10 Cars that Damaged GM's Reputation

[2005Explorer]

10 Cars That Damaged GM's Reputation (With Video)

GM's current precarious situation didn't come about overnight. There are arguments to be made that various government regulations led to the disaster and that management can't escape much of the blame, and there are plenty who contend it was a series of disastrous union labor contracts that have put the company at risk. But there's one thing everyone agrees on: Over the past few decades GM put some truly terrible products out on the market. Unreliable, uninteresting and flat ugly, these were cars that simply destroyed GM's reputation. It's ironic that right now, just as it teeters near bankrupcy, GM has never had a stronger lineup of cars and trucks. From the shockingly good Chevrolet Cobalt SS, turbocharged and solid Saturn Astra, to the sweet-natured Cadillac CTS and the brilliant Chevrolet Corvette ZR1, the corporation's product portfolio is strong. But each of those cars is weighed down by the legacy of products like the ten listed here. We've arbitrarily limited ourselves to cars built since 1970 here, so don't look for the ill-fated Corvair or truly horrid 1917 Chevrolet Model D on the list.

By John Pearley Huffman

Published on: November 25, 2008

 

http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive...es/4293188.html

 

I would agree with most of those except I am not sure that Saturn deserves to be on that list. It is what GM did to Saturn that should be on that list. If it would have been handled properly it could have really made a dent in the import market.

 

So while we are at it which Ford cars and trucks from 1970 on would make a list like this? I think these would qualify...

 

Ford Pinto - Mercury Bobcat

Ford Mustang II

1980-1982 Ford Thunderbird - Mercury Cougar

Ford Bronco II

1984-1985 Ford Tempo - Mercury Topaz (These cars seemed to improve by 1986)

1995-2000 Ford Contour - Mercury Mystique

Ford Excursion (not that it was a lemon, but it gave a Ford a bad image)

2000 Ford Focus - A great car with a terrible launch. It was fixed by 2001, but damage to the brand was done.

 

I don't know if any of those were as bad as some of the GM stuff that was listed like the Vega, Olds diesels, and X bodies, but they did not help Ford's image.

[Paul Selby]

The Crown Vic got a lot of undeserved negative press because it caught fire after being rear ended at 75 MPH. No mention of the drunks that plowed into these cars or that no other car made could withstand the same hit.

 

The Explorer/Firestone fiasco was another black eye. The bad driver behind the wheel not wearing a seatbelt in most cases was never mentioned.

 

The F-150 got a lot of negative coverage with the cruise control fires.

[2005Explorer]

The Crown Vic got a lot of undeserved negative press because it caught fire after being rear ended at 75 MPH. No mention of the drunks that plowed into these cars or that no other car made could withstand the same hit.

 

The Explorer/Firestone fiasco was another black eye. The bad driver behind the wheel not wearing a seatbelt in most cases was never mentioned.

 

The F-150 got a lot of negative coverage with the cruise control fires.

 

The cruise control fires were Ford's fault even though Texas Instruments made the switch. Having a system that was "live" all the time was not a good idea.

 

The Crown Vic didn't deserve the negative press because the accidents that caused fires were very severe. I think the media was just trying to get a Pinto story started again.

 

Last there wasn't anything wrong with the Explorer. It suffered from the same stability issues as any SUV does. The people that drove it never read the Warning labels and drove it like they stole it. When a faulty Fireblowin' tire went out they had no idea how to bring the vehicle under control at a high rate of speed. That issue was 50% bad tires and 50% bad drivers. An SUV is not a passenger car and handles differently.

Edited November 25, 2008 by 2005Explorer

[Bleed Blue]

10 Cars That Damaged GM's Reputation (With Video)

GM's current precarious situation didn't come about overnight. There are arguments to be made that various government regulations led to the disaster and that management can't escape much of the blame, and there are plenty who contend it was a series of disastrous union labor contracts that have put the company at risk. But there's one thing everyone agrees on: Over the past few decades GM put some truly terrible products out on the market. Unreliable, uninteresting and flat ugly, these were cars that simply destroyed GM's reputation. It's ironic that right now, just as it teeters near bankrupcy, GM has never had a stronger lineup of cars and trucks. From the shockingly good Chevrolet Cobalt SS, turbocharged and solid Saturn Astra, to the sweet-natured Cadillac CTS and the brilliant Chevrolet Corvette ZR1, the corporation's product portfolio is strong. But each of those cars is weighed down by the legacy of products like the ten listed here. We've arbitrarily limited ourselves to cars built since 1970 here, so don't look for the ill-fated Corvair or truly horrid 1917 Chevrolet Model D on the list.

