the hook either. Fortunately both of them are setting abysmal sales numbers.
If the new M is as nice as they are saying and the M45 is going to be 48K, it just makes the RL look even more overpriced. I have read how some people have liked the 500 and that surprised me a bit.
The STS might drive well but come on GM, And the interior was OK but nothing special. I drove the CTS-V at Laguna Seca and it impressed me because of the performance but the STS doesn't do it for me.
As for the 5, did these guys leave it off the list because it was actually out last year or do they have the memory retention of a gerbil? I thought the 5 might be the size that Banglization would work best on. As it turns out, it is worse than the 7. And the materials and build quality have declined more. Interior is another big step backward. Didn't even have to mention the i Drive ubertech abomination. As for other disappointments, I wouldn't let the GTO or bimmers roller off the hook either. Fortunately both of them are setting abysmal sales numbers.
Guess we just diagree on Cadillac interiors. The STS, I think, inside is beautiful. I agree with you that the CTS-V has the performance, but its almost all-black interior, with just a little brushed-metal, IMO, is cheap, CHEAP.
You are absolutely correct about the new 5-series (though I have not seen the M5 yet...that will be at Detroit). The new 5-series cars I HAVE seen are a joke, especially compared to the cars they are replacing.....some of the best sport sedans in the world. BMW, IMO, is ripping people off with them.
01-01-05, 02:20 PM
#13
Lexus Champion
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Washington
Posts: 3,057
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Besides the fact that I may disagree on some of their choices in cars, I am laughing to myself because of how ignorant the Autospy writers sound. There are numerous fundamental errors in the article as well as a genral feel of mediocrity, oh well.
About the cars, I don't think there's anyway that the 5 can stay off of this list. I'm starting to feel bad for BMW's ignorance. The RL, since it's such an improvement over the previous generation may need to be rethought about its presence on the list. I haven't driven it myself, but Autospy states it right in their article; everyone else loves it! I absolutely love the STS and believe Cadillac is coming around, no matter how slowly. For me, it is one of the most relieving cars I've seen this year.
James
About the cars, I don't think there's anyway that the 5 can stay off of this list. I'm starting to feel bad for BMW's ignorance. The RL, since it's such an improvement over the previous generation may need to be rethought about its presence on the list. I haven't driven it myself, but Autospy states it right in their article; everyone else loves it! I absolutely love the STS and believe Cadillac is coming around, no matter how slowly. For me, it is one of the most relieving cars I've seen this year.
James
01-01-05, 05:00 PM
#14
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Indiana
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am really surprised that so many people like the Caddy STS. I agree with the AutoSpy ranking this car as disappointing, but only because it is the exact same exterior as the CTS. To spend $50K+ on a car, it needs to stand out. It is VERY difficult to differentiate it from the CTS. The interior is nice, but Caddy needs a new design other than the squared off look. Worked wonders for the Escalade, but you can only go to the well so many times.
Anything Ford produces is a guaranteed disappointment - not sure if they will EVER get it!
Agree with the comments about the BMW 5 series. But they made up for it with the design of the 645 (although crazy pricing - $15K more for the same drive train and power as the 5 series and two less seats).
Anything Ford produces is a guaranteed disappointment - not sure if they will EVER get it!
Agree with the comments about the BMW 5 series. But they made up for it with the design of the 645 (although crazy pricing - $15K more for the same drive train and power as the 5 series and two less seats).
01-01-05, 05:07 PM
#15
Lexus Champion
Ahhh...US odyssey sucks. Too bad you guys don't get what we get. Here's the Asian version of the Odyssey.
Stock from factory with a much reduced height to better clear our cramped parking structures, also comes with cool chameleon burgundy color and all the super nice wood interior...
Stock from factory with a much reduced height to better clear our cramped parking structures, also comes with cool chameleon burgundy color and all the super nice wood interior...