By John Pearley Huffman

Published on: November 25, 2008

 

http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive...es/4293188.html

 

I would agree with most of those except I am not sure that Saturn deserves to be on that list. It is what GM did to Saturn that should be on that list. If it would have been handled properly it could have really made a dent in the import market.

 

So while we are at it which Ford cars and trucks from 1970 on would make a list like this? I think these would qualify...

 

Ford Pinto - Mercury Bobcat

[Ford Mustang II]

1980-1982 Ford Thunderbird - Mercury Cougar

Ford Bronco II

1984-1985 Ford Tempo - Mercury Topaz (These cars seemed to improve by 1986)

1995-2000 Ford Contour - Mercury Mystique

Ford Excursion (not that it was a lemon, but it gave a Ford a bad image)

2000 Ford Focus - A great car with a terrible launch. It was fixed by 2001, but damage to the brand was done.

 

I don't know if any of those were as bad as some of the GM stuff that was listed like the Vega, Olds diesels, and X bodies, but they did not help Ford's image.

I know the Mustang II isn't the most popular among Mustang fans, but I would not say it damaged Ford (certainly not at the time). It was EXACTLY the right car at the right time. The fact that they sold 1.1 million plus in 5 years is pretty impressive. Ford would be thrilled to see those kinds of numbers again on any of the last few years of Mustang bodystyles.

[sprtch06]

Sure, a lot of the Big 3's problems are of their own making, but I think perceptions are worse than reality. My wife has an Oldsmobile van with 92k on the clock. It has been a steady performer and has never let me down. The only problems are with some of the interior trim, specifically the seats. Between mine own and the kids my wife babysits it's a wonder there is an interior left. Besides not all of GM's screwups are bad. I remember in tech school, word was a 5.7 Olds diesel block punched .125" over with 455 heads made for an idestructible drag race engine.

[StevenCaylor]

10 Cars That Damaged GM's Reputation (With Video)

GM's current precarious situation didn't come about overnight. There are arguments to be made that various government regulations led to the disaster and that management can't escape much of the blame, and there are plenty who contend it was a series of disastrous union labor contracts that have put the company at risk. But there's one thing everyone agrees on: Over the past few decades GM put some truly terrible products out on the market. Unreliable, uninteresting and flat ugly, these were cars that simply destroyed GM's reputation. It's ironic that right now, just as it teeters near bankrupcy, GM has never had a stronger lineup of cars and trucks. From the shockingly good Chevrolet Cobalt SS, turbocharged and solid Saturn Astra, to the sweet-natured Cadillac CTS and the brilliant Chevrolet Corvette ZR1, the corporation's product portfolio is strong. But each of those cars is weighed down by the legacy of products like the ten listed here. We've arbitrarily limited ourselves to cars built since 1970 here, so don't look for the ill-fated Corvair or truly horrid 1917 Chevrolet Model D on the list.

By John Pearley Huffman

Published on: November 25, 2008

 

http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive...es/4293188.html

 

I would agree with most of those except I am not sure that Saturn deserves to be on that list. It is what GM did to Saturn that should be on that list. If it would have been handled properly it could have really made a dent in the import market.

 

So while we are at it which Ford cars and trucks from 1970 on would make a list like this? I think these would qualify...

 

Ford Pinto - Mercury Bobcat

Ford Mustang II

1980-1982 Ford Thunderbird - Mercury Cougar

Ford Bronco II

1984-1985 Ford Tempo - Mercury Topaz (These cars seemed to improve by 1986)

1995-2000 Ford Contour - Mercury Mystique

Ford Excursion (not that it was a lemon, but it gave a Ford a bad image)

2000 Ford Focus - A great car with a terrible launch. It was fixed by 2001, but damage to the brand was done.

 

I don't know if any of those were as bad as some of the GM stuff that was listed like the Vega, Olds diesels, and X bodies, but they did not help Ford's image.

 

I remember the fuel shortage from the mid-70s. I also remember all of the awards that the Mustang II received like Car of the Year from two magazines.

 

As to the 1980 Thunderbird, I remember it was the first T-Bird with a performance suspention (TRX option) and was available with Ricaro bucket seats.

[STAPGUY23]

why all the hate on the contour. I drove a 98 SVT which I bought in 2003and drove for 5 yeras. it had 200,000kms on it when I sold it.what a great car never had a major problem. A friend of mine drives a 96 contour with 275,000kms and still going!!! I still see alot of them on the road.

[StevenCaylor]

why all the hate on the contour. I drove a 98 SVT which I bought in 2003and drove for 5 yeras. it had 200,000kms on it when I sold it.what a great car never had a major problem. A friend of mine drives a 96 contour with 275,000kms and still going!!! I still see alot of them on the road.

 

I remember the hate on the Contour was based on one thing, the lack of rear seat leg room.

[mgazak]

I had a 99 Mystique for 2 and a half years (traded it with just over 100K miles) and that car never let me down. My sister on the otherhand had a 98 Contour V6 that constantly seem to have problems. It seemed to be hit or miss with the Contour/Mystique.

[packardbob]

In retrospect some of the things that screwed these projects up was just plain stupidity. Take the Olds diesel, pretty much a completely different engine than the gas Olds 350, but it retained the head bolt pattern that the gas Olds 350, 307 and 403 shared, bad idea. How could the same pattern, using the same number of head bolts be used for something that has 22:1 compression ratio when it was designed for low compression smog engines? Just plain stupid. My grandfather had one of these 350's in an 83 Delta 88, nice car and it got about 32-38mpg on the highway but it was gutless as a turd and spent most of the time at the dealership until he put aftermarket head bolts and main bearing bolts in place of the factory spec. bolts.

 

The V-8-6-4 is interesting as well, Ford tried to do something to change the way emissions was met too. Ford fitted 100 LTD Crown Vics with Pro Co engines with direct injection in 1980? 81? and it worked, but the cost was way to high when a catalytic converter could reduce the cost per car by over $1000 vs DI.

[Mark B. Morrow]

They are spot on with regard to the Vega. My mother had a '71 wagon that rusted and shook itself to pieces after 5 years with 17k on the odometer. The front fenders were rusted through by 1972, the doors had to be lifted up to close them. The hinges were welded instead of bolted so there was no way to adjust them. After the wagon died the Chevy dealer we bought it from gave us a "Great Deal" on a '75 hatchback. It was better than the wagon, but suffered the same rust problems. It lasted until 1981 when it was uninspectable at 25k miles. It was replaced with a Chevette my grandfather had bought for his business.The 'vette rode like it was ready to self destruct at any moment. It was the last GM car anyone in the family owned.

 

The sad part was that the Vega was a pretty good car to drive when it was new. It was the poster child for what happened to good ideas when the "bean counters" got a hold of a company. If GM hadn't cut every corner, the Vega might well have been a great success. Better build quality and a sleeved engine block would have eliminated the worst of the problems. It certainly sold well.

 

Of course no one mentions that Toyotas, Datsuns and VWs of the same vintage were rust buckets as well. In the Northeast, these cars disintegrated very quickly. I made lots of money in high school patching up the Toyotas, Datsuns, VWs and the odd Fiat my parents' friends owned.

 

The Chevette was just a mediocre car from the get go.

 

The Cimmaron was a stupid idea that cheapened the Cadillac brand

 

The X cars suffered from the same bean counter mentality as the Vega.

 

Olds Diesels were poorly designed and extremely trouble prone as were the V8-6-4 Caddys

 

Aztek - The text book definition of ugly.

 

I do hope GM manages to survive

[syrtran]

The Crown Vic didn't deserve the negative press because the accidents that caused fires were very severe. I think the media was just trying to get a Pinto story started again.

The Pinto didn't deserve the bad press, either. NHTSA listed less than 100 fires, with only a couple dozen deaths. (*) And how many were on the road? A couple million?

 

Sure, a lot of the Big 3's problems are of their own making, but I think perceptions are worse than reality.

Perception is the biggest problem. Here and in the linked article, we're discussing cars mostly made over 10 years - and some over 30 years - ago. I'd stick a current Cobalt's reliability up against the Sentra's any day. And there's that wonderful +1 MPG highway over the equivalent non-Hybrid Civic. We've also seen the latest reliability ratings for Ford vehicles that puts them in the same company as Toyota. But, then, the news media ignore these and dredge up Pintos and Vegas.

 

Of course, none of the anti-domestic people seem to remember that '70s and early '80s Civics and Accords had useable lifespans of about 3 years before body rot took over. There were even rumors of Accords with rust direct from the factory. Toyotas were a bit better - about 5 years. Of course, one made the point of not noticing just how thin those Corollas' and Coronas' doors were back then.

 

Ford's biggest historical problem was rust - the 1970's were the worst. The early Pinto and Maverick with their lack of inner fenders. the later LTD, Granada, T-Bird and Fairmont with their dipped-in-a-paint-vat chipping along the lower edges of doors and fenders, and the generally crappy rustproofing up 'till the mid-to-late '80s.

 

 

 

 

(*) And, in many cases, the NHTSA made the specific point of how the rear-seat passengers would've survived if not for the fire! That tells me that Pintos generally had pretty good frames back there if they could stop an intrusion in the TWO FEET (or so) between the rear seat and bumper.

[2005Explorer]

One other car that I would add would be the Lincoln Versailles. It was not as bad as the Cimmaron for cheapening the brand, but it was badge engineering gone bad. They didn't even change the instrument panel. It was exactly the same as the Granada and Monarch.

 

I did not mean to offend anyone if you had good memories of the cars on the list. I was just trying to figure out some of the models that either were lemons or were considered failures in safety. I included the Contour not because it was a horrid car, but because it was deemed a market failure.

 

Your right, the Mustang II was a successful product, however many Mustang loyalists feel that it is a low spot in the history of the Mustang and it's importance to the marketplace.

 

I am biased towards Ford, however one thing I noticed trying to compile my list is that it was actually more difficult then I thought. I honestly feel that GM has produced a lot more garbage over the years then Ford did. I am sure someone could come up with a Chrysler list pretty easily. I know my first vehicle on that list would be the Aspen and Volare.

 

The Pinto didn't deserve the bad press, either. NHTSA listed less than 100 fires, with only a couple dozen deaths. (*) And how many were on the road? A couple million?

 

What you are saying might be true, however on my list I feel the Pinto did more to hurt Ford's image then any other vehicle. Even today 35 years after the fact, people still refer to burning Pintos as a Ford legacy. Now compare the 2009 Focus to the 1970's Pinto and you can see how far Ford has really came. If people can't see the improvement just by comparing those two compact cars they never will.

Edited November 26, 2008 by 2005Explorer

[retro-man]

I once had a 1970 Pontiac Lemans (the "lemons" as I came to refer to it). That was in 1975. I bought it with 65,000 miles on the clock, and could not keep it running for any consecutive 3 day period. 33 years now, and I've never been able to make myself consider another GM product. (Avid readers will know that my '02 T-Bird is running a close 2nd on the lemon scale though - I regret to say.)

 

I have to say though, that the new Malibu looks real nice in person. Nice job. I wish the Fusion's styling was that appealing to me. Maybe someday if GM is around long enough......

[twintornados]

The Explorer/Firestone fiasco was another black eye. The bad driver behind the wheel not wearing a seatbelt in most cases was never mentioned.

The very idea of installing 2-ply passenger tires on a vehicle that most of it's owners would use for towing a trailer was stupid indeed.....when I sold tires during that time frame....I always recommended stepping up to a 3-ply "extra load" tire.

[mettech]

A big turn off on GM products was the headliner that drooped when the glue failed.

 

Personal Ford issue:

I had a '75 Pinto. I had to take it in for the recall to have the plastic shield installed around the gas tank. :reading:

 

I had a '95 Lincoln Continental. Nice car, but the trim inside fell off and the air suspension failed.

 

I have a '05 F-350, PSD. Between the suspension issues, engine issues and a few electrical problems, this has been by far the most troublesome vehicle I've ever owned

[NickF1011]

I remember the hate on the Contour was based on one thing, the lack of rear seat leg room.

 

The peeling dashboards, cruddy plastics, and unreliable automatics didn't help either. And the fact that you could get a considerably better Taurus for only a couple thousand more.

Edited November 26, 2008 by NickF1011

[JLaudioF150]

IMO, cars that tarnished the Ford Reputation:

 

Tempo

Probe

Lincoln LS

Ford Five Hundred, then renamed to Taurus (Montengo and Sable)

Excursion

Lincoln Continental

Crown Vic, Marquis, Towncar

Lincoln Blackwood

Mark Lt

Last model Thunderbird

MN112 Thunderbirds and Cougars

Countour

2001+ Cougar

Maurader

96+ Taurus

 

 

Flame Me. But, before doing so, ask yourself how many of those cars on the list are still offered today. Second, some on the list (including the Mark Lt, Blackwood, Maurader, Five Hundred, and new Taurus) are 'flops' just because they do little to help the perception about Ford. Cars that, when I heard about them at the auto shows, I thought "that isn't gonna sell"! Renaming the Five Hundred to Taurus wasn't going to do anything. Hell, I always joke about it, but when I'm in line at a fast food joint or at a toll booth behind the last generation Taurus (and 97-older T-birds, cougars, etc.) you have to notice that most of them no longer have functioning power windows! Drivers have to open the door to order food or pay the toll. I'm not even going to go on and on about the 3.8L.

 

I'm a proud owner of a 97 F150. Flawless vehicle (at least for me), but it seems like the only vehicle Ford has done right (until the new Fusion, Edge, and even the Flex and now Focus).

 

***My power windows still work too.

[NickF1011]

IMO, cars that tarnished the Ford Reputation:

 

Tempo

Probe

Lincoln LS

Ford Five Hundred, then renamed to Taurus (Montengo and Sable)

Excursion

Lincoln Continental

Crown Vic, Marquis, Towncar

Lincoln Blackwood

Mark Lt

Last model Thunderbird

MN112 Thunderbirds and Cougars

Countour

2001+ Cougar

Maurader

96+ Taurus

 

 

Flame Me. But, before doing so, ask yourself how many of those cars on the list are still offered today. Second, some on the list (including the Mark Lt, Blackwood, Maurader, Five Hundred, and new Taurus) are 'flops' just because they do little to help the perception about Ford. Cars that, when I heard about them at the auto shows, I thought "that isn't gonna sell"! Renaming the Five Hundred to Taurus wasn't going to do anything. Hell, I always joke about it, but when I'm in line at a fast food joint or at a toll booth behind the last generation Taurus (and 97-older T-birds, cougars, etc.) you have to notice that most of them no longer have functioning power windows! Drivers have to open the door to order food or pay the toll. I'm not even going to go on and on about the 3.8L.

 

I'm a proud owner of a 97 F150. Flawless vehicle (at least for me), but it seems like the only vehicle Ford has done right (until the new Fusion, Edge, and even the Flex and now Focus).

 

***My power windows still work too.

 

A lot of complaining from an owner of a vehicle with a recall list a mile long and horrible crash test ratings. Most of the vehicles on your list are less "damaging" than they were simply "unpopular". Since they were so unpopular, they probably did less to hurt Ford's reputation than many other vehicles that sold better. By the time most of the vehicles on your list hit the market, the damage was already done. The lack of interest in Ford's cars by then led to them being unpopular. It mostly was not a result of the shortcomings of the vehicles themselves.

[Going_Going_Gone]

Everything bad you could imagine about cars and car making applied to the Vega. When you drove past the plant on the Ohio Turnpike, there were two lots of new cars. One lot had ready-to-ship cars in it and the other was full of cars that didn't pass final inspection and had to be repaired before shipping. The reject lot routinely had two to three times as many cars in it as the finished lot. Additionally, many of the line workers were working stoned as often as not and there were several murders in the Youngstown area, including my sister's next door neighbor, a line supervisor, that were connected to union issues at that plant. It was just all-around bad.

[Ford Jellymoulds]

Ford have not had to many bad cars in Europe the 90's Scorpio was dreadful Ford sold next to none proved that American car design does not work globally in Europe, bean counters designed the the last Escort it was so low rent it you just felt it, and the present Focus Convertible new owners have had to wait a year for their car not because it was a sort after car on a waiting list.

[jtstakelin]

IMO, cars that tarnished the Ford Reputation:

 

Tempo

Probe

Lincoln LS

Ford Five Hundred, then renamed to Taurus (Montengo and Sable)

Excursion

Lincoln Continental

Crown Vic, Marquis, Towncar

Lincoln Blackwood

Mark Lt

Last model Thunderbird

MN112 Thunderbirds and Cougars

Countour

2001+ Cougar

Maurader

96+ Taurus

 

 

Flame Me. But, before doing so, ask yourself how many of those cars on the list are still offered today. Second, some on the list (including the Mark Lt, Blackwood, Maurader, Five Hundred, and new Taurus) are 'flops' just because they do little to help the perception about Ford. Cars that, when I heard about them at the auto shows, I thought "that isn't gonna sell"! Renaming the Five Hundred to Taurus wasn't going to do anything. Hell, I always joke about it, but when I'm in line at a fast food joint or at a toll booth behind the last generation Taurus (and 97-older T-birds, cougars, etc.) you have to notice that most of them no longer have functioning power windows! Drivers have to open the door to order food or pay the toll. I'm not even going to go on and on about the 3.8L.

 

I'm a proud owner of a 97 F150. Flawless vehicle (at least for me), but it seems like the only vehicle Ford has done right (until the new Fusion, Edge, and even the Flex and now Focus).

 

***My power windows still work too.

 

 

Wish I could say the same of my '97 F-150. I had a 4.2L super cab that hydrolocked due to the lower intake gasket failure. Man, do I miss that truck!

[syrtran]

What you are saying might be true, however on my list I feel the Pinto did more to hurt Ford's image then any other vehicle. Even today 35 years after the fact, people still refer to burning Pintos as a Ford legacy. Now compare the 2009 Focus to the 1970's Pinto and you can see how far Ford has really came. If people can't see the improvement just by comparing those two compact cars they never will.

I didn't mean to imply the Pinto shouldn't be on your list, I was just comparing the media "feeding frenzy" on the CV to the same thing on the Pinto. You can add Samurai-tipping and Audi "unintended acceleration" to that list. These four items are why Consumer Reports is on my "must-not-buy" list.

 

One thing the original article missed on the Aztek that soured it in a lot of peoples' minds was the dealers' adding every option to their initial vehicles, driving prices well above $25K.

 

And they shouldn't have mentioned the Corvair (in the prologue). It was a technological tour-de-force in its day, and it sold well, even after Nader's book was published. The only reason it had any kind of stigma was because Nader lied. The only times the swing-axle was a problem was in situations that would've made any 'normal' car of the day impossible to control. The Corvair was used in road racing all across the country.

[goingincirclez]

Wow, some of those cars approach 40 years old. WTF is the point? Most cars last about 10-15 at best, even if cared for. I think there have been many more cars built that were capable of such feats.

 

That said, my list of Ford's Worst/Most Damaging 10 (to the public) since 1970 would include, in no particular order at this time:

 

1) Pinto/Bobcat - for reasons unfair and well-known

2) Lincoln Versailles - Let's hide our credible luxury tech advances in a Granada with a Continental Kit.

3) Fairmont / Zephyr - Euro styling that sold well and disintegrated even better.

4) Taurus - How can something so right go so horribly, horribly wrong?

5) Windstar - Taurus II

6) 3.8 engine - Underpowered, overmatched, hotheaded - and offered in virtually everything Ford sold.

7) 80's AOD - Let's play transmission roulette!

8) Bronco II - Center of Gravity, meet thy nemesis

9) Explorer - Nemesis, meet thy son: the Pinto of a new generation.

10) Merkur - kinda like Edsel, only nobody noticed because there was no vagina grille.

[bifs66]

Wow, some of those cars approach 40 years old. WTF is the point? Most cars last about 10-15 at best, even if cared for. I think there have been many more cars built that were capable of such feats.

 

That said, my list of Ford's Worst/Most Damaging 10 (to the public) since 1970 would include, in no particular order at this time:

 

1) Pinto/Bobcat - for reasons unfair and well-known

2) Lincoln Versailles - Let's hide our credible luxury tech advances in a Granada with a Continental Kit.

3) Fairmont / Zephyr - Euro styling that sold well and disintegrated even better.

4) Taurus - How can something so right go so horribly, horribly wrong?

5) Windstar - Taurus II

6) 3.8 engine - Underpowered, overmatched, hotheaded - and offered in virtually everything Ford sold.

7) 80's AOD - Let's play transmission roulette!

8) Bronco II - Center of Gravity, meet thy nemesis

9) Explorer - Nemesis, meet thy son: the Pinto of a new generation.

10) Merkur - kinda like Edsel, only nobody noticed because there was no vagina grille.

 

We bought a new Pinto in 1971 right off the showroom floor for $1995. It was a black 2000cc (OHC) 4 spd; and was trouble free for the four years that we owned it. One thing I enjoyed most about that car was its ability to dust off Vegas with ease. We traded it in on a new 1974 2800cc Mercury Capri 4spd (the European Mustang). That was probably the worst Ford we had ever owned. It had more mechanical, body, and interior problems than we experienced in any other NEW Ford car. That includes 3 F-150s, 4 Mustangs, and 5 Ford cars.

Edited November 26, 2008 by bifs66